few days ago I had the pleasure to share with colleagues an interesting participation in summer courses at the University Pablo de Olavide in Carmona, in a course entitled "surveillance society and data protection" (see news in Blog Bartolomé Borrego). Specifically my speech took place at the round table on security and eGovernment, for which I found very useful the news came just days before one of my favorite blogs: Notes information security. In short, there was clear how to focus the intervention, but again Javier Cao helped me find an approach that focused solely on a legal approach, or, rather, to offer interest to lawyers and for those who did not have such a condition, because surely the audience would integrands both as each other.
The first question that struck me was conceptual: what the hell I say it's the security? Nothing, and I am very devoted to the dictionary, I find the SAR offers heterogeneous meanings: quality insurance, free and clear of any danger, harm or risk; true, indubitable and infallible somewhat ; firm, steady and is not in danger of failing or falling, not suspicious ... And the question is very clear: if all that we apply to e-Government, do you really think someone who is safe? Is there widespread concern in public administration in issues related to security, or just some "crazy on the hill" is concerned with these issues? Since then, I think the ordinary citizen distrust of government, which together with a lack of ICT culture is undoubtedly a dangerous cocktail from the point of view of confidence ... And he has reason to distrust: the times that one comes face to face with applications that do not work and errors are systematically or poorly designed, often asking us for the umpteenth time that roles and has his own acting administration (violating a right that has existed since 1992), the digital divide ... Not to mention some cases (which I know from direct explanation of a hit) in which to raise at trial the issue of the security measures of a relevant state body that allows indiscriminate access to third party information to the State Attorney referred to a alleged Law Database ...
Luckily, as a lawyer, I had a solution: I enrocaré in certainty, but to be honest I was not convinced, so I started trying to find reasons. The scheme legal framework for e-administration "is characterized by the certainty of its rules? It really is predictable application? Phew, shaking the fence. Certainly, we must recognize that the Law 11/2007 (LAE) has made undeniable progress in relation to the previous situation, to the extent that it is one of the most advanced laws in Europe which has helped solve many of legal barriers existitían before in Spain. But the fact remains that there are many gaps and unresolved problems, including:
- there is a clear lack of coordination between Law 30/1992 and LAE in some areas;
- the LAE does not deals with data protection (limited to state to pass), regardless of the Data Protection Act is based on a model for protecting itself from the early / mid 90's, where the Internet was very, very different and hardly anyone knew or what you were talking; ESSENTIAL
- some of the LAE estimates are non-basic, so not subject to certain guarantees to any Adminitración (ex.: the case of automated actions);
- recognition rights is not always the best methodology to impose obligations on the administration, especially if it is not clear title to them until after he exercised (Right not to submit documents of art. 6.2.b LAE) or you can give them or exercise them without further justification (if the choice of channel).
