EPIC --- Privacy and Human Rights Report
|Title Page Next Contents ||
An International Survey of
Privacy Laws and Developments
Electronic Privacy Information Center
Washington, DC, USA
London, United Kingdom
© 2007 by the Electronic Privacy Information Center and
Printed in the United States of America
All Rights Reserved
The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) is a public interest research center in Washington, DC. It was established in 1994 to focus public attention on emerging civil liberties issues and to protect privacy, the First Amendment, and constitutional values. EPIC is a member of the Transatlantic Consumer Dialogue, the Global Internet Liberty Campaign, the Internet Free Expression Alliance and the Internet Privacy Coalition.
The EPIC Bookstore provides a comprehensive selection of books and reports on computer security, cryptography, the First Amendment and free speech, open government, and privacy. Visit the EPIC Bookstore at <http://www.epic.org/bookstore/>.
About Privacy International
Privacy International (PI) is a human rights group formed in 1990 as a watchdog on surveillance by governments and corporations. PI is based in London, England, and has an office in Washington, DC. PI has conducted campaigns throughout the world on issues ranging from wiretapping and national security activities to ID cards, video surveillance, data matching, police information systems, and medical privacy.
An electronic version of this report and updates are available from the EPIC web site at <http://www.epic.org> and the Privacy International web page at <http://www.privacyinternational.org/>.
As we go to press with the tenth edition of the Privacy and Human Rights report, the following paragraphs appeared in a front-page news report in the New York Times:
At least 20,000 police surveillance cameras are being installed along streets here in southern China and will soon be guided by sophisticated computer software from an American-financed company to recognize automatically the faces of police suspects and detect unusual activity. . . .
Data on the chip will include not just the citizen’s name and address but also work history, educational background, religion, ethnicity, police record, medical insurance status and landlord’s phone number. Even personal reproductive history will be included, for enforcement of China’s controversial “one child” policy. Plans are being studied to add credit histories, subway travel payments and small purchases charged to the card. . .
Both steps are officially aimed at fighting crime and developing better controls on an increasingly mobile population, including the nearly 10 million peasants who move to big cities each year. But they could also help the Communist Party retain power by maintaining tight controls on an increasingly prosperous population at a time when street protests are becoming more common.
It is a remarkable article that describes the development of an unparalleled system of mass surveillance, as well as the role of the US-based firm “China Public Security” that has gathered the funding from US investment firms and the technology from US hi-tech firms to pursue the project.
From a privacy perspective, the concern about such systems of mass surveillance is more than the fact of constant observation, the prospect that a person’s activities will be tracked in both physical space and through the recorded events of electronic transactions. It is that decisions affecting the individual will be made in secret without accountability and with too many opportunities for improper and abusive conduct. Why do the police approach one person on the street and not another? Why are certain people who present identity documents subject to further scrutiny? Is religion or ethnicity a factor that a state agent should consider in how an individual is treated? What is consequence of meeting with another person in a public square where one’s presence is recorded by a camera overhead?
How well societies are able to answer questions such as these, in addition to whether they have actually conducted the assessment to determine if such systems are necessary, is a key measure of the commitment to transparency and justice in a modern age. And whether advocates and experts are able to distinguish between such systems is also some measure of the quality of the debate surrounding new forms of surveillance. The publication of the annual Privacy and Human Rights report is intended to further this discussion.
Of course, in the surveillance economy decisions are made not only by the countries and institutions that deploy such technologies but also by the companies that design them. The scope of data collection, the methods of analysis, the extent of data retention, and the prospects for additional applications reflect choices made by the firms that market systems of video surveillance, DNA collection, biometric identification, and behavioral profiling. So we learn that the system in China to monitor the public in the city of Shenzhen was developed and financed in the United States, inspired in part by the work of American firms to develop systems of identification and surveillance in Iraq.
China will soon host the Olympics and invite the people of the world to that extraordinary country. This creates a unique opportunity for a public dialogue about the appropriate scope of state surveillance in modern society. Perhaps China will take the lead from the last Olympic host Greece. In 2004, at the urging of the United States and in the midst of heightened concerns about terrorism, Greece installed an elaborate system of closed circuit television across Athens. Cameras peered over street corners and across city parks. But once the event concluded, the country, now at the urging of its own data protection authority, concluded the cameras were intrusive and unnecessary. Some were gathered up and stored in warehouses. Others were moved from residential communities to public highways. Today the debate between law enforcement and privacy authorities over the scope of camera surveillance in Athens continues. But there is a shared sense that it is an important debate and one that should take place in many other cities around the world.
Financial Support for the 2006 edition of the Privacy and Human Rights report was provided by the Open Society Institute, the Ford Foundation, the Rose Foundation, and the “On the Identity Trail Project” of the university of Ottawa School of Law, which is supported by the Social Science and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) of Canada.
We are grateful to everyone who has helped make this report possible. As always, we welcome your suggestions.
EPIC Executive Director
EPIC International Privacy Project Director
Marc Rotenberg, EPIC Executive Director and President
Lillie Coney, EPIC Associate Director,
Privacy Coalition, Coordinator
Melissa Ngo, EPIC Senior Counsel
Allison Knight, EPIC Staff Counsel,
EPIC International Privacy Project, Director
Guilherme Roschke, Skadden Fellow
Daniel Burger, EPIC Administrative Director
Katitza Rodríguez Pereda, International Policy Fellow
Simon Davies, EPIC Senior Fellow
Harry Hammitt, EPIC Senior Fellow
This study was first undertaken by David Banisar, then EPIC Program Director, in 1997 and has been updated on an annual basis. Sarah Andrews, Research Director at EPIC, and Gus Hosein, Senior Fellow at Privacy International, helped prepare the 2002 update. Cédric Laurant, EPIC Policy Counsel, coordinated the research for the 2003 and 2004 editions. EPIC Executive Director Marc Rotenberg was the chief editor for the 2002 through 2006 editions of the Privacy and Human Rights report. The 2006 edition of the Privacy and Human Rights report was produced by Marc Rotenberg (Editor in Chief), Allison Knight (Research Director), and Katitza Rodríguez Pereda (Latin America).
EPIC staff and the law students who have participated in the EPIC Public Interest Opportunities Program (IPIOP) provided substantial writing and research. The 2002 IPIOP Fellows were Nicole Anastasopoulos, Will DeVries, Marcia Hofmann, Dwayne Nelson, Carla Meninsky, Greg Pemberton, Sara Rose and Jason Young. The 2003 IPIOP Fellows were John Baggaley, Doug Barnes, Erik Blum, Eva Gutierrez, Milana Homsi, Waseem Karim, Heather Newton, Christian Schröder, Sherwin Siy, Tiffany Stedman, Liz Tockman, and Maryam Zafar. The 2004 IPIOP Fellows were Cliff Chen, Kenneth Farrell, Samantha Liskow, Dina Mashayekhi, Patrick Mueller, Katherine Oyama, Olumide Owoo, Amanda Reid, Tara Wheatland, and Paul Jones. The 2005 IPIOP Fellows were Michael Capiro, Charles Duan, Amina Fazlullah, Louisa Garib, Anthony Gray, Rakeim Hadley, Kristina Irion, Dhruv Kapadia, Jessica Meyers, Ibrahim Moiz, Catherine Ó Súilleabháin, Yong Jin Park, Tori Praul, Guilherme Roschke, Kathryn Sheely, and Nerisha Singh. The 2007 IPIOP Fellows were Tanith Balaban, Caitriona Fitzgerald, Harley Geiger, Jeremy Hessing-Lewis, Evan Mayor, Jena McGill, Mark Pike, Jennifer Shyu, Ravinder Singh, Evan Stern, Felix Tang, Timothy Vollmer, and Aleah Yung.
To gather information for this study and previous editions, knowledgeable individuals from academia, government, human rights groups and other fields were asked to submit reports and information. Their reports were supplemented with information gathered from constitutions, laws, international and national government documents, news reports, human rights reports and other sources.
EPIC and Privacy International would like to thank the following people for providing invaluable reports, information and advice for various editions of the Privacy and Human Rights survey: Reijo Aarnio, Data Protection Ombudsman, Finland; Jason Abrams; Linda Ackerman, Privacy Activism, United States; Andrzej Adamski, Nicolas Copernicus University, Poland; Ariel Agramont Loza, Bolivia; Marco Agramont Loza, Bolivia; Ada Redondo Aguilera, www.cybernotarios.com, Guatemala; Yaman Akdeniz, University of Leeds and Cyber-Rights & Cyber-Liberties, United Kingdom; Jair Rosales Alegria, Guatemala; Guilherme Alberto Almeida, Kaminski, Cerdeira e Pesserl Advogados Associados, Brazil; Matías Altamira, Altamira Gigena - Estudio Jurídico, Argentina; Ken Anderson, Information and Privacy Commission of Ontario, Canada; Pedro Anguita, Abogado, Doctor en Derecho y Master en Informática y Derecho, Chile; Christian Hess Araya, Corte Suprema de Justicia, Costa Rica; Fernando Argüello, El Salvador; Olesya Arkhypska, International Renaissance Foundation, Ukraine; S. Artz, Dutch Data Protection Authority, the Netherlands; Linda Austere, Center for Public Policy "PROVIDUS," Republic of Latvia; Antonio M. Aveleyra Ortiz, Universidad Iberoamericana, Mexico; Renata Ávila, Creative Commons-Guatemala, Guatemala; Zuzana Babicová, Office for Personal Data Protection, Slovak Republic; Maria Badeva University of Witwatersrand, South Africa; Christoffer Badse, Danish Institute for Human Rights, Denmark; Elizabeth Bakibinga, Ugandan Parliament, Uganda; Aiga Balode, Data State Inspection, Republic of Latvia; Zsolt György Balogh, University of Pécs, Hungary; Andrej D. Bartosiewicz, Association for Support of Local Democracy, Slovak Republic; Nilgün Basalp, Istanbul Bilgi University, Turkey; Ralf Bendrath, Universität Bremen, Germany; Colin Bennett, University of Victoria, Canada; Tara Berish, student, Canadian Internet Policy and Public Interest Clinic (CIPPIC), Canada; Jacques Berleur, Facultés Universitaires Notre-Dame de la Paix, Belgium; Mark Berthold, Office of the Ombudsman, New Zealand; Humberto Carrasco Blanc, Latlink.net, Chile; Diana Alonso Blas, College Bescherming Persoonsgegevens, Netherlands; Renato Opice Blum, Opice Blum Advogados Associados, Brazil; Joze Bogataj, Data Protection Inspectorate, Republic of Slovenia; Stefan Brands, Credentica and McGill School of Computer Science, Canada; Ian Brown, Foundation for Information Policy Research, United Kingdom; Mads Bryde Andersen, University of Copenhagen, Denmark; Seidy Galina Tapia Bueno, Sub Directora de la Facultad de Ciencias Jurídicas y Políticas, UNIBE, República Dominicana; Herbert Burkert, GMD, Germany; Heiner Busch, Switzerland; Beatriz Busaniche, Fundación Vía Libre, Argentina; Lee Bygrave, Norwegian Research Centre for Computers and Law (Institutt for rettsinformatikk) and Faculty of Law, University of Oslo, Norway, Baker & McKenzie Cyberspace Law and Policy Centre and Faculty of Law, University of New South Wales, Australia; Marco Calamari, Progetto Winston Smith, Italy; Rafael Fernández Calvo, CLI, Spain; Anne Carblanc, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, France; Alejandra Gils Carbó, Fiscal de la Cámara de Apelaciones, Argentina; Fred Carter, Privacy Commissioner's Office, Canada; David Casacuberta, Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility-Spain, Spain; Holanda Castro, Venezuela; Pavel Cerny, EPS, Czech Republic; Beng Seng Chan, Documentation for Action Groups in Asia, Hong Kong; Jongin Chang, Korea Information Society Development Institute, Korea; Dmitry Chereshkin, Russian Academy of Natural Sciences, Russia; Chris Chiu, American Civil Liberties Union, United States; Kira Kolby Christensen, Legal Adviser, Datatilsynet, Denmark; Panageas Christos, City College, Greece; Tyng-Ruey Chuang, Taiwan Association of Human Rights, Taiwan; David Clancy, Information Commissioner's Office, United Kingdom; Richard Claude, United States; Julie Cohen, Georgetown University Law Center, United States; Tracy Cohen, Independent Communications Authority of South Africa; Martín Colombo, Ferrere Abogados, Uruguay; Carlos Vera, Corpece, Ecuador; Virgil Cristian Cristea, Institution of the Romanian People’s Advocate, Romania; Bela Csiszer, Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Hungary; Iain Currie, University of Witwatersrand, South Africa; Paulo Renato Dallagnol, Brazil; Ulrich Dammann, Bundesbeauftragte für den Datenschutz, Germany; Dance Danailovska, Open Society Institute, Republic of Macedonia; Fany Davidova, Access to Information Programme, Bulgaria; Ian Deguara, Data Protection Commissioner’s Office, Malta; Carlos E. Delpiazzo, Olivera & Delpiazzo, Uruguay; Ravi Dhar, Punjab Agricultural University, India; Alexander Dix, Commissioner for Data Protection and Access to Information (Brandenburg) Germany; Olena Dmytrenko, Ukraine; Danilo Doneda, Brazil; Ronnie Downes, Irish Data Protection Agency, Ireland; Pedro Dubie, AEDIP, Spain; Pavan Duggal, Cyberlaws.net, Cyberlaw Asia and Cyberlaw India, India; Alexandre Dulaunoy, Association Electronique Libre, Belgium; Jos Dumortier, Katholieke Universiteit of Leuven and Interdisciplinary Centre for Law and Information Technology, Belgium; Igor Dyadura, Ukrainian Internet Society, Ukraine; Kathy Eivazi, Australian National University, Australia; Bo Elkjaer, Denmark; Jón Erlendsson, Iceland; G.Erdenebat, Law School of NUM, Mongolia; Gal Eschet, University of California – Berkeley, United States; Alberto Escudero-Pascual, University of Dar es Salaam, Tanzania; Maria Farrell, International Chamber of Commerce, France; Emilio Aced Félez, Agencia de Protección de Datos, Spain; William G. Ferroggiard, National Security Archive, United States; Eric Fischer, Congressional Research Service, United States; Adriana Fleitas, Ferrere Abogados, Paraguay; Ádám Földes, Hungarian Civil Liberties Union, Hungary; Anne-Marije Fontein, College Bescherming Persoonsgegevens, Netherlands; Jeannine Forgues, Ferrere Abogados, Bolivia; Maurice Frankel, Campaign for Freedom of Information, United Kingdom; Gabor Freidler, Office of the Parliamentary Commissioner for Data Protection and Freedom of Information, Hungary; Tina Fugl, Danish Data Protection Agency, Denmark; Paula Jaramillo Gajardo, Derechos Digitales, Chile; Zoltan Galantai, Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Hungary; Miguel Angel Garcia, MAG (Estudios de Consumo), Spain; Robert Gellman, United States; Marie Georges, CNIL (Commission Nationale Informatique et Libertés), France; Rishab Aiyer Ghosh, India; Andrea Glorioso, Italy; Ann Goldsmith, Office of the Privacy Commissioner, Canada; Eric Goldstein, Human Rights Watch Middle East/North Africa, United States; Sybilla Graczyk, Association of Polish Consumers, Poland; Graham Greenleaf, University of New South Wales, Australia; Marina Gromova, Russia; Andrés Guadamuz, University of Edinburgh, Scotland; Clara Guerra, National Data Protection Commission, Portugal; Robert Guerra, Privaterra, Canada; Eva Sanchez Guerrero, Open University of Catalonia, Spain; Valeriu Guguianu, Ministry of Public Information, Romania; Arnhildur Gumundsdóttir, Personuvernd (Privacy and Data Protection Authority), Iceland; Alex Hamilton, Liberty, United Kingdom; Aileen Harrington, Office of the Data Protection Commissioner, Ireland; Edward Hasbrouck, United States; Pétur Hauksson, Mannvernd, Iceland; Bénédicte Havelange, Commission de la protection de la vie privée, Belgium; Helmut Heil, Bundesbeauftragte für den Datenschutz, Germany; Iceland; Hordur Helgi Helgason, Icelandic Data Protection Authority (Persónuvernd), Gunnel Helmers, Data Inspectorate of Norway; Dixie Ho, CIPPIC, University of Ottawa, Canada; Jan Holvast, Holvast and Partners, Netherlands; Masao Horibe, Emeritus Professor, Hitotsubashi University Fellow, Chuo Law School, Japan; Axel Horns, FITUG e.V. (Förderverein Informationstechnik und Gesellschaft), Austria; Gerrit Hornung, Projektgruppe verfassungsverträgliche Technikgestaltung, University of Kassel, Germany; Nóra Horváth, Office of the Commissioner for Data Protection and Freedom of Information, Hungary; Deborah Hurley, Harvard Information Infrastructure Project, United States; Pavol Husar, Commissioner for the Protection of Personal Data in Information Systems, Slovak Republic; Beatriz Iglesias, CPSR-Perú, Spain; Kristina Irion, EPIC Fellow; Germany Yutaka Ishikawa, Chuo University School of Law, Japan and Georgetown University School of Law, United States; Joichi Ito, Japan; Joel Jaakkola, Finland; Triinu Jaaksoo, Data Protection Inspectorate, Estonia; Ona Jakstaite, State Data Protection Inspectorate, Lithuania; Bardhyl Jashari, Foundation Metamorphosis, Republic of Macedonia; Rikke Frank Joergensen, Digital Rights, Denmark; Sigrún Jóhannesdóttir, The Icelandic Data Protection Commission, Iceland; Anna Johnston, Salinger Privacy, Australia; Barbara Jurgeleviciene, State Data Protection Inspectorate of the Republic of Lithuania, Lithuania; Neringa Kaktavičiūtė, State Data Protection Inspectorate of the Republic of Lithuania, Lithuania; Omar Kaminski, Kaminski, Cerdeira e Pesserl Advogados Associados, Brazil; Jerry Kang, Georgetown University Law Center, United States; Myungkoo Kang, Seoul National University, South Korea; Marina Karakonova, Access to Information Programme, Bulgaria; Sonja Bien Karlovšek, Information Commissioner, Republic of Slovenia; Alexander Kashumov, Access to Information Programme, Bulgaria; Michael Kassner, Electronic Privacy Information Center, United States; Nurcan Kaya, Istanbul Bilgi University, Turkey; Yeoh Beng Keat, Ministry of Energy, Communications and Multimedia, Malaysia; Tinatin Khidasheli, Georgian Young Lawyers' Association, Georgia; Maarja Kirss, Data Protection Inspectorate, Estonia; Mindaugas Kiskis, Law University of Lithuania, Lithuania; Michalis Kitromilides, Office of the Personal Data Protection Commissioner, Cyprus; Jon Klaaren, Wits Law School, South Africa; Maija Kleemola, Office of Data Protection Ombudsman, Finland; Albert Koellner, VIBE!AT (Verein für Internet-Benutzer Österreichs), Austria; Neda Korunovska, Foundation Open Society Institute, Republic of Macedonia; Matej Kovacic, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia; Anita Kovalevska, Latvian National Human Rights Office, Republic of Latvia; Igor Kowalewski, The Bureau of the Inspector General for Personal Data Protection, Poland; Natalia Krajcovicova, Inspection Unit for the Protection of Personal Data, Slovak Republic; Artak Krakosyan, Civil Society Institute, Armenia; Andreas Krisch, VIBE!AT (Verein für Internet-Benutzer Österreichs), Austria; Dieter Kronegger, Arge Daten, Austria; Peter Kuhm, VIBE!AT (Verein für Internet-Benutzer Österreichs), Austria; Ewa Kulesza, Inspector General for Personal Data Protection, Poland; Jorma Kuopus, Office of the Parliamentary Ombudsman, Finland; Brenda Kwok, Office of the Privacy Commissioner for Personal Data, Hong Kong; Margarita Lacabe, Derechos Human Rights, United States; Anne-Christine Lacoste, Commission de la protection de la vie privée, Belgium; Gary Laden, Council of Better Business Bureaus, Inc., United States; Stephen Lau, former Hong Kong Privacy Commissioner, Hong Kong; Pierre-Emmanuel Laurant, Elsewhere Entertainment, Belgium; Pippa Lawson, Canadian Internet Policy and Public Interest Clinic (CIPPIC), Canada; Georg Lechner, Österreichische Datenschutzkommission, Austria; Anatoly Levenchuk, Russia; Vaida Linartaite, State Data Protection Inspectorate, Lithuania; Amalia Logiaki, Greek Data Protection Authority, Greece; Néstor Loizaga, Ferrere Abogados, Paraguay; Manon Lavoie, University of Ottawa, Canada; Yasha Maccanico, Statewatch, Spain; Yasutaka Machimura, Professor of law at Hokkaido University, School of Law, Japan; An Machtens, Commission de la protection de la vie privée, Belgium; Prathiba Mahanamahewa, University of Colombo, Sri Lanka; László Majtényi, Hungarian Information and Privacy Commissioner, Hungary; Jean Marc Manach, Journalist, France; Piñar-Mañas, Agencia Española de Protección de Datos, Spain; Bogdan Manolea, Association for Technology and Internet (APTI), Romania; Romanian Information Technology Initiative, Romania; Veni Markovski, Internet Society Bulgaria, Bulgaria; Joe Meade, Data Protection Commissioner, Ireland; Marijana Marushic, Directorate for Personal Data Protection of Republic of Macedonia, Macedonia; Meryem Marzouki, Imaginons un Réseau Internet Solidaire, France; Viktor Mayer-Schönberger, Harvard University, United States; Robin McLeish, Hong Kong; TJ McIntyre, University College Dublin, Digital Rights Ireland, Ireland; Arwid Mednis, partner Wierzbowski Eversheds, Poland; Pedro Mendizábal Simonetti Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility-Peru, Peru; Yukiko Miki, Information Clearinghouse, Japan; Erich Moechel, Quintessenz, Austria; Alessandro Monteleone, Italy; Andrea Monti, Studio Legale Monti, Italy; Christoph Mueller, University of Zurich, Switzerland; Ivonne Muñoz, Instituto Tecnológico y de Estudios Superiores de Monterrey (ITESM), México; Ioan Muraru, Avocatul Poporului, Romania; Dinesh Nair, Malaysia; Sjoera Nas, Bits of Freedom, Netherlands; Victor Naumov, Saint Petersburg Institute for Informatics RAS, Russia; Sally Neill, CPSR-Perú, Perú; Karel Neuwirt, Office for Personal Data Protection, Czech Republic; João Miguel Neves, Portugal; Detlef Nogala, Max-Planck-Institut, Germany; Bruno Nowak, Investlife, Luxembourg; Ts.Nyamkhuu, Open Society Forum, Mongolia; Mícheál O Dowd, Ireland; Nelly Ognyanova, Bulgarian Institute for Legal Development, Bulgaria; Toshimaru Ogura, Toyama University, Japan; Edetaen Ojo, Media Rights Agenda, Nigeria; Maia Okruashvili, Liberty Institute, Georgia; Ville Oksanen, Electronic Frontiers Finland, Finland; Antoin O’Lachtnain, Digital Rights Ireland, Ireland; Kaidi Oone, Estonian State Chancellery, Department of State Information Systems, Estonia; Lina Ornelas, Directora General de Clasificación y Datos Personales - IFAI, México; Mercedes Ortuño, Agencia Española de Protección de Datos, Spain; Maxim Otstavnov, Computerra-Russia, Russia, Russia; Astrid Paiser Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer,Austria; Pablo A. Palazzi, Habeas Data Forum, Argentina; Fereniki Panagopoulou, Humboldt University, Germany; Zoran Pandev, Directorate for Personal Data Protection of Republic of Macedonia, Macedonia; Nikolaos K. Papadopoulos, Technological Educational Institute of Serres, Greece; Vagelis Papakonstantinou, PK Partners, Greece; Iris Pappo, Eitan, Pearl, Latzer & Cohen-Zedek, Israel; Hugues Parasie, Commission de la protection de la vie privée, Belgium; Ginger Paque, DiploFoundation, Venezuela; Phol Paucar, Perú; Vesna Paunkoska, Directorate for Personal Data Protection of Republic of Macedonia, Macedonia; Dragoslava Pefeva, Internet Society Bulgaria, Bulgaria; Marvin Carbajal Pérez, Costa Rica; Alberto Escudero-Pascual, Royal Institute of Technology, Sweden; Andriy Pazyuk, Privacy Ukraine, Ukraine; Marvin Carbajal Pérez, Costa Rica; Stephanie Perrin, Digital Discretion, Canada, and Electronic Privacy Information Center, United States; Charlotte Edholm Petersen, Datatilsynet, Denmark; Attila Péterfalvi, Commissioner for Data Protection and Freedom of Information, Hungary; Veronica Pinero, Ottawa University, Canada; Vladimir Pirosik, Environmental Lobbying Facility, Slovak Republic; Signe Plumina, State Data Inspection, Republic of Latvia; Erki Podra, Data Protection Inspectorate, Ukraine; Yves Poullet, Centre de Recherches Informatique et Droit, Belgium; Andrei Pribylov, Human Rights Network, Russia; Ivan Procházka, Office for Personal Data Protection, Czech Republic; Arturo Quirantes, University of Granada and Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility-Spain, Spain; Asta Radvilaite, Human Rights Monitoring Institute, Lithuania; Levan Ramishvili, Liberty Institute, Georgia; Felix Rauch, Swiss Internet User Group, Switzerland; Haim Ravia, Pearl Cohen Zedek Latzer, Israel; Joel Reidenberg, Fordham University Law School, United States; Nelson Remolina Angarita, Universidad de Los Andes, Colombia; Marcelo Bauzá Reilly, Uruguay; Katitza Rodríguez Pereda, Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility-Peru and Privaterra-Perú, Peru; Dorota Rowicka, Bureau of Inspector General for the Protection of Personal Data, Poland; Felipe Rodriquez, Electronic Frontiers Australia, Australia; Roman Romanov, International Renaissance Foundation, Ukraine; Anneliese Roos, University of South Africa, South Africa; Karen Rosier, Centre de Recherche Informatique et Droit, Belgium; Paul Roth, University of Otago, New Zealand; Narine Rshtuni, Civil Society Institute, Armenia; Claudio Ruiz, ONG Derechos Digitales, Chile; Karin Irina Kuhfeldt Salazar, Defensoría del Pueblo, Colombia; María De Lourdes Zamudio Salinas, Universidad de Lima, Perú; Jolanta Samuolyte, Human Rights Monitoring Institute, Lithuania; Sinapan Samydorai, Think Centre, Singapore; Alfredo Chirino Sánchez, Director Escuela Judicial, Corte Suprema de Justicia, Costa Rica; David Sandukhchyan, Center of Information Law and Policy, Armenia; Marina Savintseva, Transparency International-Russia, Russia; Jan Schallaböck, Unabhaengiges Landeszentrum fuer Datenschutz Schleswig-Holstein (ULD), Independent Centre for Privacy Protection Schleswig-Holstein (ICPP), Germany; Dag Wiese Schartum, Eliane Schmid, Federal Data Protection Commissioner’s Office, Switzerland; University of Oslo, Norway; Christian Schröder, Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer, Germany; Anat Scolnicov, Association for Civil Rights in Israel, Israel; Lindsay Scotton, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Canada; Pablo Segura, Coordinador Técnico Legal, Dirección Nacional de Protección de Datos Personales, Argentina; Jin Wan Seo, University of Inchon, South Korea; Antonino Serra, Consumers International - Oficina para América Latina y el Caribe, Chile; Justyna Seweryoska, Bureau of the Inspector General for the Protection of Personal Data, Poland; Fumio Shimpo, University of Tsukuba, Japan; Maria U. Shkarlat, Internews-Ukraine, Ukraine; Alberto Cerda Silva, ONG Derechos Digitales, Chile; Bernard Silva, Office of the Federal Privacy Commissioner, Australia; Pedro Mendizábal Simonetti, CPSR-Perú, Peru; Sergei Smirnov, Human Rights Network, Russia; Robert Ellis Smith, Privacy Journal, United States; Christoph Sobotta, University of Frankfurt, Germany; Daniel Soto, Amnesty International USA, Latin America; Per Helge Sørensen, Digital Rights Denmark, Denmark; Barry Steinhardt, American Civil Liberties Union, United States; Hana Stepankova, Office for Personal Data Protection, Czech Republic; Blair Stewart, New Zealand Privacy Commission, New Zealand; Filip Stojanovski, Foundation Metamorphosis, Republic of Macedonia; Bettina Stomper, Quintessenz, Austria; Laura Sukelyte, EU Phare Programme Twinning Project on Personal Data Protection, Republic of Lithuania; Helena Svatosova, Iuridicum Remedium, Czech Republic; Thordur Sveinsson, Personuvernd (Privacy and Data Protection Authority), Iceland; Máté Dániel Szabó, Eötvös Károly Policy Institute, Hungary; Iván Székely, OSA Archivum and Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Hungary; Alina Szymczak, Inspector General for Personal Data Protection, Poland; Mónica Estrada Tanck, Directora de la Ponencia del Comisionado Presidente del IFAI, México; Raymond Tang, Office of the Privacy Commissioner for Personal Data, Hong Kong; Gustavo Tanus, www.protecciondedatos.com.ar, Argentina; Jérôme Thorel, Privacy International Advisory Board, France; Simonas Toliu, Law University of Lithuania, Lithuania; Andrej Tomšič, Information Commissioner, Republic of Slovenia; Juan Antonio Travieso, Dirección Nacional de Protección de Datos Personales, Argentina; Kosmas Tsiraktsopulos, Swiss Data Protection Commission, Switzerland; Toivo Übi, Andmekaitse Inspektsioon, Estonia; Eduardo Ustaran, Berwin Leighton Paisner, United Kingdom; Daniel Valentovic, Office for Personal Data Protection, Slovak Republic; Mikko Valimaki, Electronic Frontiers Finland, Finland; Marie Vallée, Videotron, Canada; Shauna Van Dongen, Privacy Journal, United States; Vasja Vehovar, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia; Ondrej Veis, Charles University, Czech Republic; Cristos Velasco San Martín, North American Consumer Project on Electronic Commerce (NACPEC), Mexico; Geetha Veloo, Malaysia; Maria José Viega, Estudio Viega Asociados, Uruguay; Biljana Volceska, Directorate for Personal Data Protection of Republic of Macedonia, Macedonia; Elisabeth Wallin, The Data Inspection Board, Sweden; Nigel Waters, Pacific Privacy Consulting and Australian Privacy Charter Council, Australia; Raymond Wacks, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong; Elizabeth Jane Walsh, University College Cork, Ireland; Oren Weichenberg, student, Deeth Williams Wall LLP, Canada; Maurice Wessling, Bits of Freedom, Netherlands, and European Digital Rights; Peter Wilfling, Citizen and Democracy Association, Slovak Republic; Ingrid Wilson, Australian Privacy Commission, Australia; Niti Wirudchawong, Official Information Commission, Thailand; Bobson Wong, Digital Freedom Network, United States; Jason Young, Deeth Williams Wall LLP, Canada; Ko Youngkyoung, Social Information Networking Group, South Korea; Evhen Zakharov, Ukrainian Helsinki Human Rights Union, Ukraine.
Privacy and Human Rights 2006
 Keith Bradsher, “China Enacting a High-Tech Plan to Track People,” The New York Times, August 12, 2007, at A1, available at <http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/12/business/worldbusiness/12security.html>. See also Keith Bradsher, “A Chinese Tycoon, Inspired to Create Police Technology,” The New York Times, August 12, 2007, available at <http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/12/business/12securityside.html> (“Mr. Lin said the success of American technology during the invasion of Iraq inspired him to acquire the predecessor company for China Public Security and turn it to police work.”)