Smart Nation: Privacy Protection and Public Trust
Teo Yi-Ling, Manoj Harjani
02 February 2021
An unexpected U-turn by the Singapore government on its initial undertaking that TraceTogether data would only be used for COVID-19 contact tracing purposes wrought strong reactions from the Singapore public. What does this portend for public trust in future Smart Nation initiatives?
Source: Unsplash
IN THE course of implementing TraceTogether ̶ a digital system to facilitate contact tracing efforts in response to the COVID-19 pandemic ─ assurance had been given at the highest levels that individual privacy would be respected. Accusations have, however, been levelled at the government of breaking trust and leveraging technology for political control. Legitimate questions have been asked about when it knew that existing Criminal Procedure Code provisions covered use of TraceTogether data, and why disclosure of this fact was not made upfront.
Privacy lacks a clear definition in the Singapore context – does it refer to privacy of the person, their data, or both? There is no black-letter law in Singapore enshrining privacy of the person – it is not a constitutionally-guaranteed right. Where the Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA) is concerned, it only provides for the obligations of businesses in protecting customers’ personal data and does not cover government use of personal data. What impact will this controversy have on public attitudes towards adopting future data-driven Smart Nation initiatives?
Read the full article at
https://www.rsis.edu.sg/rsis-publication/cens/smart-nation-privacy-protection-and-public-trust
Comments
Post a Comment