A piece of legislation that recently passed the Lower House and was sent to the Upper House could significantly change the framework under which private information is handled.

The bill has raised a variety of concerns.

For example, it remains to be seen if privacy will be amply protected under the new system the central government is hoping to establish. There are also concerns the bill could bring to naught the accumulated efforts of local governments, which have long worked to ensure personal information is protected.

The Lower House, however, deliberated on the bill only in a slipshod manner before passing it. High hopes are therefore placed on the role of the Upper House to address the concerns. 

The bill is part of Prime Minister Yoshihide Suga’s pet legislation package for digital transformation. One of its central objectives is to unify personal data protection laws, which have been set separately for the central government, for independent administrative agencies and for private-sector bodies.

Another main point of the bill is about having personal data protection ordinances of local governments “reset,” in the words of digital transformation minister Takuya Hirai, and integrate them into nationwide rules, while at the same time also standardizing their data management systems.

The defects of the current setup, whereby different rules apply to information held by different owners, have been known. The setup could even compromise human lives if it hinders smooth exchange of information between relevant organizations at scenes of disaster relief and health care.

But the digitization and centralized management of data, which the central government is hoping to realize through the legislation, are far more colossal in scale.

Those measures could certainly enhance convenience, including when data is to be used by private businesses, but they also arouse concerns about a potential abuse of various personal data that will be consolidated and identified. And any leak of such data would entail immeasurable consequences.

That notwithstanding, the Lower House deliberated on the package of bills for only less than 30 hours in total. The main opposition Constitutional Democratic Party of Japan submitted an amended bill, which included tougher requirements for unintended use of personal information possessed by administrative organs, only to see it voted down.

The chamber adopted a supplementary resolution calling on the central government for rigorous operation of the data management system, but it is not legally binding. The bill should therefore undergo a fix in the Upper House.

Once the bill becomes law and takes effect, the Personal Information Protection Commission (PPC), an extra-ministerial board of the Cabinet Office, will be the sole body responsible for monitoring and overseeing appropriate handling of data by different organs.

The PPC, however, is not authorized to issue improvement orders to administrative organs, even though it is entitled to give them instructions, advice and recommendations.

The commission should be given, among other things, the right to conduct on-the-spot inspections on administrative organs, just as it has the power to do so on private-sector bodies, to ensure their efficient functioning.

The commission’s staff, currently numbering about 150 employees, should also be reinforced to meet the mounting calls for its independence and expertise.

The plan for “resetting” local government ordinances across Japan is arousing misgivings of its own.

Historically speaking, local governments preceded the central government in working to ensure protection of personal data. Realigning their practices to match standards of the central government goes against the ideals of local autonomy.

Local governments have handled many types of private information that require particular caution, such as that on welfare recipients and domestic violence victims. They also have to handle original sets of information for the sake of their independent policy measures.

Hasty integration of data management systems mandated by the central government would inevitably cause disarray.

The central government should be willing to learn from the practice of local governments, which have paid due respect to their residents.

--The Asahi Shimbun, April 11