IN THIS ISSUE
FRONT PAGE
FEATURE
Addressing Board Knowledge Gaps
VIEWPOINT
Getting Together
GUEST ARTICLE
Using Technology To Improve Board Performance
GUEST ARTICLE
Changing Demographics and Globalization Demand New Strategies
GUEST ARTICLE
Virtual Chapters in Associations
GUEST ARTICLE
Association Toy or Tool?
GUEST ARTICLE
Impact of PIPEDA on Charitable and Non-Profit Organizations
REGULAR COLUMNS
Change Management with Peter de Jaeger
Public Affairs with Huw Williams
Customer Relationships with Paul Ward
TOOLS, TIPS AND RESOURCES
PAST ISSUES
|
GUEST
ARTICLE - Mark Wong and Others
Impact of the Personal Information
Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA) on
Charitable and Non-Profit Organizations
A. INTRODUCTION
Recent developments that have been made in
the area of electronic commerce have provided consumers
with many conveniences, but at the same time these
developments have given rise to significant privacy
concerns. Modern day conveniences that consumers enjoy,
such as online banking, online trading and the use of
Interac have enabled businesses to collect with relative
ease the personal information of consumers without their
specific knowledge or consent. In addition, the
combination of e-commerce and the internet means that
personal information collected can potentially be made
available to a worldwide audience.
In response to these concerns, the Federal
Government of Canada passed the Personal Information
Protection and Electronic Documents Act (“PIPEDA” or the
“Act”) to inspire consumer confidence in e-commerce
activities. Although PIPEDA initially was proclaimed into
force in response to e-commerce concerns, the Act is
actually broad and far reaching in that when fully
implemented it will purport to regulate all collection,
use and disclosure of personal information by
organizations in the course of commercial activities,
regardless of whether the personal information was
obtained through or is even related to e-commerce.
B. OVERVIEW OF PIPEDA
The implementation and coming into force
of PIPEDA is divided into three stages. On January 1,
2001, PIPEDA applied to personal information collected,
used or disclosed in the course of commercial activities
by federal works, undertakings and business. On January 1,
2002, the Act was extended to the collection, use or
disclosure of personal health information by the same
organizations already covered in Stage 1. Finally, on
January 1, 2004, the Act will apply to every organization
that collects, uses or discloses personal information,
including personal health information, in the course of
commercial activities.
PIPEDA is comprised of five parts, but
only Part One deals with the protection of personal
information in the private sector and will be the focus of
this article’s discussion. Part One, in turn, is divided
into five divisions: Division 1 outlines the rules for the
collection, use and disclosure of personal information in
the course of commercial activities; Division 2 deals with
remedies; Division 3 deals with privacy audits; Division 4
deals with general matters; and Division 5 contains the
Act’s transitional provisions.
The substantive portions of PIPEDA are not
found in Part One of the Act, but can be found in Schedule
1 to the Act. The provisions of Schedule 1 of the Act,
based on the Canadian Standards Association’s “Model Code
for the Protection of Personal Information” (the “Model
Code”), are the core of PIPEDA. The Model Code was
designed to provide businesses with some minimal
guidelines concerning the protection of personal
information in their care and control.
C. DOES PIPEDA APPLY TO CHARITIES AND
NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS?
As mentioned above, beginning January 1,
2004, PIPEDA will apply to every organization that
collects, uses or discloses personal information,
including personal health information, in the course of
commercial activities. Whether a charity or non-profit
organization will be subject to PIPEDA depends on whether
these organizations engage in the kind of commercial
activities contemplated by the Act.
Commercial activity is defined broadly as
“any particular transaction, act or conduct or any regular
course of conduct that is of a commercial character,
including the selling, bartering or leasing of donor,
membership or other fundraising lists.” Priscilla Platt,
et al., in Privacy Law in the Private Sector – An
Annotation of the Legislation in Canada, explain that the
term commercial activity is not limited to businesses
engaging in regular commercial activities, but also
includes single isolated acts of commercial activities by
non-commercial organizations. Therefore, charities or
non-profit organizations engaging in commercial activities
that are ancillary to its primary purposes may be subject
to the Act to the extent that those commercial activities
involve the collection, use or disclosure of personal
information.
The definition of commercial activity also
includes the phrase “conduct that is of a commercial
character”. The listed examples of conduct that is of a
commercial character – selling, bartering or leasing of
donor, membership or other fundraising lists – sets out a
guideline as to what other activities may be viewed as
“conduct that is of a commercial character”. As the
drafters of PIPEDA specifically used the word “includes”,
it is presumed that they intended for the Act to cover any
other conduct similar to those already listed.
Although the term commercial activity has
also been judicially interpreted under other statutes, the
courts have found it difficult to assign a clear-cut
judicial definition to this term. In Windsor-Essex County
Real Estate Board v. Windsor (City) (1974), 6 O.R. (2d)
21, the court held that “there is no doubt that an
intention to make a profit will be a very important factor
in determining whether an activity is a commercial
activity, but the lack of it does not automatically
prevent if from being so characterized.” (This decision
was overruled on other grounds in Ontario (Regional
Assessment Commission) v. Caisse Populaire de Hearst Ltee.,
(1983) 143 D.L.R. (3d) 590.) At this time, the scope of
the term commercial activity is still under debate and
will undoubtedly be subject to more judicial
interpretation in the future.
Presently, it is generally agreed that the
term commercial activity appears to cover for-profit
activities. However, Priscilla Platt, et al explain that
it is possible that the courts may broaden its
interpretation to include any transaction that involves
the exchange of consideration. Legal commentators have
indicated that this position is supported by the fact that
the definition of commercial activity includes
“bartering”, which suggests that any transactions
involving an exchange of consideration would be
sufficient. Therefore, the cautious approach would be to
assume that PIPEDA can apply to charities and non-profit
organizations that collect, use or disclose personal
information while carrying out some form of commercial
activity.
D. EFFECT OF PIPEDA
If a charity or non-profit organization is
deemed to be subject to PIPEDA, the Act will impose
onerous, and time-consuming administrative costs on the
organization. The Act requires organizations to comply
with the 10 principles incorporated in Schedule 1 of the
Act. As indicated above, Schedule 1 is based on the
Canadian Standards Association’s “Model Code for the
Protection of Personal Information”. In summary, Schedule
1 sets out the following 10 principles:
-
Accountability – An organization
is responsible for personal information under its
control and shall designate an individual or individuals
who are accountable for the organization’s compliance
with the following principles.
-
Identifying Purposes – The
purposes for which personal information is collected
shall be identified by the organization at or before the
time the information is collected.
-
Consent – The knowledge and
consent of the individual are required for the
collection, use, or disclosure of personal information,
except where inappropriate.
-
Limiting Collection - The
collection of personal information shall be limited to
that which is necessary for the purposes identified by
the organization. Information shall be collected by fair
and lawful means.
-
Limiting Use, Disclosure, and
Retention – Personal information shall not be used
or disclosed for purposes other than those for which it
was collected, except with the consent of the individual
or as required by law. Personal information shall be
retained only as long as necessary for the fulfillment
of those purposes.
-
Accuracy – Personal information
shall be as accurate, complete, and up-to-date as is
necessary for the purposes for which it is to be used.
-
Safeguards – Personal information
shall be protected by security safeguards appropriate to
the sensitivity of the information.
-
Openness – An organization shall
make readily available to individuals specific
information about its policies and practices relating to
the management of personal information.
-
Individual Access – Upon request,
an individual shall be informed of the existence, use,
and disclosure of his or her personal information and
shall be given access to that information. An individual
shall be able to challenge the accuracy and completeness
of the information and have it amended as appropriate.
-
Challenging Compliance – An
individual shall be able to address a challenge
concerning compliance with the above principles to the
designated individual or individuals accountable for the
organization’s compliance.
It is important to note that Schedule 1
contains both mandatory provisions and discretionary
provisions. As all 10 principles use mandatory language
through the word “shall”, an organization is obliged to
comply with the principles. However, the subclauses within
the 10 principles only use discretionary language through
the word “should”; therefore, the subclauses are only
recommendations and do not impose any obligations.
However, an organization would be prudent to voluntarily
follow the recommendations set out in the subclauses in
light of the fact that section 11(1) of the Act allows an
individual to file a complaint against an organization for
contravening a mandatory obligation or for not following a
recommendation set out in Schedule 1. It is clear that not
only may the privacy Commissioner investigate an
organization for breaches of the mandatory obligations but
also for failure to follow discretionary recommendations.
E. CONSEQUENCES OF NON-COMPLIANCE
If an organization fails to comply with
PIPEDA’s requirements in its data collection procedures,
it can become subject to a complaint. As mentioned above,
Division 2 of PIPEDA outlines the remedies available to an
individual where it is alleged that an organization has
contravened a requirement under Part I of the legislation.
Section 11 (1) of PIPEDA provides that an individual may
file a written complaint with the Commissioner alleging
that an organization has either contravened a Division 1
provision, or a Schedule 1 recommendation. The
Commissioner may also initiate a complaint if it is
satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to investigate
the matter (s. 11 (2)). Under s. 11 (4), the Commissioner
must give notice to an organization if a complaint under
PIPEDA has been filed against it.
The Commissioner must investigate all
complaints as stipulated under s. 12(1) of PIPEDA, and has
extensive powers by which to investigate complaints. These
powers include:
-
Summoning and enforcing the appearance
of persons to give testimony before the Commissioner (s.
12 (1)(a));
-
Administering oaths (s. 12(1)(b));
-
Receiving and accepting any evidence, by
oath, affidavit or otherwise, that the Commissioner
deems fit, regardless of whether it would be admissible
in court [Emphasis added] (s. 12 (1)(c));
-
Enter any premises occupied by an
organization, other than a dwelling house, at any
reasonable time (s. 12 (1)(d));
-
Converse in private with any person in
any premises entered (s. 12(1)(e)); and
-
Examine or obtain copies of or extracts
of relevant materials found in any premises (s. 12
(1)(f)).
It is important to note that a
Commissioner’s findings after investigating a complaint
are not binding on an organization. Under sections 14 and
15 of PIPEDA, a complainant, including the Commissioner,
after the Commissioner’s report has been issued, may apply
for a court hearing to the Federal Court. Upon hearing the
case, the Federal Court may give a number of remedies
found in s. 16 of PIPEDA, including:
-
An order that the organization correct
its practices to comply with sections 5 to 10 of PIPEDA
(s. 16 (a));
-
An order that the organization publish a
notice of any action taken or proposed to correct its
practices (s. 16(b)); and
-
An award of damages to the complainant,
including damages for any humiliation that the
complainant has suffered (s. 16(c)).
Section 28, under Division 4 of PIPEDA,
outlines three statutory offences under which an
organization can be charged, which include:
-
knowingly contravening s. 8 (8) of the
Act. Section 8 (8) stipulates that an organization has a
duty to retain information until a requester’s recourses
have been exhausted;
-
knowingly contravening s. 27.1 of the
Act. Section 27.1 prohibits employers from taking action
against employees and independent contractors who, in
good faith, report contraventions of PIPEDA to the
Commissioner, or refuse to participate in activities
which fail to comply with the legislation;
-
obstructing the Commissioner or the
Commissioner’s delegate in the investigation of a
complaint or in conducting an audit.
The three statutory offences listed above
are punishable by summary conviction and a fine not
exceeding $10 000 (s. 28 (a)), or by an indictable offence
and a fine not exceeding $100 000 (s. 28 (b)). For
charities and non-profit organizations, many of which have
limited resources, paying a fine and/or being exposed to
criminal conviction can be devastating to the
organization’s reputation, financial health, and future
existence.
F. CONCLUSION
On January 1, 2004, all organizations
collecting, using and disclosing personal information
throughout the course of their commercial activities must
comply with PIPEDA. Therefore, any charity and non-profit
organization engaging in such activities would be
well-advised to take immediate steps to implement a sound
privacy policy. A sound privacy policy will provide both
structure to an organization’s information collection
procedures, and protection from public complaints and
criminal sanctions.
Mark J. Wong, B.A., LL.B Assisted by Shen
Goh and Suzanne White.
www.carters.ca
Reprinted with permission. © 2003 Carter &
Associates
Notice from Carters & Associates - This Charity
Law Bulletin is a summary of current legal issues
provided as an information service by Carter &
Associates. It is current only as of the date of the
Bulletin and does not reflect subsequent changes in
the law. The Charity Law Bulletin is distributed
with the understanding that it does not constitute
legal advice or establish the solicitor/client
relationship by way of any information contained
herein. The contents are intended for general
information purposes only and under no circumstances
can be relied upon for legal decision-making.
Readers are advised to consult with a qualified
lawyer and obtain a written opinion concerning the
specifics of their particular situation.
|
JANUARY 2004
OUR MISSION
To build better
associations and non-profits by
delivering unique
and unparalleled expertise, programs
and services
to their staff and
volunteers.
|