HDPA (Greece) - 2/2022

HDPA (Greece) - 2/2022
Authority:	HDPA (Greece)
Jurisdiction:	Greece
Relevant Law:	Article 5(1)(c) GDPR
Type:	Complaint
Outcome:	Upheld
Started:	10.01.2020
Decided:	13.01.2022
Published:
Fine:	None
Parties:	anonymous Ministry of National Defence
National Case Number/Name:	2/2022
European Case Law Identifier:	n/a
Appeal:	n/a
Original Language(s):	Greek
Original Source:	HDPA (in EL)
Initial Contributor:	Heiko Hanusch

The Greek DPA ordered the Ministry of National Defense to reissue a military status certificate with only the data subject's name on it because the previous one violated the principle of data minimisation by mentioning more than the name.

English Summary

Facts

The data subject complained to the Ministry of National Defense that his military status certificate ("Type A Certificate") mentioned that he "has not fulfilled his military obligations and is currently under no military obligation because he is exempt from military service". The Ministry of National Defense rejected the complaint. As a result, the data subject lodged a complaint with the HDPA (Greece).

Holding

The HDPA upheld the complaint and held that Ministry of National Defense violated the principle of dataminimisation under Article 5(1)(c) GDPR.

It reasoned that the Type A Certificate's general purpose is to only certify that the holder is not subject to military obligations. As long as there are no special circumstances which require the certificate to mention further information, the certificate's purpose is achieved by just mentioning the name of the holder. Special circumstances may be the particular objectives which the applicant pursues with the certificate or legal provisions requiring additional information. Since no special circumstances existed, the Ministry of National Defense violated Article 5(1)(c) GDPR.

Comment

For the corresponding decision of the same day see HDPA (Greece) - 3/2022.

Further Resources

Share blogs or news articles here!

English Machine Translation of the Decision

The decision below is a machine translation of the Greek original. Please refer to the Greek original for more details.

  1 Athens, 13-01-2022 No. Prot .: 78 DECISION 2/2022 (Department) The Personal Data Protection Authority met in a composition of the Department at its headquarters on 26.07.2021 at the invitation of its President, in order to examine the case referred to in the history hereof. The President of the Authority K. Menoudakos, and the regular members of the Authority S. Vlachopoulos, as rapporteurs, Ch. Anthopoulos and K. Lambrinoudakis were present. Present without the right to vote were K. Karveli, a specialist scientist-lawyer, as an assistant rapporteur, who left after the discussion of the case and before the conference and the decision and G. Paleologos, an employee of the administrative affairs department of the Authority, as secretary. The Authority took into account the following: With no. prot. requesting the revision of Article 44 of the Regulation on the Organization and Operation of the Units of the Joint Legal Body, and that on ... he received the response of the Military Service, which did not justify why the indication of the case of fulfillment or exemption is considered absolutely necessary and appropriate for the purpose of that certificate and, therefore, its reply was not directly relevant to the subject matter of the complaint requesting a comprehensive review of the purpose of that certificate. 2 Also with the above complaint and with his ... additional complaint to the Authority, he states that he received an overdue response from GEETHA, to which he also referred his ... report, on ... (after the end of 60 days from the original letter on ... and without a request for an extension within 30 days), which, however, does not justify why the indication of fulfillment / exemption is considered absolutely necessary and appropriate to serve the purpose of the certificate and the wider public interest, and therefore legitimate. In particular, as it appears from the documents attached to the complaint, in from ... with no. ... a certificate received by the complainant from the Military Service Φ stated that "he has not fulfilled his military obligations and is not currently subject to any military service, because he has been released from military service". Following this, the complainant, in his above-mentioned complaint to the Military Service Φ and to the Ministry of National Defense, denounced as illegal the indication on the certificate of exemption from military service, as he claims, this indication is a sensitive personal data. and is unnecessary in relation to the purpose of the certificate, because it indirectly reveals sensitive personal data, exposing the person concerned to a risk of discrimination. With the same complaint, he requested the revision of article 44 of the Regulation on the Organization and Operation of the Units of the Joint Legal Body. In response to the complaint, the Military Service Φ in its relevant document stated that it insists on the legality of the issuance of the Certificate of Military Status Type A received at the request of the complainant, as its content is in accordance with the existing legal framework on the legal processing of personal data and the relevant decisions and orders issued. Also, the complainant received a reply from the General Staff on ... according to which the indication of the fulfillment / exemption in the army certificate of type A 'is considered absolutely necessary and appropriate for the service of the purpose of the certificate and the wider public interest, and, therefore legal. 3 The Authority, in the context of the investigation of the complainants, sent the no. prot. G / EX / 2241 / 24.3.20 document for providing clarifications regarding the complaint of A to the Recruitment F and the Ministry of National Defense. The Ministry of National Defense in its reply of 27.4.20 to the Authority stated the following: of personal data protection, as already decided by the Personal Data Protection Authority, with the no. 1620/2000 and 159/2014 decisions, b) the claim of the complainant about indirect disclosure of sensitive personal data through the above change is not valid, as on the one hand it has already been judged by decision 159/2014 of the Authority that the mere indication of the exemption from enlistment does not constitute sensitive personal data, on the other hand, the provisions of Law 4624/19 no longer contain the concept of sensitive data, with the consequence that the relevant distinction between personal and sensitive data provided by Law 2472/97 and there is no classification as to the protection afforded; (c) the existing form of personal data protection and the relevant in law the reasons for exemption from enlistment vary in their nature, it is not possible to deduce from third parties the reason for the exemption of the subject (e) his claim that third parties have access to the exemption data is unfounded, as, as a rule, third parties are denied access to such data, of course in the case of a person legally authorized by the data subject, , therefore and since the action of the Public Administration is governed by the principle 4 of equal treatment, there is no margin for discrimination due to his exemption from conscription and g) the content of the conscription certificate in question is fully harmonized with the current legislation on protection from processing personal decisions and the relevant decisions and orders issued. The Authority, after examining the complaint and the details of its dossier and after hearing the rapporteur and the assistant rapporteur, who left after the discussion of the case and before the conference and the decision, after a thorough discussion THOUGHT ACCORDING TO THE LAW 1. According to the provisions of article 5 par. 1 of the GCP, personal data must, inter alia: (b) be collected for specified, express and lawful purposes and not be further processed in a manner incompatible with those purposes; (c) be appropriate, relevant and limited to the purposes necessary for processing ("data minimization") and (d) be accurate and, where necessary, up to date. 2. In accordance with Article 42 of the Rules of Organization and Operation of the Joint Legal Body, military changes are registered in the military units by the staff of the Service, which is responsible for the issuance of the relevant administrative act and are confidential elements that are not disclosed to third parties. the type of changes registered in the files is determined by orders issued by GEETHA. Confidentiality is an obligation and responsibility arising from the current legislation on personal data protection, while exceptionally it is possible to notify third parties of changes or data from the computer files and military registers, according to the conditions set by the current legislation on the protection of the individual from the processing of personal data and for the reasons mentioned exclusively therein. Also, according to article 44 of the Regulation of Organization and Operation of the Common Legal Corps, the certificates of military status are used in the cases when the interested parties want the certification of their military status or the certification of all or some of their military changes. In order to make a decision on the indication of all or some changes, the purpose for which the person concerned requests the issuance of the certificate is taken into account, and if this is not clearly deduced from the relevant application, the changes of classification and dismissal, award are indicated in the certificate. ranks of officer and swearing in, recognition of service time and entry into reserve and time not counted as time of actual military service. For the issuance of certificates, the provisions of the current legislation for the protection of the individual from the processing of personal data are taken into account. Changes relating to unsuitability for military service or postponement for health reasons or shift of classification for health reasons or to physical fitness crisis are listed in accordance with applicable legislation to protect the individual from the processing of personal data. However, it is possible, if the interested party explicitly requests it in his application, to indicate these changes, as they have been registered in his conscription unit. A certificate of military status is not issued to those who are in disobedience or disobedience. 3. In order for personal data to be legally processed, ie processed in accordance with the requirements of the GCP, the conditions for the application and observance of the principles of Article 5 par. 1 GCP must be met cumulatively.
The certificates of military status issued by the
recruitment offices based on the data registered in
military portion should include only as much information as possible
6
necessary for the purpose for which they are granted. The indication of anyone
another element that does not meet this purpose is unnecessary and
contrary to the principles of proportionality, appropriateness and
minimizing the processing required by its above provisions
ΓΚΠΔ.
Specifically, the main purpose of the certificate of military status
general content, type A certificate, is the certification that
one is no longer subject to military service. The indication, therefore, in
certificate of any other data is contrary to the above principles and,
therefore, it is illegal. From home means that in the issued certificate
legally include more or all of the military
changes if required by law for the purpose for which
the certificate is issued. In that regard, which is based on the GCC,
the above-mentioned provision of Rule 44 of the Rules of Procedure is harmonized
Organization and Operation of the Joint Legal Body, which provides
that certificates of enlistment are used in the cases
in which the interested parties wish the certification of their conscription
status or certification of all or some of their military changes,
that in order to indicate all or some changes, the purpose is taken into account
for which the person concerned requests the issuance of the certificate and that for
issuance of certificates shall take into account the provisions of the applicable
legislation to protect the individual from data processing
personal.
4. In the case of A's complaint, it was granted to the complainant
certificate of military status type A ', "upon relevant application for
any lawful use ', as stated on the certificate itself, in which
confirms that the complainant "has not fulfilled his military
obligations and is not currently subject to any military obligation because it has
exempt from conscription ".
However, according to the above, this certificate is not
legally contains the information that the complainant has not fulfilled the
his military obligations and that he has been released from the obligation
7
since it was not granted for a specific purpose, for which it was against
law necessary to certify this information, but for any lawful use. In
In this case, it was therefore sufficient to certify that the complainant was not subject
Military Service.
FOR THOSE REASONS
The beginning
INVITES the Ministry of National Defense, as the controller, to issue for
the complainant again the type of military status certificate
A 'with the indication only since it is no longer subject to any
military service.
The President The Secretary
Konstantinos Menoudakos Georgia Paleologos