Υπ. Of Education: Wrong assumptions in the decision of the Personal Data Protection Authority for e-learning | Skai.gr

by

The announcement of the Ministry of Education (YPAITH) regarding the Decision of the Personal Data Protection Authority (APDPH) 50/2021 regarding e-education speaks of “wrong assumptions”.

The ministry accuses the Authority of “sudden change of course” and “bypassing its ongoing dialogue with the Ministry of Education”.

At the same time, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs attacks SYRIZA, that it adopts “interpretations without retaliation”, “falsely stating that the decision allegedly includes that personal data were transferred to the US and were the subject of commercial exploitation.”

The APDPH, in its 4/2020 opinion, the ministry states, had considered e-learning legal in principle, making some recommendations, “which the ministry adopted within the stipulated three-month deadline”. Since then, the statement continued, “and while the ministry was in constant contact with the Authority and provided additional requested information, no deviations from the data protection rules were ever noted, nor, of course, was the statement made by the Authority for the first time its new decision “.

Among other things, the ministry claims that “the Authority erroneously considers that the data processing applied in e-learning is the one described in the CISCO Privacy data sheets”. However, the statement said, “the ministry has achieved specific, stricter data protection conditions that apply only under our contract” and that “the data is pseudonymous and it is doubtful whether it can be used in a way that adversely affects data subjects “.

It is noted that this decision ends with five reprimands for the Ministry of Education, as well as with the explicit warning that there should be compliance within two months.

The decision states, inter alia, that “in relation to the issue of data transmission outside the EU, as analyzed in paragraph 20 hereof, it is found that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs violated the obligations of Article 46 of the General Data Protection Regulation, as it has not evaluate the transmission in the manner described in that paragraph “.

.

You May Also Like

Recommended for you