Breathe
By Julieta del Río, INAI Commissioner.
We should not be tempted to infringe on the rights of others; let us defend our own rights and act accordingly.
Data come, data go, everyone has "their own data". On a daily basis we hear the concept of "data", but when the word "personal" is added, the situation changes. Personal data has an owner, yes, it belongs to each person and only the owners can give their consent for its use.
The obligated entities (public institutions) have under their custody millions of personal data of citizens who, according to their attributions, come and provide their information, such as in the health sector, education, public prosecutors, social programs and any activity that links authorities with society. By law, these obligated subjects must guarantee the physical and technological security of personal data, but above all, they must not expose them publicly, because that is a crime.
This week we saw cases that caught the attention of public opinion, such as that of the President, who projected on the screen of the National Palace the letter sent by journalist Natalie Kitroeff (from The New York Times) to the office of the coordinator of social communication of the Office of the Presidency of the Republic, which allowed the reporter's contact telephone number to be displayed.
And speaking of the subject, a couple of days ago I was invited to Harvard University to talk about artificial intelligence, whose main fuel, by the way, is personal data. There, I explained that the topic becomes relevant in the context of this year's federal electoral process, in which more than 19,000 positions will be elected in different states. The malicious use of new technologies can misinform people about their immediate context and about what is happening in the country. Ignorance is a gold mine for candidates and political parties.
Precisely, disinformation is fought with information. Why do I say this? Because the Constitution establishes, in Article 16, that no one may be disturbed in his privacy, and the law is the law.
However, contrary to this, we see in social networks that the protection of personal data is not respected in this country. What we do know is that in Mexico there is the National Institute for Transparency, Access to Information and Protection of Personal Data (INAI) to denounce and to investigate ex officio cases of maximum public interest. What is not permissible are the attacks against the Institute; INAI is not a candidate, but an institution with duties and principles that did not ask to be dragged into a political game.
Let us not allow that, as people with rights, our most intimate sphere, which is our personal data, is exhibited. I reiterate that INAI is open to any person who wants to denounce; it acts ex officio when it identifies the person who violates someone else's data, whether it is a company or an institution responsible for the improper treatment.
Any country in a democracy must be open to the difference of ideas, but always within the framework of respect for the laws and the Constitution; no one above it. All political disputes must subscribe to the democratic principles of respect, tolerance and adherence to the rule of law.
The opinions expressed are the responsibility of the authors and are absolutely independent of the position and editorial line of the company. Opinion 51.
Comments ()