[ad_1]
Although the Minister of Finance, Ignacio Briones, reiterated today that the request made to the Superintendency of Pensions of the RUT of the people who agreed to withdraw the 10% is within the law, among the experts there is not a single vision.
For the former president of the Council for Transparency, Marcelo drago, the law referred to by the minister (Law No. 20,403) corresponds to the law for the readjustment of public sector salaries, bonuses and other benefits of 2009.
“It is a law passed before the reform that recognizes the right to the protection of personal data as a constitutional guarantee, so it does not necessarily comply with current standards,” he adds.
In this sense, it limits that “the authorization established in article 30 of Law No. 20,403 refers exclusively to the processing of social security data for the purposes of fulfilling the purposes of that law, the granting of readjustments, bonuses and other benefits. (school bonds, winter bonds) not to study the regulatory impacts of bills, so the principle of purpose is not met and it has no legal basis ”.
He further argues that “This rule can only be invoked if the personal data of a social security nature that are being requested will be used exclusively to calculate the readjustment of public sector salaries, bonuses and other benefits, nothing more ”.
For his part, the former Superintendent of Pensions, Alejandro Ferreiro, acknowledged that he was taken by surprise with this rule. In fact, he said that the issue of personal data protection is a point that has been debated at length in the Council for Transparency, “but this is a rule that I did not know about, and that is in force.”
For this reason, and interpreting the scope of article 30 of that law, Ferreiro maintains that “If read in some detail, this rule seems to empower the Ministry of Finance to collect this information for statistical analysis purposes with the obligation to preserve its confidentiality from third parties, and with possible sanctions in the case of not doing so ”.
In conversation with radio Duna, Ferreiro in a certain way endorsed Minister Briones’s thesis regarding the statistical purposes of these data. In this sense, he said that knowing what the effect of the withdrawal has been, knowing what has happened to the balances “and undoubtedly knowing who has benefited in a debatable way -at least, from the tax benefits of having withdrawn this-,” makes sense to when calculating the impact of what is being discussed now ”.
That said, Ferreiro believes that these types of procedures do add value.
Isolating the case of the Ministry of Finance, on which Ferreiro considers that it acted correctly and under those circumscribed by law, he explains that each body has permission to process and use personal data within the framework of its powers.
For example, “If Internal Taxes (SII) have access to tax information, it is for those purposes, and in view of this, the State of Chile cannot claim to have access to these data, just because a department has them ”.
In this particular case, he said that, based on the principle of the purpose of the use of the data, “the Superintendency of Pensions would do so within its scope, and if the Ministry of Finance did not have an express legal permission such as the one it seems to have, it could not access that information ”.
