Last week, Article 19 held the ‘Freedom of Information at 250‘ event at the Free Word Centre. The aim of the event was to commemorate, celebrate and scrutinise the adoption of the first freedom of information law in Sweden and Finland in 1766.
Participants also discussed the relevance and significance of the law today and the future of freedom of information, in a national and global context.
There was a range of speakers on the day including Maurice Frankel and Des Wilson from the Campaign for Freedom of Information (CFOI), the new Information Commissioner, Elizabeth Denham, and Lord James Wallace of Tankerness, former member of Scottish Government, who piloted the Freedom of Information Act through the Scottish Parliament.
We have collected a number of tweets from participants at the event using #FOI250 and published them on Storify to help capture the flavour of the discussions which took place.
The collection documents the two moderated discussions and the evening panel. There is also a list of resources and reaction at the end of the collection. Click here or on the image below to view the Storify collection.
Freedom of Information at 250 was an Article 19 event held at the Free Word Centre with the support of the Information Law and Policy Centre at the Institute of Advanced Legal Studies, and the Embassies of Sweden and Finland.
Social media has revolutionised how we communicate. As part of a series for The Conversation, Alyce McGovern, UNSW Australia and Sanja Milivojevic, La Trobe University summarise how social media is affecting crime and criminal justice.
The popularity of social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter and Snapchat have transformed the way we understand and experience crime and victimisation.
Previously, it’s been thought that people form their opinions about crime from what they see or read in the media. But with social media taking over as our preferred news source, how do these new platforms impact our understanding of crime?
Social media has also created new concerns in relation to crime itself. Victimisation on social media platforms is not uncommon.
However, it is not all bad news. Social media has created new opportunities for criminal justice agencies to solve crimes, among other things.
Thus, like many other advancements in communication technology, social media has a good, a bad and an ugly side when it comes to its relationship with criminal justice and the law. Continue reading
In this guest blog post, Brendan Van Alsenoy – legal researcher at the Centre for IT and IP Law, University of Leuven – analyses the scope of the personal use exemption under the new EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).
A note with regard to the relevance of the GDPR to the UK: this post was written before the EU referendum result on 24th June. For the ICO’s statement on the potential regulatory implications of a UK exit from the EU please see this link.
The blog post was originally posted on the CiTiP blog at KU Leuven. It is based on a draft paper included in the CiTiP Working Paper Series. You can follow the CiTiP on Twitter here.
In less than 30 years, individuals have transcended their role as passive “data subjects” to become actively involved in the creation, distribution and consumption of personal data. Unless an exemption or derogation applies, individuals are – at least in theory – subject to data protection law.
The evolving role of the individual
We use information and communication technologies every day. Mobile devices tell us where to eat, who to meet and how to get there. We share pictures, post videos and tweet reviews. We google everything and everyone.
With all these processing capabilities at our fingertips, the question can be asked: are we subject to EU data protection law?