skip to Main Content
BY THE SLOVENIAN DATA PROTECTION AUTHORITY: The Information Commissioner (IP) Is Not Familiar With Any Of The Previous Version Of The Proficiency Testing Questions NIJZ PCT

BY THE SLOVENIAN DATA PROTECTION AUTHORITY: the Information Commissioner (IP) is not familiar with any of the previous version of the proficiency testing questions NIJZ PCT

This post is also available in: Italiano Español Français

Due to the public interest in objective information and wrong affirmations of some important political figures on the role of IP and the inspection procedure against the NIJZ talking about the admissibility PCT, IP underlines that is not aware of any of the two version of application.

It has not requested to IP a preliminary opinion, that otherwise we would expect due to the nature of the personal data processing with the implementation, especially given the experience that NIJZ should have acquired in the process of expression of interest for the vaccination on the eGovernament portal.

In addition, IP has not ordered anything yet about the proficiency testing question, because was made aware of the question by media, as well as the other part of the Slovenian population, and has not still received an explanation on the procedure request.

Due to journalistic questions, IP has answered, on the 23rd of July, with a press release by confirming the receipt of the communication as a basis for the beginning of the inspection procedure, by underlining at the same time the need to comply to what is planned by the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).

The lack of cooperation of NIJZ with IP in the development of an app based on the personal data processing is a problem if IP has an open door with other contributors and individuals and so each year it issues 1.200 opinions and 100 comments on legislative proposals. In case of the PCT app, it has not been asked an opinion to IP, neither has been received a request to the appeal of NIJZ.

It is not acceptable that the burden of inadequacy is charged to an organism with is not aware of the question (even not by media), simply by warning on the need to respect the personal data protection legislation, which is standard for all the Member States.

The European Authorities have frequently underlined that the legal basis exists only for the usage of COVID certificates of the European Union for the purpose of crossing the borders, but also if member States desire to use those certificates for other purposes, they have to adopt a national appropriate legislation in order to permit it.

On the contrary, France and Austria, where COVID European certificates are due to the adoption of the national legislation, this is also legally used for the purpose to verify the compliance with the condition PCT, for example, the entrance in a restaurant, in Slovenia this legislation has not been adopted, but the government rules these questions with its decrees.

In addition, several representatives of the authorities also wrongly contested the impossibility and illegality of the verification of identity cards of the persons who submitted the PCT certificate. Already in April last year, by introducing time limits for shopping in stores, IP clarified that legal persons required by the regulation to verify a condition relating to the identity of an individual can certainly do so by checking the identity document of an individual (IP Opinion of 21.4.2020).

The same applies in the case of demonstration of compliance with the PCT condition, where any misuse of certificates may require access to an identity document.

Due to the possibility of such abuses, it is not logical how the appropriate verification of compliance with the PCT condition can be carried out through an “anonymous” application, emphasizing once again that the IP has not yet ordered anything or expressed any opinion and that the updated version of the application was not due to the involvement of an IP that is not yet officially familiar with the application.

Since the NIJZ did not avail itself of the possibility of prior cooperation, where many problems could be solved (for example, with regard to the inspection of identity cards), the IP is conducting an inspection procedure.

We expect all taxpayers, including the NIJZ, to participate fully in the procedure.


Back To Top