個人資料保護辦公室

Gabinete para a Protecção de Dados Pessoais

Office for Personal Data Protection

Complaint Case Notes
Print

No: 0021/2016/IP

Title: Building surveillance system

Reason: Report

Brief:

    The Complainant of the current case reported to the GPDP (Office for Personal Data Protection) that surveillance cameras were installed, without the consent of the flat owners, at the communal areas of Building A.  He also pointed out that these cameras were not used for security purposes, but to monitor the flat-owners entering and exiting the building and their activities.

Analysis:

    GPDP’s investigation revealed that even before the complaint was lodged, surveillance cameras had been installed at the corridors and inside the elevators, according to the management committee of the flat owners (hereinafter as Management Committee).  These cameras, however, were removed after the previous management company’s contract was not extended.  Cameras were later re-installed, in addition to those newly-installed at the rooftop, by the Management Committee, in order to improve the electronic surveillance of the building.  The installations of these cameras were unanimously adopted by the Management Committee members during the committee meeting, and the president and other committee members also confirmed these decisions by signing.
  According to Article 4(1)(1) of the Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA), “personal data” shall mean any information of any type, including sound and image, relating to an identified or identifiable natural person (“data subject”).  Article 3(1) of the same Law governs that the respective data processing should be regulated by the PDPA. 
  The cameras installed at the corridors, elevators and roof-top, as allowed by the Management Committee resolution, were aimed at the building security.  The areas covered by these cameras were the communal areas as referred in Article 1324(1)(f) of the Civil Code, approved by Decree Law 39/99/M.   Article 1329 of the Civil Code provides that the communal areas of a building are managed by a general assembly of the condominium and an executive body.  Since the Management Committee installed, within its scope of management, the surveillance cameras for the building security and the protection of the communal areas and the building residents, such purposes are lawful and legitimate and in line with condition for legitimate data processing that laid down by Article 6(5) of the PDPA. 
  On the other hand, according to Article 10(1) of the PDPA, a controller or his representative shall provide the data subject from whom data relating to him is directly collected with the information regarding the respective personal data processing, including the identity of the controller and of his representative, if any, as well as the purposes of the processing, etc.  Originally no notices were found, in the conspicuous places near where the cameras were installed, to inform the residents of the recordings of the surveillance cameras.  But after the Management Committee was reminded by the GPDP, notices have been put up.
  To sum up, the information available did not reveal any violations of the PDPA by the Management Committee of Building A.  

Result:

    The GPDP has already informed the investigation results to the Building Committee and the current case was closed.

Reference:
Please refer to Article 3, 4, 6 and 10 of the Personal Data Protection Act.

Back

Avenida da Praia Grande, N.º 804, Edif. China Plaza, 17.º andar, Macau Tel:(853) 2871 6006 Fax:(853) 2871 6116