- 23/04/2020
- Category: Commentaries
The discourse on public information disclosure in the context of handling the Coronavirus Disease 19 pandemic (COVID 19) is still an interesting subject to be discussed. On March 30, 2020 the Indonesian Institute of Sciences (LIPI) with eight other institutions published the results of a survey on public perceptions about information disclosure for COVID-19 patients. The survey found 97% of respondents agreed that a positive patient history of COVID-19 was opened to the public, 65% agreed if the patient’s name was opened to the public, 65.8% agreed if the specific address of the patient was opened to the public, and 64% of respondents agreed if the sub-district address is opened to the public[i]. At almost the same time there was also a group of people who conducted a judicial review to the Constitutional Court (MK) to examine several articles on the open classification of patient data information.
However, we cannot ignore that disclosure of patient data information has a high enough risk for their safety and caused social chaos among the public. Recently, it still left in our minds about positive patients 01 and 02 who get social discrimination from the public; some medical personnel who were expelled from their homes; and the people’s refusal of the COVID 19 positive patient corpse to be buried in a public eater.
This paper tries to answer the question about What is Information Privacy? And what are the limits to information disclosure in the face of a COVID 19 pandemic outbreak in Indonesia?
Information Privacy
Information privacy is broadly defined as the right to control personal information while also relating to its development and dissemination[ii]. The definition of information privacy also continued to change during the twentieth and twentt-first centuries along with the evolution of information technology[iii]. The definition of information privacy was started by Warren and Brandeis in 1890 regarding as: “the right to be left alone”. The above understanding centers on the principle of “an inviolable personality”.[iv]
The definition slowly changed when the development of the use of cameras that became popular and newspapers were widely circulated. The right to be left alone changes to the right to determine the conditions for sharing personal information.[v] It can also be found at this time in the application that we use on smartphones that ask permission to use media and telephone data.
Next there is a slight change in the definition of privacy is not an absolute right and rigid, under certain conditions can change to the extent that makes sense[vi]. The point is that the right to information privacy can be lost at any time under certain conditions. However, this change in definition also has further implications that bring to deeper questions about what conditions make it possible to disclose the right of information privacy.
Limitation of information disclosure for CO-VID patients 19
COVID 19 is a new virus that appears towards the end of 2019 in Wuhan Province, China. Thus, not much information is known about COVID 19. This causes the excavation and dissemination of information about COVID 19 to be done as a form of risk mitigation.[vii] Nevertheless, disclosure of information about COVID 19 patients also needs to be processed properly. Which mean, the information disseminated needs to have limitations given to continue protecting patient safety and privacy.
The information which is opened from COVID 19 patients is the patient’s travel history. It does not include the name and address in detail where the patient lives[viii]. The patient’s travel history will be the basis for tracking and early warning to be more careful about the community contained in the patient’s travel history. Besides, regions that have not been affected can continue to carry out activities as usual by always following the regional control procedures of the central government.
Information about names and addresses in detail also remains not disseminated. This is to avoid social discrimination that will affect the families of COVID 19 patients. Besides, opening history of COVID 19 patients also does not violate the right to information privacy, which is currently in an emergency situation – in this case related to the increasingly spread of COVID 19 widespread – which forces the central government to provide special ways to minimize its spread.
It has to be noted that the disclosure of information on COVID 19 patients regarding travel history can be done in the context of the spread of the virus that has not been spread massively. Because if it is late, the information will become unuseful.
Author: Fajar Cahyono
Editor: Treviliana Eka Putri
Read more article written by Fajar Cahyono
[i] Rusli, Cahyadi. (2020). Temuan Survei Keterbukaan Informasi Pasien Positif COVID-19. http://lipi.go.id/berita/Temuan-Survei-Keterbukaan-Informasi-Pasien-Positif-COVID-19/21983 (Accessed 3 April 2020)
[ii] Taddeo, Mariarosaria. (2016). “Ethics and Information Technologies: History and Themes of a Research Field”. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/271826911 (Accessed 3 April 2020)
[iii] Hildebrandt, M. (2013). Balance or Trade-off? Online Security Technologies and Fundamental Rights. Philosophy & Technology, 26(4), 357–379.
[iv] S. Warren and L. Brandeis. (2015). “The Right to Privacy,’” 4 Harvard L. Rev. 193 (1890). (n.d.). http://uscivilliberties.org/themes/4559-s-warren-and-lbrandeis-the-right-to-privacy-4-harvard-l-rev-193-1890.html (Accessed 3 April 2020)
[v] ibid
[vi] Agre, P. (1997). Technology and privacy the new landscape. http://site.ebrary.com/id/10015368 (Accessed 3 April 2020)
[vii] Westman, Nicole. (2020). Personal Privacy Matters During a Pandemic-But Less Than it Might at Other Times. https://www.theverge.com/2020/3/12/21177129/personal-privacy-pandemic-ethics-public-health-coronavirus (Accessed 3 Arpil 2020)
[viii] ibid
