If your body is a temple then mine must have a leaky roof, because just two weeks after returning from Australia, I'm sick again... It's super annoying, but at least I've learnt from the last illness that I shouldn't try to force myself too hard to work through the head fog, so I'm trying to spread the work out a bit and take it easier until things are better. Which is why this week's wrap is going to be a short and sweet one.
(1)
On Thursday, Bertha Henson flagged on Facebook how easy it is to get hold of people's NRIC numbers just by going to BizFile and searching under 'People Profile'. What was most outrageous to me was the response she got when she reported it to the relevant departments: one response she got from the Personal Data Protection Commission (PDPC) reminded her that the Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority (ACRA) is exempted from the Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA). Someone from the Government Data Security Contact Centre said that it would take up to 10 to 15 working days to "investigate the issue". Henson later got an email from the same "Mr Joshua" telling her that ACRA has “always displayed the full NRIC in their information products’’, but also: “Having said that, mindful of the need to reduce the risk of personal data exposure where possible, ACRA conducted a review for the need to display identification numbers of individuals involved in running and managing the business entities in full in ACRA’s public register.’’
A day later, Henson shared the link to a Business Times article with the headline "Acra removes ability to search for citizens' IC numbers on Bizfile after privacy concerns raised":
Strangely, though, when I clicked through to that link I arrived at an article with a different headline: "Ability to search for citizens’ IC numbers on Acra’s Bizfile raises privacy concerns". And nowhere in the article do I see it reported that ACRA has removed that ability? 🤔🤔🤔
In any case, as of Friday afternoon, it's still possible to find people's IC numbers by searching BizFile. It doesn't seem as if ACRA has budged at all, so I'm curious as to how that Business Times headline came about (it also comes up when you search it on Google, then links you back to the article I ended up at).
At a time when the government is supposedly so committed to fighting scams that they want to pass legislation allowing the police to impose restrictions on personal bank accounts (as highlighted in last week's wrap), it's just bizarre that they don't seem to grasp the problem with making it so easy to get hold of people's IC numbers. It really doesn't take much at all to run the search, and you can even find the IC numbers of senior political officer holders, dead and alive.
This would be a problem if anyone else disclosed IC numbers so easily, but the government isn't covered by the PDPA... so how are Singaporeans supposed to demand accountability if the data gets misused? The ACRA data policy states that "Holders of personal data obtained through ACRA's system or from authorised ISPs are responsible for making sure that they comply with the Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA) and other laws, regarding the disclosure and use of personal data and information. Should the use of information by anyone constitute an offence or a breach of the law, he or she may face legal action or criminal prosecution." The responsibility is on others to make sure that they're not misusing the information... but does ACRA need to make the data so easy to obtain in the first place?
This is not a person-centric privacy policy and it's not clear what mechanisms there are for accountability and compensation when problems crop up. Insisting that it's legal because ACRA is exempted from the PDPA anyway is not an answer.
(2)
It's getting harder to recruit potential political candidates. People are wary of venturing into the field because of the public scrutiny and voters' expectations. That's unsurprising, and not necessarily a problem. Of course, there are some things that need to be worked on—for example, one woman told CNA that she hasn't been willing to join the Workers' Party because the public attention is "even harder for women" where "looks, dressing and weight are judged". That shouldn't be the case, and is part of the sexism and misogyny that we should be addressing in our society, but generally speaking people who aspire to hold public office should expect heightened levels of public scrutiny, and take that into account before stepping into the fray.
On my radar...
📚 A shout-out to my friend Gayathrii's piece on book clubs, published on CNA! I really related to the reluctance to join book clubs because of the pressure to finish the book—it's the major reason why I've not participated in book clubs, because I'm wary of committing myself to getting through any particular book in time for the discussion. (Gratifyingly, the featured image in the article comes from a book club discussion of my book—just about the only book club I've attended. 😅)
Thank you for reading this week! I hope to be back next week in good health and a fuller wrap.