Investigation
report: University refusing to comply with
data access request in relation to examination marking
1. The Privacy Commissioner for Personal Data (“the
Commissioner”) Mr. Roderick B. Woo published today (19 January) a
report (“the Report”) on the result of an investigation of a complaint
case carried out pursuant to section 38(a) of the Personal Data
(Privacy) Ordinance (“the Ordinance”). The case concerned the
refusal of a university (“the University”) to comply with a data access
request (“DAR”) for examination marking of a student (“the
Complainant”).
2. An individual is empowered by the Ordinance to
access his personal data held by a data user. Section 2(1) of the
Ordinance defines “personal data” as any data relating to a living
individual; being recorded in a form that can be processed or accessed;
and from which the identity of the individual can be directly or
indirectly ascertained.
3. Under section 18 of the Ordinance, a data subject
has the right to make a request to be informed by a data user whether
the data user holds his or her personal data and to be supplied with a
copy of such data. Section 19 of the Ordinance provides that a
data user shall comply with a DAR not later than 40 days after
receiving the request. If the data user has reasonable grounds to
refuse to comply with the request under the Ordinance, he shall inform
the data subject of the reasons for the refusal in writing before the
expiration of that period.
4. The duty of a data user when complying with a DAR only
extends to supplying a copy of the personal data of the data subject,
and not a copy of the document in which the data are contained.
5. The case arose from a DAR made to the University
by the Complainant for copies of the “examination answers, audio-tapes,
coursework (and related comments of the above) on 4 courses” that the
Complainant had attended (“the Requested Data”). In response to
the DAR, the University stated that as it was within the period of the
appeal process of the Complainant’s request for review of course
grades, the University could not look into the Complainant’s DAR to
supply the Complainant with the examination answer scripts and
coursework, but agreed to provide the Complainant with a copy of the
video tape requested by the Complainant. The Complainant
therefore complained that the University had failed to comply with the
Complainant’s DAR.
6. After careful consideration of all the
circumstances of the case, the Commissioner was of the view that the
University had not complied with the Complainant’s DAR not later than
40 days after receiving the request and contravened the requirements of
section 19(1) of the Ordinance. During the course of the
investigation, the University finally provided the Complainant with the
Requested Data.
7. The Commissioner reminded candidates, “The term
‘personal data’ under the Ordinance refers to data from which the
identity of a living individual can be ascertained. I understand
that there are occasions especially where a candidate is not satisfied
with his examination results, he may wish to have access to his
examination scripts, coursework or answer books with scores and
examiners’ written remarks contained therein. However, he may not
understand that his examination answers are not necessarily his
personal data in respect of which he can make a valid DAR to the
education or examination bodies concerned. In fact, examination
papers and answers generally do not constitute personal data of the
candidates because they do not refer to their personal
information. For instance, mathematics examination papers and
answers only relate to mathematical calculations and do not constitute
personal data of the candidates. Hence, the Ordinance does not
empower candidates to request for copies of examination papers and
answers from education or examination bodies.”
8. On the other hand, the Commissioner offered some
advice to education and examination bodies in handling DARs, “Personal
information of a candidate which are contained in answers, or comments
marked on answer books by examiners are personal data of the
candidate. When an education or examination body receives a DAR
from a candidate, it should provide the candidate with a copy of the
latter’s personal data, but personal data from which the identity of
the examiner can be ascertained, e.g. name of the examiner, need to be
deleted. Therefore, education or examination bodies should take
care when handling DARs from candidates.
9. For case background, relevant provisions of the
Ordinance, explanations of the University, result of the investigation
and comments arising from the investigation, please refer to the
Report. Copies of the Report are available from the
Commissioner’s Office at 12/F, 248 Queen's Road East, Wan Chai, Hong
Kong. It is also available for download from the website of the
Commissioner's Office
(www.pcpd.org.hk),
END