For the London Free Press – June 16, 2008

Read this on Canoe

Ontario information and privacy commissioner Anne Cavoukian has expressed concern for the tainted image of privacy laws in Canada.

In her 2007 annual report, available at www.ipc.on.ca, Cavoukian challenges the belief that privacy laws are to blame for many tragedies in which it is alleged release of relevant information would have saved the day.

Cavoukian very firmly states that privacy laws are not the problem; the problem is the misinterpretation and the misapplication of privacy laws. She has even gone so far as to publicize her opinion in the Washington Post and the National Post.

Cavoukian uses the Virginia Tech massacre and the events that unfolded before and during the tragedy as an example of the prevalence of the public’s misconceptions about privacy laws.

The massacre took place April 16, 2007, on the campus of Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. Thirty-three people, including the gunman, died and many others were wounded in two separate attacks by a student who had previously been diagnosed with a mental illness.

Cavoukian accuses the media of sensationalizing the school shooting by alleging that privacy laws and restrictions on the release of private information to the university and health officials were to blame.

Cavoukian says that the problem in the Virginia Tech tragedy was not the mere existence of privacy laws, but public officials’ lack of understanding of the appropriate application of those laws.

While Cavoukian emphasizes the importance of privacy laws in protecting personal information, she also acknowledges that this protection is not absolute and is subject to exceptions in extreme situations.

In a fact sheet issued in 2005 titled Disclosure of Information Permitted in Emergency or Other Urgent Circumstances, Cavoukian sets out situations in which disclosure of personal information is permitted under Ontario’s privacy laws.

These include, for example, a situation in which the health or safety of an individual or the public is at stake or it is necessary to eliminate or reduce significant risk of harm to an individual or a group ,or it is necessary to allow contact with close relatives or friends of an injured or dead person.

In her report, Cavoukian challenges the public to ask questions every time they’re told they can’t have information because of privacy laws. She urges people to ask which law prohibits the release of the information, why it is prohibited and whether there are instances when the information may be released.

Cavoukian stresses the importance of privacy laws and the fact that they are an integral part of our society and are especially important in allowing us to realize liberty and freedom.

She concludes her report by noting, “privacy is too important to our social fabric to let it come under attack on the basis of false accusations.”