On-site visits, along with privacy sweeps and the submission of relevant documents, are allowed under NPC Circular No. 18-02, which provides the guidelines on the conduct of compliance checks.
With the launch of the Data Breach Notification Management System (DBNMS), the NPC will no longer accept other forms of submissions except through the DBMNS online platform.
Sen. Franklin M. Drilon defended the constitutionality of the vetoed bill as he underscored that the measure contains no constitutional infirmity, specifically the provision that merely mandates the use of one's real name and registered SIM card in creating social media accounts.
Re-electionist senator Sherwin Gatchalian underscored the need to separate the legislation on social media after a more thorough and comprehensive discussion.
The Philippine Competition Commission (PCC) said online platforms were among those that benefited the most from the pandemic-induced transition to a digital economy. The strategic use of data can lead to market structures that incentivize players to abuse their dominance.
Under the draft circular, an administrative fine may be imposed based on the annual gross income of personal information controllers (PICs) or personal information processors (PIPs) within the range of 0.25% to 3% for grave violations and 0.25% to 2% for major violations.
In the Philippines, 94% of the country’s corporate respondents said privacy laws have had a positive impact, and only 1% indicated the laws have had a negative impact.
According to the NPC, the personal data of public officers, including individuals who are or were performing service under contract for the government, may be disclosed if the requested information is a matter of public concern or interest, provided that the information is relevant to the subject matter of the request, and disclosure is not otherwise prohibited by any law or regulation.
The SEC said the act of “contacting the person in the borrower’s contact list other than those who were named as guarantors or co-makers shall constitute unfair debt collection practice.”
