IMPACT OF THE PERSONAL INFORMATION PROTECTION AND ELECTRONIC
DOCUMENTS ACT (PIPEDA) ON CHARITABLE AND NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS
By Mark J. Wong, B.A., LL.B
Assisted by Shen Goh and Suzanne White
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.
|