[:lt]<\/p>\n
Visuomen\u0117s interesas \u017einoti nesibaigia pasibaigus politiko kadencijai. Toki\u0105 pozicij\u0105 d\u0117l vie\u0161\u0173j\u0173 asmen\u0173 duomen\u0173 vie\u0161umo diskusijoje i\u0161sak\u0117 Lietuvos teis\u0117s instituto mokslininkas dr. Laurynas Pak\u0161taitis. Diskusija \u201eKaip \u012fgyvendinti duomen\u0173 apsaugos reikalavimus nesuma\u017einant visuomen\u0117s teis\u0117s \u017einoti?\u201c, vykusi spalio 23 dien\u0105, buvo organizuota \u201eTransparency International\u201c Lietuvos skyriaus (TILS) ir visuomenin\u0117s organizacijos \u201eBaltosios pir\u0161tin\u0117s\u201c.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Teisingumo viceministr\u0117 Irma Gud\u017ei\u016bnait\u0117 diskusijos dalyviams pristat\u0117 Lietuvos Respublikos teisingumo ministerijos si\u016blymus i\u0161 vie\u0161osios erdv\u0117s i\u0161imti kandidatavusi\u0173 per \u012fvairius rinkimus asmen\u0173 duomenis. Tokie duomenys, pagal pateikt\u0105 pasi\u016blym\u0105, tur\u0117t\u0173 b\u016bti vie\u0161i vien\u0105 arba dvi kadencijas, atsi\u017evelgiant \u012f tai, kaip kandidatui pasisek\u0117 rinkimuose. Ministerija savo pasi\u016blymus pareng\u0117 remdamasi Bendruoju duomen\u0173 apsaugos reglamentu (BDAR) bei kit\u0173 \u0161ali\u0173 praktika.<\/p>\n
Dr.\u00a0L.\u00a0Pak\u0161taitis diskusijos dalyviams tvirtino, jog n\u0117ra tikslinga riboti laik\u0105, kuomet informacija apie politikus yra vie\u0161a. Kaip pavyzd\u012f mokslininkas pateik\u0117 istorij\u0105 apie vieno i\u0161 teatr\u0173 vadov\u0105, kuris kandidatavo \u012f savivaldyb\u0117s taryb\u0105 ir tuomet pateik\u0117 savo duomenis. Tie duomenys buvo svarb\u016bs tiek nustatant galimas piktnaud\u017eiavimo schemas, tiek po kurio laiko vertinant situacij\u0105. Tod\u0117l, mokslininko manymu, visuomen\u0117s teis\u0117 \u017einoti yra prioritetin\u0117.<\/p>\n
Vyriausiosios rinkim\u0173 komisijos pirminink\u0117 Laura Matjo\u0161aityt\u0117 diskusijoje i\u0161d\u0117st\u0117 pozicij\u0105 \u2013 BDAR n\u0117ra pritaikyta reguliuoti vie\u0161\u0173j\u0173 asmen\u0173 duomenis, tod\u0117l toki\u0173 asmen\u0173 duomenis VRK si\u016blo skelbti neribot\u0105 laik\u0105.<\/p>\n
\u201eTransparency International\u201c Lietuvos skyriaus projekt\u0173 vadov\u0117 dr.\u00a0Egl\u0117 Kavoli\u016bnait\u0117-Ragauskien\u0117 atkreip\u0117 d\u0117mes\u012f, kad politik\u0173 duomen\u0173 vie\u0161umo klausimu yra pasisak\u0119 ir teismai \u2013 2008\u00a0m. buvo i\u0161sakyta pozicija, jog politik\u0173 duomenys gali b\u016bti skelbiami neribot\u0105 laik\u0105. Politikos analiz\u0117s instituto vadov\u0117 Virginija B\u016bdien\u0117 nepritar\u0117 duomen\u0173 skelbimo ribojimams \u2013 anot jos, pasaulyje yra daug blog\u0173 pavyzd\u017ei\u0173, kai politikai siekia kuo grei\u010diau pasl\u0117pti informacij\u0105 apie save, tod\u0117l visuomenei turi b\u016bti sudarytos visos s\u0105lygos informacij\u0105 gauti neribojant laiko. Su tuo nesutiko \u017dmogaus teisi\u0173 steb\u0117jimo instituto teisininkas Karolis Liutkevi\u010dius, akcentav\u0119s \u017emogaus teis\u0119 \u012f privatum\u0105 bei galimyb\u0119 vie\u0161ai prieinam\u0105 informacij\u0105 panaudoti paty\u010dioms ar pan.<\/p>\n
[:en]<\/p>\n
The public interest to know does not end when a politician\u2019s term of office expires. This is the position on publishing the data of public figures that was expressed in a discussion by Law Institute of Lithuania researcher Dr Laurynas Pak\u0161taitis. The discussion \u201cHow to implement data protection requirements without diminishing the public\u2019s right to know?\u201d, which took place on 23 October, was organised by Transparency International Lithuania and The White Gloves, a public organisation. Vice-Minister of Justice Irma Gud\u017ei\u016bnait\u0117 gave a presentation to the discussion participants on the proposals of the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Lithuania to remove the data of people who have run in various elections from the public domain. According to the proposal, such data should be made public for one or two terms, depending on how the candidate fared in the election. The ministry prepared its proposals based on the General Data Protection Regulation (hereinafter \u2013 the GDPR) and the practice of other countries.<\/p>\n Dr Pak\u0161taitis contended that it is not expedient to limit the time during which information about politicians is public. As an example, the researcher presented the story of one theatre\u2019s manager who had run for municipal council and submitted his data at that time. Those data were important both for identifying potentially abusive schemes and for assessing the situation over time. The researcher therefore believes that the public\u2019s right to know is a priority.<\/p>\n Chairwoman of the Central Electoral Commission Laura Matjo\u0161aityt\u0117 put forth a position in the discussion that the GDPR is not tailored to regulate the data of public figures, so the CEC suggests making the data of these individuals public for an indefinite period.<\/p>\n Transparency International Lithuania project manager Dr Egl\u0117 Kavoli\u016bnait\u0117-Ragauskien\u0117 pointed out that the courts have also spoken on publishing the data of politicians \u2013 in 2008, an opinion was expressed that the data of politicians can be published for an indefinite period. Virginija B\u016bdien\u0117, head of the Institute for Policy Analysis, opposed restrictions on the publication of data \u2013 according to her, there are many bad examples in the world where politicians try to conceal information about themselves as soon as possible, so all conditions must be made for the public to obtain this information without time limitations. Human Rights Monitoring Institute jurist Karolis Liutkevi\u010dius did not agree with this, emphasising the human right to privacy and the possibility of using publicly accessible information for bullying or the like.<\/p>\n [:]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" [:lt] Visuomen\u0117s interesas \u017einoti nesibaigia pasibaigus politiko kadencijai. Toki\u0105 pozicij\u0105 d\u0117l vie\u0161\u0173j\u0173 asmen\u0173 duomen\u0173 vie\u0161umo diskusijoje i\u0161sak\u0117 Lietuvos teis\u0117s instituto mokslininkas dr. Laurynas Pak\u0161taitis. Diskusija \u201eKaip \u012fgyvendinti duomen\u0173 apsaugos reikalavimus nesuma\u017einant visuomen\u0117s teis\u0117s \u017einoti?\u201c, vykusi spalio 23 dien\u0105, buvo organizuota \u201eTransparency International\u201c Lietuvos skyriaus (TILS) ir visuomenin\u0117s organizacijos \u201eBaltosios pir\u0161tin\u0117s\u201c.\u00a0 Teisingumo viceministr\u0117 Irma Gud\u017ei\u016bnait\u0117 diskusijos dalyviams pristat\u0117 Lietuvos Respublikos teisingumo ministerijos si\u016blymus i\u0161 vie\u0161osios erdv\u0117s i\u0161imti kandidatavusi\u0173 per \u012fvairius rinkimus asmen\u0173 duomenis. Tokie duomenys, pagal pateikt\u0105 pasi\u016blym\u0105, tur\u0117t\u0173 b\u016bti vie\u0161i vien\u0105 arba dvi kadencijas, atsi\u017evelgiant \u012f tai, kaip kandidatui pasisek\u0117 rinkimuose. Ministerija savo pasi\u016blymus pareng\u0117 remdamasi Bendruoju duomen\u0173 apsaugos reglamentu (BDAR) bei kit\u0173 \u0161ali\u0173 praktika. Dr.\u00a0L.\u00a0Pak\u0161taitis diskusijos dalyviams tvirtino, jog n\u0117ra tikslinga riboti laik\u0105, kuomet informacija apie politikus yra vie\u0161a. Kaip pavyzd\u012f mokslininkas pateik\u0117 istorij\u0105 apie vieno i\u0161 teatr\u0173 vadov\u0105, kuris kandidatavo \u012f savivaldyb\u0117s taryb\u0105 ir tuomet pateik\u0117 savo duomenis. Tie duomenys buvo svarb\u016bs tiek nustatant galimas piktnaud\u017eiavimo schemas, tiek po kurio laiko vertinant situacij\u0105. Tod\u0117l, mokslininko manymu, visuomen\u0117s teis\u0117 \u017einoti yra prioritetin\u0117. Vyriausiosios rinkim\u0173 komisijos pirminink\u0117 Laura Matjo\u0161aityt\u0117 diskusijoje i\u0161d\u0117st\u0117 pozicij\u0105 \u2013 BDAR n\u0117ra pritaikyta reguliuoti vie\u0161\u0173j\u0173 asmen\u0173 duomenis, tod\u0117l toki\u0173 asmen\u0173 duomenis VRK si\u016blo skelbti neribot\u0105 laik\u0105. \u201eTransparency International\u201c Lietuvos skyriaus projekt\u0173 vadov\u0117 dr.\u00a0Egl\u0117 Kavoli\u016bnait\u0117-Ragauskien\u0117 atkreip\u0117 d\u0117mes\u012f, kad politik\u0173 duomen\u0173 vie\u0161umo klausimu yra pasisak\u0119 ir teismai \u2013 2008\u00a0m. buvo i\u0161sakyta pozicija, jog politik\u0173 duomenys gali b\u016bti skelbiami neribot\u0105 laik\u0105. Politikos analiz\u0117s instituto vadov\u0117 Virginija B\u016bdien\u0117 nepritar\u0117 duomen\u0173 skelbimo ribojimams \u2013 anot jos, pasaulyje yra daug blog\u0173 pavyzd\u017ei\u0173, kai politikai siekia kuo grei\u010diau pasl\u0117pti informacij\u0105 apie save, tod\u0117l visuomenei turi b\u016bti sudarytos visos s\u0105lygos informacij\u0105 gauti neribojant laiko. Su tuo nesutiko \u017dmogaus teisi\u0173 steb\u0117jimo instituto teisininkas Karolis Liutkevi\u010dius, akcentav\u0119s \u017emogaus teis\u0119 \u012f privatum\u0105 bei galimyb\u0119 vie\u0161ai prieinam\u0105 informacij\u0105 panaudoti paty\u010dioms ar pan. [:en] The public interest to know does not end when a politician\u2019s term of office expires. This is the position on publishing the data of public figures that was expressed in a discussion by Law Institute of Lithuania researcher Dr Laurynas Pak\u0161taitis. The discussion \u201cHow to implement data protection requirements without diminishing the public\u2019s right to know?\u201d, which took place on 23 October, was organised by Transparency International Lithuania and The White Gloves, a public organisation. Vice-Minister of Justice Irma Gud\u017ei\u016bnait\u0117 gave a presentation to the discussion participants on the proposals of the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Lithuania to remove the data of people who have run in various elections from the public domain. According to the proposal, such data should be made public for one or two terms, depending on how the candidate fared in the election. The ministry prepared its proposals based on the General Data Protection Regulation (hereinafter \u2013 the GDPR) and the practice of other countries. Dr Pak\u0161taitis contended that it is not expedient to limit the time during which information about politicians is public. As an example, the researcher presented the story of one theatre\u2019s manager who had run for municipal council and submitted his data at that time. Those data were important both for identifying potentially abusive schemes and for assessing the situation over time. The researcher therefore believes that the public\u2019s right to know is a priority. Chairwoman of the Central Electoral Commission Laura Matjo\u0161aityt\u0117 put forth a position in the discussion that the GDPR is not tailored to regulate the data of public figures, so the CEC suggests making the data of these individuals public for an indefinite period. Transparency International Lithuania project manager Dr Egl\u0117 Kavoli\u016bnait\u0117-Ragauskien\u0117 pointed out that the courts have also spoken on publishing the data of politicians \u2013 in 2008, an opinion was expressed that the data of politicians can be published for an indefinite period. Virginija B\u016bdien\u0117, head of the Institute for Policy Analysis, opposed restrictions on the publication of data \u2013 according to her, there are many bad examples in the world where politicians try to conceal information about themselves as soon as possible, so all conditions must be made for the public to obtain this information without time limitations. Human Rights Monitoring Institute jurist Karolis Liutkevi\u010dius did not agree with this, emphasising the human right to privacy and the possibility of using publicly accessible information for bullying or the like. [:]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":3130,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[4,261],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3129","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-naujienos","category-2018-naujienu-irasu-metai"],"post_mailing_queue_ids":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/teise.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3129","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/teise.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/teise.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/teise.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/teise.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3129"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/teise.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3129\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":6780,"href":"https:\/\/teise.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3129\/revisions\/6780"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/teise.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/3130"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/teise.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3129"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/teise.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3129"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/teise.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3129"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}<\/code><\/p>\n