Stc 2922000

Organic law 15 1999

NCJ051718TRIBUNAL CONSTITUTIONALSentence 292/2000, of November 30, 2000(Plenary) Appeal of unconstitutionality n.º 1463/2000(BOE of January 4, 2001)SUMMARY:Appeal of unconstitutionality. Protection of personal data. Nullity of precepts of Law 15/1999 (Protection of personal data). It is declared contrary to the Constitution and null and void the clause «when the communication had been foreseen by the provisions of creation of the file or the …

SUMMARY:Appeal of unconstitutionality. Protection of personal data. Nullity of precepts of Law 15/1999 (Protection of personal data). It is declared contrary to the Constitution and null and void the clause «when the communication has been foreseen by…

Rgpd boe

By order of March 28, 2000, the Fourth Section of this Court decided to admit the appeal of unconstitutionality filed by the Ombudsman and to transfer the complaint and documents presented, in accordance with the provisions of art. 34 LOTC, to the Congress of Deputies and the Senate, through their Presidents, and to the Government, through the Ministry of Justice, so that they could appear in the process and make whatever allegations they deemed appropriate. It was also agreed to publish the initiation of the appeal in the Official State Gazette (BOE), which was done on April 8, 2000.

By letter registered in this Court on April 5, 2000, the President of the Congress of Deputies communicated the Agreement of the Bureau of the Permanent Deputation not to appear in the proceeding or to make any allegations, although he made available to the Court any actions that it might require.

By letter registered in this Court on April 25, 2000, the President of the Senate communicated to this Court the Agreement of the Bureau of the Chamber to appear in the proceeding and to offer its collaboration for the purposes of art. 88.1 LOTC.

Constitutional court search engine

Plenary. Ruling 292/2000, of November 30, 2000. Appeal of unconstitutionality 1.463/2000. Filed by the Ombudsman regarding articles 21.1 and 24.1 and 2 of Organic Law 15/1999, of December 13, 1999, on the Protection of Personal Data. Infringement of the fundamental right to the protection of personal data. Partial nullity of several precepts of the Organic Law.

The Ombudsman states that the power to consent to the transfer of personal data forms part of and is a necessary guarantee of the right to privacy of its owner (arts. 4, 5 and 11 L.O.P.D.), since without this power it would be impossible to minimally control the circulation of the information that the Administrations have collected on his person, weakening the protection offered to such data by the Constitution itself. And this would happen if the Administration were authorized to organize a traffic of personal data without the knowledge and consent of the interested parties (section 4 of art. 21 L.O.P.D.) by means of rules of the Administration itself, which do not even have the criteria and guarantees that must be followed and respected fixed by the L.O.P.D. It is true, the appellant argues, that this right of control over one’s own personal data has limits that the L.O.P.D. itself provides for, referring to the law for its precision, which is in accordance with the provisions of art. 53.1 Spanish Constitution. But it is no less so that art. 21.1 L.O.P.D. regulates the possibility of the limit being set in a regulation with a lower rank than the law by means of a reference, moreover, in blank, which is directly contrary to the reservation of law of the aforementioned art. 53.1 C.E.

Stc 2922000 2022

El contenido de esta Revista representa únicamente la opinión del autor y es de su exclusiva responsabilidad. La Comisión Europea no acepta ninguna responsabilidad por el uso que pueda hacerse de la información que contiene.

La protección de datos es un tema especialmente relevante para la protección de derechos fundamentales como la privacidad de las personas. Este derecho debe ser especialmente protegido en el ámbito de los procesos electorales, donde la legislación española ha sufrido algunos cambios que se analizan en este artículo. En este sentido, el enfoque de este trabajo se centra en la reciente sentencia del Tribunal Constitucional español, que anula el artículo 58.1 bis LOREG por incompatibilidad con la ordenación constitucional y con determinados aspectos de la legislación europea y nacional en la materia. En consecuencia, este trabajo pretende contribuir a la discusión sobre esta reciente sentencia así como determinar las implicaciones de esta incompatibilidad constitucional en materia de protección de datos aplicada a los procesos electorales.