Contributed By Kasznar Leonardos Intellectual Property
The Brazilian Federal Constitution, enacted in 1988, protects the fundamental rights of privacy, honour and image in Article 5, and addresses the inviolability of private life and intimacy in item X and the right to secrecy of correspondence and of telegraphic, data and telephone communications in item XII. Crimes related to wiretapping are addressed by Law No. 9296/96, and Law No. 12737/2012 criminalises the act of hacking electronic devices with the aim of obtaining, modifying, destroying or disclosing data or information without the owner’s authorisation.
The Brazilian Civil Rights Framework for the Internet (Law No. 12965/2014 – “Internet Act”) also addresses the right to privacy, data protection and secrecy of private communication, according to its Article 3, section II, and Articles 8 and 11. The Internet Act also sets forth the obligation to comply with standards related to the security of data and network functionality.
The Brazilian General Personal Data Protection Act (Law No. 13,709/2018 – LGPD) was enacted on 14 August 2018, and will come into force on 15 August 2020. Provisional Measure no. 869/2018 was turned into Law No. 13853/2019 and created the Data Protection National Authority (ANPD), which will be entitled to regulate, enforce and apply penalties based on the LGPD. The ANPD’s directive body is still subject to speculation, and no official appointment has yet been announced.
In general terms, the LGPD applies to all personal data (defined as “information related to an identified or identifiable natural person”) undergoing processing operations, whether performed by an individual or company, online or offline (i) in Brazil; (ii) abroad, if the purpose of the processing activity is to offer or provide goods or services or the processing of data of individuals located in Brazil; or (iii) abroad, if the personal data being processed was collected in Brazil. The exceptions are listed in Article 4, which sets forth that the LGPD will not apply if the data processing is carried out exclusively for private and non-economic purposes (if performed by an individual), or for artistic, journalistic, academic, public security, state security, national defence and/or criminal repression purposes.
Since the LGPD was inspired by the General Data Protection Regulation in force in Europe, it also provides for basic proceedings in case of a data breach. The controller must send a notification (which must contain all details about the incident) to the ANPD and to the data subject if the incident is significant enough to pose any risk of damage to data subjects.
The administrative penalties set forth by the LGPD for the infringement of a data subject’s rights range from warnings to fines, depending on the degree and recidivism of the controller or processor. Administrative penalties do not prevent infringing entities being held civilly liable.
Other Brazilian legislation that also addresses the protection of the right to privacy, intimacy and freedom of expression includes:
Since the ANPD is not yet operating, and considering the significant amount of data collected and processed in commerce, the main regulators are the National Consumer Protection Secretariat (SENACON) and the Protection and Consumer Protection Foundation (PROCON). The National Telecommunications Agency (ANATEL) oversees data protection issues related to telecommunication services. Public prosecutors may also initiate proceedings to investigate potential infringements in the civil and criminal spheres, in addition to individual claims. In such cases, an inquiry is initiated upon the prosecutor’s request, and the investigation may be followed by a judicial proceeding.
It is important to highlight that, once the ANPD is operational, it will have no powers to audit controllers or processors, but will be able to request information through administrative proceedings.
Since the LGPD is not yet in force and the ANPD is still not operating, the administrative consumer protection entities and public prosecutors are bound to act in accordance with general procedures. In short, such procedures may be initiated by a complaint by the offended parties or ex officio, and the investigated entity is entitled to access all documents and to present its defence. Once a decision is rendered by the authority, the parties may file an appeal, which will be analysed and ruled on by or on behalf of the president or governing body of such authority. Considering that most of the authorities entitled to pursue data protection claims are part of the federal public administration, decisions rendered thereby are subject to revision by a Federal Court; if rendered, for example, by the Federal District Public Prosecutor’s Office, which is part of the State administration, then it shall be reviewed by the State courts.
Once in force, the ANPD will be bound by the rules on general administrative procedures, but some specific provisions set forth by the LGPD will apply. Overseeing, enforcement and sanctioning will be conducted through an administrative proceeding, making sure that the investigated party has the right to an adversary system and full defence.
According to Article 52, 1st Paragraph, the penalties for infringement of the law shall be enforced according to the following criteria:
As it has only recently enacted specific legislation concerning data protection, Brazil is still not considered by any foreign data protection body to provide an adequate level of data protection. However, once the law is in force and the national authority starts enforcing it, it is likely that Brazil will strengthen its relationship with data protection entities around the world and be considered as providing an adequate level of protection, especially due to the LGPD’s roots in the GDPR.
As a Federative State, Brazil may have national, State and Municipal laws. However, State and Municipal laws are only allowed to address local aspects of national laws – ie, a federal law must have already been created to legitimate the existence of State and Municipal laws ruling the same matter. Some attempts of regional laws on data protection have already been ruled unconstitutional based on such disposition. Notwithstanding, the States of São Paulo, Rio de Janeiro, Ceará and Mato Grosso do Sul have bills pending that aim to govern data processing operations in their respective territories, as State-level general data protection laws. The Cities of São Paulo, Recife, Salvador and Campinas are also attempting to pass bills of laws addressing data protection, and Vinhedo (SP), João Pessoa (PB) and Cariacica (ES) have already enacted data protection legislation, which is still in force.
A significant number of Brazilian companies and foreign companies doing business in Brazil are members of the Brazilian Direct Marketing Association (ABEMD), which is a non-profit entity focused on encouraging, expanding and setting up basic rules related to direct marketing in Brazil. ABEMD issued the Email Marketing Self-Regulatory Code (CAPEM), developed in 1997, and sets forth that companies need to provide an opt-out option in their marketing e-mails. CAPEM is being largely adopted not only by its members but also by non-members, even though its provisions and resolutions are not binding or mandatory.
Two Brazilian NGOs deserve to be mentioned since they have been very active in monitoring and promoting discussions in many sectors about data protection, including participating in the public consultations on the bills of law of the Internet Act and of the LGPD:
The current Brazilian legal frame on data protection is similar to the US model, in the sense that it is fragmented into rules applicable to specific situations (consumer protection matters, internet users rights, etc). Upon the entrance into force of the LGPD, the data protection regulation will be converted into a centralised model. The LGPD was generally inspired by the GDPR and, although it is clearly less detailed and sophisticated than the GDPR, it can be deemed as being very similar thereto.
The similarities between the Brazilian and EU systems are as follows:
Although the regulations are functionally similar, the following differences are noteworthy:
The enactment of the LGPD is certainly the most important legal development on the matter since the Internet Act (2014). Although the creation of the national authority was initially vetoed by the Presidency, the ANPD rejoined the LGPD after Provisional Measure No. 869/19 turned into Law No. 13,853/2019. The ANPD’s directive body is subject to speculation, and no official appointment has yet been announced.
Another change brought by Law No. 13,853/2019 was the effectiveness of the LGPD: it will come into force 24 months after its official publication – ie, on 15 August 2020.
There are some Bills of Law currently being discussed in Congress which suggest the postponement of the date on which the LGPD shall enter into force.
Since the appointment of the directive body of the ANPD has not yet been announced, this should continue to be an important topic, since it is expected to issue regulations aimed at clarifying some the LGPD’s gaps and uncertainties.
Appointment of Privacy or Data Protection Officers
Currently there is no legal obligation to appoint a Data Protection Officer (DPO) in companies that process personal data. This requirement will be applicable after August 2020, in compliance with the LGPD, although the ANPD is authorised to waive such requirement under certain criteria (which will be detailed when the authority is operational). Additional regulation about the DPO’s roles and duties are also expected to be issued by the ANPD.
Criteria to Authorise Collection, Use or Other Processing
The Internet Act predicts the possibility of processing internet users’ data only if the data subject provides consent (online environment). The exception for the consent requirement rests in a preceding Court Order.
Upon the LGPD’s entrance into force, data processing operations will be legal if they are compliant with the following legal basis:
“Privacy by Design” or “by Default”
Although there is no explicit definition of these terms, the LGPD provides that security measures must be adopted from the conception phase of the product or service until and during its operation.
Privacy Impact Analyses
Currently there is no legal obligation to conduct a privacy impact analysis. Upon the LGPD’s entrance into force, the ANPD will be entitled to order a data protection impact assessment report referring to the controller’s data processing operations. The report must contain the description of the types of data collected, the methodology used for the collection and the analysis of the controllers regarding adopted measures, safeguards and mechanisms of risk mitigation.
Internal or External Privacy Policies
In order to comply with the obligation set forth by the Internet Act and the LGPD to obtain a data subject’s clear, free and informed consent, it is recommended to adopt external privacy policies. There is no such obligation to adopt internal privacy policies, although doing so is also recommended, especially due to Article 50 of the LGPD, which refers to having internal policies in place as a “good practice”.
Data Subject Access Rights
Although it is applicable to the use of personal data in the digital environment, the only legislation currently in force that more extensively provides for data subjects’ access rights is the Internet Act, which sets forth that the data subject has the right to request the definitive elimination of the personal data provided to a certain internet application at the end of the relationship between the parties, except in cases of mandatory log retention.
Sector-driven legislation also provides for specific rules, such as the Consumer Protection Code, the Access to Information Act (applicable to the public sector), the Tax Code, the Bank Secrecy Act and the Compliant Debtors List Act.
Once the LGPD is in force, data subjects’ access rights will be more extensive, since the LGPD explicitly provides for the right to the following:
Use of Data Pursuant to Anonymisation, De-identification and Pseudonymisation
Brazilian legislation does not provide a definition of de-identification and pseudonymisation, but anonymisation is defined by the LGPD as the “use of reasonable technical means available at the time of processing, by means of which the data loses the possibility of direct or indirect association to an individual.” According to the LGPD, anonymised data can be freely processed – ie, the processing does not need to be endorsed on a legal basis, provided that the anonymisation process cannot be reversed with reasonable efforts.
It is also up to the ANPD to regulate standards and techniques to be used in anonymisation processes, and to make verifications about the security thereof.
Restrictions or Allowances
Once the LGPD is in force, data subjects will have the right to request the review of decisions made based only on the automated processing of personal data that affects their interests, including decisions made in the sense of defining their personal, consumption and credit profile or aspects of their personality. The ANPD will be entitled to audit the automated processing if it suspects the processing is discriminatory.
The Concept of “Injury” or “Harm”
The LGPD does not provide any definition or idea of “harm”, apart from the one already stated in the Brazilian Civil Code, according to which, one who causes harm to another, by action or omission, commits an illicit act, and is liable therefor. In this sense, indemnification is due from any harm arising from a violation of data privacy rights.
The LGPD reiterates such provision in its Article 42: controllers or processors are liable for any harm caused to data subjects in violation of their rights and their indemnification obligation. The processor will be jointly liable if it violates data protection legislation or acts contrarily to the controller’s instructions. All controllers directly involved in the violation of data protection rights will also be jointly liable therefor. Additionally, Article 45 provides that the consumerist legislation is applicable when data protection is violated in the consumerist context.
The LGPD sets forth the following liability exception when a controller and/or processor can prove that they did not participate in any of the processing activities, that their participation in the processing activity does not violate any data protection legislation, and that the harm arises exclusively through the data subject’s fault.
Currently there is no legislation providing for the processing or definition of sensitive personal data.
Once the LGPD is in force, the definition of “sensitive personal data” will be “personal data concerning racial or ethnic origin, religious belief, public opinion, association to any trade union or religious organisation, philosophical or political organisation association, data concerning health or sex life, genetic or biometric data, whenever related to a natural person.”
According to the LGPD, processing of sensitive personal data will be legitimate only in the following cases: (i) when specific and express consent is obtained from the data subject or her/his legal representative, for specific processing purposes; and (ii) if there is no consent from the data subject, when the processing is indispensable for:
Although financial data is not specifically addressed by the LGPD, confidentiality obligations regarding this type of data are provided for in the Brazilian Federal Constitution and the Bank Secrecy Act.
The health sector in Brazil is highly regulated, so health data is addressed by different laws and regulations.
Rule no. 124/2006 issued by the Brazilian National Supplementary Health Agency (ANVISA) determines that private healthcare services providers must not share data subjects' personal data with third parties without previous consent, under the penalty of BRL50,000 (approximately USD12,000).
The Code of Medical Ethics, drafted by the Brazilian Federal Medicine Council, sets forth that healthcare professionals must protect patients’ data.
Law No. 13,787/2018, enacted in December 2018, addresses the digitalisation, retention, storage and handling of patients’ records. The law establishes that the records of all patients must be digitalised, and the physical files discarded, unless they have historical value. The digitalised records may be deleted 20 years after the last update.
Furthermore, within clinical trials, ANVISA’s Board of Directors Resolution RDC 09/2015 and Resolution No. 466/2012 of the National Council of Health provide that the data and privacy of clinical trial participants shall be protected.
Once the LGPD is in force, health data will be treated as sensitive personal data and the processing thereof will be subject to stricter rules, as noted above.
The Brazilian Federal Constitution provides that the privacy of communications is a fundamental right and, therefore, is granted a special level of protection. The Internet Act also grants the inviolability of the user’s communications through the internet, except when supported by a court order.
The Brazilian Telecommunications Act (Law No. 9,472/1997) also provides that users of telecommunications services are protected by the inviolability of their communication and privacy, unless otherwise determined.
The LGPD does not list communications as sensitive data, but they could be considered as such if they contain any of the specific matters considered as sensitive.
Voice Telephony and Text Messaging
Voice communications and text messages are protected under the fundamental right of privacy granted by the Federal Constitution and applicable to communications. In this sense, Law No. 9,296/1996 allows for a breach in communication only in cases where such information is needed to help a criminal investigation and is supported by a court order.
Content of Electronic Communications
The same protection granted to private communications is applicable to electronic communications. Additionally, Law No. 12737/2012 criminalises the act of hacking electronic devices with the aim of obtaining, modifying, destroying or disclosing data or information without the owner’s authorisation.
Children’s or Students' Data
The Civil Code and the Child and Adolescent Statute establish 18 years as the legal age, so any act practised by anyone under this age will be null if not preceded by the authorisation of a responsible person. The Internet Act establishes parental disclosure, since the user (responsible person for the minor) will have the opportunity to choose the content they find appropriate (or not) for the child or adolescent.
The application of the LGPD will introduce further provisions on the processing of data involving children and adolescents. According to the law, the data must be processed in the best interests of the children and must be preceded by a separate consent of one of his or her parents or legal representatives.
There are no provisions involving educational or school data specifically. When related to under-age individuals, the same rules apply as above.
There is no specific law regarding the protection of employees' data. The obligation to respect the privacy of communication – according to the Federal Constitution and Internet Act – is applicable. However, the employer has the right to use technologies to identify content accessed by its employees using workplace devices (eg, corporate e-mail, company’s internal systems, etc). In this case, it is recommended that employees are previously informed that the devices used during the employment relationship will be monitored.
Internet, Streaming and Video Issues
The use of tracking and behavioural technologies implies the storing of data to offer customised information to the user. However, according to the Internet Act, this kind of processing must be preceded by the user’s consent and, to do that in a practical way, companies generally use technologies such as cookies (with a warning on the initial screen of their website), beacons, etc. Because much information obtained from users’ access to the internet is able to identify them, it should be considered as personal data and, therefore, the same need for consent or other legal basis for processing personal data will be applied under the LGPD after August 2020.
Additionally, the Internet Act provides an obligation for internet connection and application providers to refrain from disclosing connection, access, personal data and private communications without a supporting court order. Connection records must be kept for one year, while access records must be kept for six months – both periods of time may be increased upon the request of the police authority or the Public Prosecutor’s office.
Hate speech, disinformation, abusive material or political manipulation is more relevant to personality rights than data protection rights under Brazilian legislation. There are penalties in the civil and criminal spheres for those who disseminate hate speech, spread disinformation or attempt political manipulation over the internet. Specifically, when the abusive material contains sexual content (eg, revenge porn), the Internet Act establishes that the internet provider must remove the content immediately, upon notification by a party (with no need for a court decision).
Data Subject Rights
The only legislation currently in force providing for data subject rights is the Internet Act, which sets forth that data subjects have the right to request the definitive elimination of the personal data provided to a certain internet application at the end of the relationship between them, except in cases of mandatory log retention.
Sector-driven legislation also provides for specific rules, such as the Consumer Protection Code, the Access to Information Act (applicable to the public sector), the Tax Code, the Bank Secrecy Act and the Compliant Debtors List Act. All these rules are basically founded on the data subject’s right to information.
Once the LGPD is in force, data subjects’ rights will be more extensive, since the LGPD explicitly provides for the right to the following:
Data subjects also have the right to be informed in a clear and ostensive way about:
Right to be Forgotten
Currently, there is no specific legislation in Brazil providing for the “right to be forgotten”, nor deletion or erasure rights. Once the LGPD is in force, erasure will be one of the statutory rights of data subjects. After the controllers/processors have processed the data, they will need to erase the personal data, unless:
Data Access and Portability
Once the LGPD is in force, data subjects will have the explicit right to (i) confirmation of the existence of the processing activity, (ii) access the personal data, and (iii) transfer the data to other service providers or suppliers of product, at the express request, in accordance with the regulation of the controlling body, observing commercial and industrial secrecy.
Right of Rectification or Correction
Once the LGPD is in force, data subjects will have the explicit right to correct incomplete or out-of-date information, and to revoke consent.
There is no specific law in Brazil governing online marketing. However, certain legislation may apply, as follows.
Companies must comply with the Brazilian Consumer Defence Code (Law No. 8,078/1990; CDC), which is the general set of rules governing consumerist relations in Brazil. The CDC provides that marketing activities must not be abusive or deceiving and, for this reason, companies should refrain from sending unauthorised marketing communication to customers. There are many official entities responsible for enforcing the rules set forth by the CDC in different levels of the public administration (public prosecutors, local and state PROCONs, public attorneys, police stations and civil organisations for consumer defence), and they are all part of the National Consumer Bureau (SENACON).
Considering that marketing activities are based on the use of personal information (e-mails and telephone numbers – even if related to a business), the LGPD will also be applicable in the sense that the use of e-mails or telephone numbers must also comply with the rules set forth by the LGPD (data subjects’ rights, legal basis for processing).
The Brazilian Internet Act (Law No. 12,965/2014) is also applicable to e-mail marketing since it governs the relationships among internet users. It provides for the need of previous and unequivocal consent from data subjects previous to sending e-mail marketing.
Although Brazil does not have a specific e-marketing law, a significant number of Brazilian companies as well as foreign companies doing business in Brazil are members of the Brazilian Direct Marketing Association (ABEMD), which is a non-profit entity focused on encouraging, expanding and setting up basic rules related to direct marketing in Brazil. ABEMD issued the Email Marketing Self-Regulatory Code (CAPEM), which is being largely adopted not only by its members but also by non-members, even though its provisions and resolutions are not binding or mandatory.
Many companies are also members of the National Council of Self-Regulation in Advertising (CONAR), which is a non-governmental entity aimed at promoting freedom of speech and defending constitutional rights applicable to advertising. CONAR has also published a set of rules applicable to advertising activities, the so-called Brazilian Code of Self-Regulation in Advertising (CSRA). Although it has no legal effects since it has not been enacted by a governmental entity, the CRSA is considered a cornerstone in the marketing business by members and non-members, who generally comply with such rules.
SMS/MMS marketing by telecommunication service providers is governed by telecommunication rules, more specifically by Ordinance No. 632/2014 issued by the Brazilian National Telecommunication Agency (ANATEL). Among other provisions, the Ordinance sets forth that the telecommunication services user has the right not to receive marketing messages unless they are preceded by previous, free and unequivocal consent (Art. 3, XVIII). Complementary to the Ordinance, through Circular Letter No. 39/2012/PVCPR/PVCP, ANATEL sets forth general rules for sending advertising messages using personal mobile telephone services, which require that all companies who send SMS/MMS marketing messages make an opt-out function available to the customer.
There is no specific law regarding the protection of employees' data. The obligation to respect the privacy of communication – according to the Federal Constitution and Internet Act – is applicable. However, according to case law on this matter, the employer has the right to use technologies to identify content accessed by its employees using workplace devices (eg, corporate e-mail, company’s internal systems, etc). In this case, it is recommended that employees are previously informed that the devices used during the employment relationship will be monitored.
The Role of Labour Organisations or Works Councils
Labour organisations and work councils are not yet sufficiently engaged in privacy protection matters, so there are still no relevant actions from these entities providing for the protection of employees’ data. However, as soon as such entities realise the importance of this matter, it is possible that they will include privacy protection clauses in their collective labour agreements or collective labour conventions.
Whistle-blower Hotlines and Anonymous Reporting
Currently, there is no law in Brazil specifically addressing whistle-blower hotlines or anonymous reporting; there is also no specific reference in the LGPD. However, companies can include whistle-blowing provisions in their internal security policy, to identify, among other things, data breaches, hate speech, abusive material or content involving sexual acts or nudity.
There are certain legal procedures that could give rise to an injunction or a court order determining the disclosure of specific data located in servers, if connected to a given criminal investigation or civil lawsuit. Such data is requested by a court or a competent authority, and is disclosed voluntarily by the data controller. Penalties may arise for non-compliance with the court order or the injunction, including daily fines, interruption of services and the imprisonment of corporate officials in Brazil.
There are no specific provisions about digital loss prevention technologies or scanning/blocking websites. The only rule related to digital loss prevention is the obligation to implement minimum standards of security in order to avoid data loss, as set forth by the Brazilian Internet Act and the LGPD. Except for websites disclosing personal sexual material, the request for blocking websites must be preceded by a court order.
Currently, claims regarding violations of privacy and data protection rights basically arise from the lack of consent to data processing. When it comes to privacy specifically, the standards will also depend on the specifications of the case, according to the Internet Act.
Once the LGPD is in force, the ANPD must establish standards to claim violations by the controller and/or processor, on the basis of the violation of data subjects’ rights according to the law.
Potential Enforcement Penalties
Current administrative penalties established by the Internet Act are as follows:
In the case of penalties enforced against a foreign company, any subsidiary, branch office or establishment in Brazil will be jointly liable for the payment of the fines. Such penalties are currently being enforced by the rules of civil liability (Articles 186 and 927 of the Civil Code). Depending on the specifics of each case, additional criminal and civil liabilities may also apply.
As of August 2020, the penalties applicable for infringing the LGPD are as follows:
These penalties do not exclude the judicial compensation of moral and material damages to the data subject, in a value that will be determined by a judge and can be – or not – based on the administrative fines.
The value of daily fines applied to violations of the LGPD shall be subject to the severity of the infraction, the extent of damage or losses caused, and grounded reasoning by the national authority.
Leading Enforcement Cases
In January 2019, the Artificial Intelligence and Data Protection Especial Unit (Espec) of the Public Prosecutor’s Office of the Federal District (MPDFT) started an investigation against Boa Vista – SCPC to investigate possible vulnerability exposed on the site about the Positive Registration (Decree 02/2020). According to the investigation, personal data such as first name, last name, CPF and the name of the clients' mothers was available to hackers.
The investigation started after a report from a client who accessed the Boa Vista – SCPC website to request the removal of its name from the Positive Registration. Later, MPDFT noticed that it was possible to extract the name of the client’s mother in the developer’s area of the site. With this information, it was possible to obtain other personal data in other sites and institutions, such as the Internal Revenue Service and Electoral Justice.
Boa Vista – SCPC was formally informed about the investigation and, so far, the investigation has found no vulnerability to the Positive Registration database.
This was not the first time that the Public Prosecution has opened an investigation against this credit bureau. In September 2018, an investigation was opened to investigate the compromise of personal data in a security incident involving Boa Vista – SCPC, but it turned out that the hacked data was not from the database of Boa Vista – SCPC.
In the action, the MPDFT highlights that Boa Vista – SCPC is considered a manager by the Positive Registry Law and, as such, has objective and joint liability for the material and moral damages it causes to those registered on its platforms
Legal standards are set by the Civil Procedure Code. The plaintiff must be the legitimate party to file the lawsuit, and have the interest to act and demonstrate on the legal possibility of its request. In addition, the plaintiff must demonstrate the defendant’s illicit conduct, the damage borne by the plaintiff and the causal link between them.
Although Brazilian law does not allow class actions as they are known in the United States, if there is a massive data breach the public prosecutor or another specific organisation can initiate an investigation and civil actions against the controller/processor of data, according to the Public Civil Action Law (Law No. 7,347/1993).
As a general rule, access to any data requires court authorisation. However, in the case of criminal investigations, Law No. 12,850/2013 allows for the public prosecutor or the chief police officer to have access only to the data containing personal qualifications, affiliations and addresses maintained by the electoral justice, telecommunication companies, financial institutions, internet providers and credit card administrators. In addition, according to Brazilian case law, the Brazilian Federal Revenue Office may request data from banks when necessary to investigate financial crimes against the public administration, under Complementary Law No.105/2001. The entry into force of the LGPD is not expected to change the application of such prior laws, as the law will not apply to processing operations carried out for law enforcement purposes.
Since privacy is safeguarded by the Federal Constitution and the Brazilian Civil Code, every time that law enforcement runs against individuals’ privacy rights, it gives rise to a lot of discussion in courts. The Brazilian Supreme Court has ruled that internet service providers of messaging services are not bound to reveal the content of those messages to public authorities. In addition, there is an ongoing discussion regarding the legality of police authorities analysing the contents of cell phones of people under investigation.
Please see 3.1 Laws and Standards for Access to Data for Serious Crimes.
Currently, there are no obstacles to an organisation invoking a foreign government access request as a legitimate basis to collect and transfer personal data. Under the LGPD, from August 2020, the collection and transfer of personal data upon request of a foreign authority will only be considered licit if such request constitutes a legal or regulatory obligation.
There are few public debates on government access to personal data. Since the public is still unaware of its data protection rights (both existing and upcoming), government actions to process additional data from citizens are rarely contested. The upcoming LGPD is likely to change that. In this regard, some caution-inspiring legislation has recently been passed in Brazil, including a national decree issued in 2016 (Decree no 8789/16), which authorises all government bodies to share their databases with other government bodies, to simplify the offering of public services.
On the other hand, citizens are entitled to request full access to their personal data held by government bodies, under Law No. 12,527/2011.
Once the LGPD is in force, data processing operations carried out by the government will also be regulated, under Articles 23 through 32. The government will have to process data based strictly on the public interest, if it communicates the situations in which, in the exercise of its competences, it carries out the processing of personal data, supplying clear and up-to-date information about the legal basis, purpose, procedures and practices used to carry out these activities in easily accessible media, preferably on its websites.
Currently, Brazilian legislation does not provide restrictions that apply specifically to international data transfers. Once the LGPD enters into force, international data transfers will be allowed in the following situations:
Currently there is a lack of regulation regarding international data issues. The LGPD, as explained above, established that international data transfers must be formalised by contractual provisions or corporate rules when there is no level of protection in the country that is receiving the data. The consent will have to be granted by the data subject when there are no other requirements for data processing.
A current best practice adopted by companies is to ensure the data is encrypted on an end-to-end basis when it is transferred abroad, to reduce the probability of hacking or leaks.
Brazilian law does not currently regulate international data transfers. According to the LGPD, when applicable, international data transfers will be allowed under a list of circumstances, one of which is the granting of an authorisation by the ANPD.
The Internet Act does not require data to be maintained in the country, so the data can be stored in cloud storage in another country, for example. However, storing the data abroad does not stop the Brazilian law from being applicable. After the LGPD comes into force, there will be no requirement to maintain the data in-country, but the requirements for international transfer mentioned above will need to be complied with in order to validate the data transfer.
There is no current or upcoming regulation that determines the sharing of algorithms or technical details with the government.
Brazilian legislation does not currently provide rules regarding international data transfers. With the application of the LGPD as of August 2020, international data transfers will be allowed for foreign data requests, litigation proceedings or internal investigations if:
Brazilian legislation does not provide for blocking statutes specifically related to privacy or data protection.
Generally, as provided for by the Federal Constitution, international treaties, conventions and international acts must be executed by the President and approved by the Congress in order to be valid in Brazil.
There is no legislation addressing the term "Big Data". The Internet Act prohibits the storing of excessive personal data in relation to the purpose for which the data subject gave their consent, so it is important to observe the correct processing of this data. Such obligation will become more explicit with the upcoming application of the LGPD, especially due to the principle of necessity.
Currently, automated decision-making is not addressed by law. Once the LGPD is applied, it will be a right of the data subject to request a review of decisions taken solely on the basis of the automated processing of personal data, including decisions related to the personal, professional, consumer or credit profile and personality.
Profiling is not currently addressed by law. Once the LGPD is in force, data used for profiling can be considered personal data and, therefore, the purpose of such processing will only be legitimate if it is carried out under one of the legal bases.
Currently, artificial intelligence and the Internet of Things are not addressed by law. Under the LGPD, the ANPD may issue regulations on such matters.
Facial recognition is not currently addressed by law. Under the LGPD, it is highly likely that the face will be considered sensitive personal data, and will therefore be subject to special protection.
Biometric data is not currently addressed by law. As of August 2020, biometric data will be considered a type of sensitive personal data and, therefore, will be subject to special protection.
Currently, geolocation is not addressed by law. Once the LGPD is in force and if the geolocation is able to identify or make a natural person identifiable, the requirements of the LGPD will be applicable to that processing of data.
The operation of drones is regulated by the Brazilian Civil Aviation Special Regulation No. 94/2017, enacted by the National Agency of Civil Aviation (ANAC). Unmanned aircraft operations (for recreational, corporate, commercial or experimental use) must follow ANAC rules, which are complementary to the regulations of other public agencies, such as the Air Space Control Department (DECEA) and the National Telecommunications Agency (ANATEL). The LGPD does not have any provisions regarding drones.
Although many organisations are starting to implement protocols for digital governance, or fair data practice review boards or committees to address the risks of emerging or disruptive digital technologies, such practice is not legally mandatory. However, when the LGPD enters into force, data processing agents will be obliged to adopt security measures to protect databases, and to implement a governance programme for privacy that establishes adequate policies and safeguards based on a process of systematic evaluation of the impacts and risks to privacy.
In November 2019, one of the biggest telecommunication services providers in Brazil, Telefonica Vivo, was notified by PROCON and ANATEL with respect to the claims of vulnerability identified in its systems, which apparently leaked the personal data of millions of users. The case is still being administratively analysed by both institutions. PROCON has informed that the applicable fine might be up to BRL10 million.
Since the LGPD is not yet applicable to cases involving data protection rights, the entities are basing their allegations on the aforementioned consumerist and telecommunication legal standards.
No relevant private litigation involving privacy or data protection has been brought, since the LGPD is not yet in force. As mentioned above, if public prosecutors are notified of violations of data protection rights, they may file a complaint addressing such violation on behalf of all data subjects involved.
There are no legal requirements applicable to due diligence or the oversight and monitoring of vendors or service providers. However, data processing agents must be reasonably diligent to avoid claims of gross negligence or joint liability in the case of security breaches caused by or with the contribution of a related third party.
There are no non-privacy/data protection-specific laws that mandate disclosure of an organisation’s cybersecurity risk profile or experience.
There are no further significant issues.