In June 2022, the Authority for Transparency and Access to  Information (ANTAI) sanctioned the digital media  La Verdad Panamá for  publishing a marriage certificate without the consent of one of the  contracting parties.
This has been the most controversial  sanction filed by the authority on data protection in Panama, which  provoked the reaction of unions of journalists and communicators  throughout the Republic.
The resolution was appealed by La Verdad  Panama is still to be resolved in the second instance; while ANTAI  pointed out that Law 81 of 2019 was violated by not requesting  authorization from the data owner before publishing the journalistic  note, which contained their data legible in the marriage certificate.
Law  81 on the Data Protection in Panama seeks to protect the fundamental  right to Privacy, without undermining the free exercise of other rights  inherent to the individual such as access to information, freedom of  expression, and, in the case of media, freedom of the press, since both  must coexist harmoniously.
However, the law is not clear in the  exceptions that it establishes to its application regarding the exercise  of journalism. In article 3, it states that those treatments that are  expressly regulated by special laws or by the regulations that develop  them are excepted from the scope of the Law, which is not the case of  journalistic activity, which to date does not have a unified legal  framework that regulates it, and that, by the way, a union of  journalists in the country has already been working on a proposal since  November 2022.
On the other hand, article 8 states that  authorization is not required for the processing of personal data in  cases in which they come from or are collected from sources in the  public domain or accessible in public media, and Decree 285 of 2022 -  which regulates the Law 81 of 2019- in its article 20, numeral 2, states  that only the media may be considered sources of public access. But in  the absence of a regulation that regulates them, what can we define as a  means of communication and what not?
The National Association of  Journalists , through the citizen participation procedure, a  legislative initiative for the modification of certain articles of the  current law, among which the addition of a clear and express exception  of the exercise of journalism, in light of this Law. Currently, the  legislative initiative is before the Government and Constitutional  Affairs Commission of the National Assembly of Panama, under the  numbering of Draft Law 159 of January 4, 2023.
Without knowing if  the modification of the Law will materialize or not, or if ANTAI will  issue any guide or additional clarification to said Law -which is what  is appropriate in our opinion- we recommend to journalists a series of  good practices for the treatment of personal data in the exercise of  journalistic work.
Among these recommendations is that of  anonymizing personal data, this means making it public, and avoiding the  identification of the person who the data is. Another recommendation is  to be open and transparent in the collection of said data and to inform  the affected person as long as it does not harm the journalistic  investigation. On the other hand, carefully weigh the public interest of  the data, since health records, family ties, or a person's sexual  behavior, for example, often only serve to feed the morbidity in the  publications instead of contributing something really necessary for  understanding the context of the complaint.
In addition to that,  the media and journalists must respect the rights of users regarding  their data, access, rectification, cancellation, opposition, and  portability, as well as basic principles such as confidentiality, among  others listed by the Law, which must be complied with on time and with  sufficient publicity to amend, to the greatest extent possible, the  error made with the data in question.
In the case of the digital  newspaper La Verdad Panamá, we consider that ANTAI did not adequately  support the resolution, since the published information –in this case,  the name and ID was included in a marriage certificate– which is a  public document. However, the fact that a document is public does not  mean that it is of public access or domain, as is the case with marriage  certificates, that we must prove to be one of the contracting parties  to request them. Even so, the outlet did not have the authorization of  both parties to publish all the personal data contained in the marriage  certificate, in addition to the fact that the public interest of the  marriage certificate was not properly justified either. Therefore, it is  extremely important to determine the public interest in the publication  of the data if the consent of the parties or one of the parties is not  obtained; or that the data be separated from the traceability of the  individual to avoid compromising her privacy.
In any case, the  most important thing is that the journalist can support the use and  publication of any data based on the public interest and good practices  for the collection, use, and conservation of information.
With  this, we do not deny the possibility that any State has of misusing or  misinterpreting this Law to regress the advances in legal matters of  transparency in the management and use of public funds, for which we  ponder the interest of journalistic unions in training in Law 81 and  their interest in better adapting it to the needs of their work.
Article provided by INPLP member: Lia Hernández Pérez (Legal IT Abogad@s, Panama)
Discover more about the INPLP and the INPLP-Members 
 
Dr. Tobias Höllwarth (Managing Director INPLP)
            
					
					
					
					
					
					
					
					
					
					
					
				
				
										
									