BCS PDP9 Exam

The principle of transparency requires that any processing of personal data is fair, lawful and transparent to the data subjects. This means that data subjects should be informed about the existence, nature, purpose and consequences of the processing, as well as their rights and choices regarding their data. Transparency is essential for ensuring accountability, trust and compliance in data processing. However, the use of AI can pose challenges to the principle of transparency, as AI can lead to invisible processing, with data subjects not being aware of its presence, or the logic, significance and implications of the processing. For example, AI can be used to profile, infer, predict or influence the behaviour, preferences, interests, emotions or personality of data subjects, without their knowledge or consent. AI can also be used to make automated decisions that affect data subjects, such as credit scoring, recruitment, health diagnosis or social benefits, without providing meaningful explanations or opportunities for human intervention.Therefore, it is important to ensure that data subjects are informed and empowered when AI is involved in the processing of their data, and that they can exercise their rights, such as the right to access, rectify, object, restrict, erase or port their data, or the right to challenge or contest automated decisions56.Reference:

Guidance on AI and data protection5

Explaining decisions made with AI6

The crime and taxation exemption in Schedule 2, Part 1, Paragraph 2 of the Data Protection Act 2018 (DPA 2018) provides an exemption from the UK GDPR's transparency obligations and most individual rights, including the right of access, but only if complying with them would prejudice the prevention or detection of crime, or the apprehension or prosecution of offenders. This means that the public authority does not need to disclose details of the investigation to the individual who submitted the subject access request, as doing so would be likely to hinder the investigation and enable the individual to evade justice. The public authority should assess the likelihood of prejudice on a case-by-case basis and document its reasons for relying on the exemption. The other options are incorrect because:

The legal and professional privilege exemption in Schedule 2, Part 1, Paragraph 19 of the DPA 2018 applies to personal data that is subject to an obligation of confidentiality arising from the provision of legal advice or legal representation, or from the conduct of legal proceedings. This exemption does not apply to the information held by the public authority about the investigation, as it is not related to any legal advice or representation, or any legal proceedings.

The term ''criminal offence data'' refers to personal data relating to criminal convictions and offences, or related security measures. This type of data is subject to specific rules under Article 10 of the UK GDPR and Part 3 of the DPA 2018. However, this does not mean that there is no obligation to disclose criminal offence data in response to a subject access request. The public authority still needs to consider whether any of the exemptions in the DPA 2018 apply, such as the crime and taxation exemption, before disclosing or withholding the data.

The right to be informed does apply in relation to criminal acts, as the UK GDPR requires controllers to provide data subjects with information about the processing of their personal data, including the purposes and legal basis of the processing, unless an exemption applies. The fact that the information has not yet been passed to the police does not affect the applicability of the right to be informed or the right of access.Reference:

Data Protection Act 2018, Schedule 2, Part 1, Paragraph 21

ICO Guide to Data Protection, Crime and Taxation2

Data Protection Act 2018, Schedule 2, Part 1, Paragraph 193

UK GDPR, Article 104

Data Protection Act 2018, Part 35

UK GDPR, Article 13 and 146

If a complainant disagrees with the decision of the UK's supervisory authority, which is the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO), they have the right to appeal to the First Tier Tribunal (Information Rights). The tribunal is an independent body that can review the ICO's decision and either uphold it, vary it or cancel it. The tribunal can also direct the ICO to take certain actions, such as issuing a decision notice or an enforcement notice. The appeal must be lodged within 28 days of receiving the ICO's decision, using the notice of appeal form and providing the relevant documents and grounds for appeal. The tribunal will then notify the ICO and the complainant of the appeal and the procedure for dealing with it. The tribunal may hold a hearing to examine the evidence and arguments of both parties, or decide the case on the basis of written submissions only. The tribunal will issue a written decision, which will be sent to both parties and published on the tribunal's website. The tribunal's decision can be further appealed to the Upper Tribunal on a point of law, with the permission of the First Tier Tribunal or the Upper Tribunal.Reference:

Information rights and data protection: appeal against the Information Commissioner1

Notice of appeal form2

First Tier Tribunal (Information Rights) website3

Information society services (ISS) are defined in Article 4(25) of the UK GDPR as ''any service normally provided for remuneration, at a distance, by electronic means and at the individual request of a recipient of services''. This means that ISS are online services that are paid for, either by the user or by another source of income, such as advertising or sponsorship, and that are provided without the parties being physically present, using electronic equipment for the transmission and reception of data, and upon the request of the user. Examples of ISS include apps, programs, websites, search engines, social media platforms, online marketplaces, content streaming services, online games, and any other online services that offer goods or services to users over the internet. Therefore, options A, B and C are correct examples of ISS, as they meet the criteria of the definition. However, option D is not a correct example of ISS, as it does not involve any remuneration for the service provider. Information services provided by non-profit or government organisations with no remuneration are not considered ISS under the UK GDPR, unless they compete with other ISS on the market.Reference:

UK GDPR, Article 4(25)4

Services covered by this code5

If a complainant disagrees with the decision of the UK's supervisory authority, which is the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO), they have the right to appeal to the First Tier Tribunal (Information Rights). The tribunal is an independent body that can review the ICO's decision and either uphold it, vary it or cancel it. The tribunal can also direct the ICO to take certain actions, such as issuing a decision notice or an enforcement notice. The appeal must be lodged within 28 days of receiving the ICO's decision, using the notice of appeal form and providing the relevant documents and grounds for appeal. The tribunal will then notify the ICO and the complainant of the appeal and the procedure for dealing with it. The tribunal may hold a hearing to examine the evidence and arguments of both parties, or decide the case on the basis of written submissions only. The tribunal will issue a written decision, which will be sent to both parties and published on the tribunal's website. The tribunal's decision can be further appealed to the Upper Tribunal on a point of law, with the permission of the First Tier Tribunal or the Upper Tribunal.Reference:

Information rights and data protection: appeal against the Information Commissioner1

Notice of appeal form2

First Tier Tribunal (Information Rights) website3