Protecting personal information

個人情報の保護

"Juki Net," as the system is known, went into limited operation last August. It identifies each resident by an 11-digit code and registers six types of basic personal information, such as name and domicile.

Full operation promises to bring a variety of benefits. It will enable the central and local governments to make better use of registered personal data in their administrative services. Residents will have "Juki cards" issued so that they can obtain copies of their residency certificates in any city, town or village.

Virtually every nook and corner of the Japanese archipelago will be connected by a state-run computer network. While the central government is promoting the Juki Net, not all local governments are joining the bandwagon. Many worry that personal information in the national database might find its way into the hands of third parties.

The trial start of the network last August raised questions about its safety, particularly about the possible leakage of data through Internet connections. The government should make sure that effective precautionary measures are put in place, and explain them in plain language.

The primary responsibility for safety rests with the local public offices that form the front lines of the Juki Net. Yet, despite their professed concerns for privacy protection, many municipalities are said to be reluctant to take up the burden — in part because of staff shortages and budget austerity — and would prefer to place the onus entirely on private companies.

That is a dangerous course to take, as shown by a report from a Nagano prefectural panel considering ways of protecting personal information. The report, submitted in May to Gov. Yasuo Tanaka, points out that many offices in the prefecture are not taking any safety precautions. The panel recommended that Nagano stay out of the Juki Net for the time being.

According to a survey in the report, in 27 of 121 districts the network was connected to Internet systems subject to third-party intrusion. A subsequent survey found the number of "unsafe" districts had declined slightly to 23.

Separately, a nationwide survey by the Ministry of Public Management, Home Affairs, Posts and Telecommunications found that about one in 10 offices was linked to the Internet. This makes it likely that public concerns over safety will linger even after the Juki Net goes into full operation.

If that is the case, the privacy legislation that passed the Diet in May is no assurance that personal data will be fully protected. The Nagano report flies in the face of the ministry's claims that a public-private system of safeguards has been established.

Mr. Toranosuke Katayama, the Cabinet minister in charge, has criticized Nagano Prefecture for violating the law governing the Juki Net. But Mr. Tanaka remains cautious, saying he must listen to what residents have to say. Mr. Katayama has promised to hold a joint panel debate with the prefecture, but he has yet to deliver on his promise. The debate should be conducted in public.

Even if the safety issue is resolved, the government will have to tackle another question: how to deal with moves by residents to opt out of the Juki Net. In pace-setting Yokohama City, 800,000 residents have declined access; the network includes data on the remaining 2.62 million residents.

The best thing would be for all districts to join. But if many residents remain concerned about the possible abuse of their personal data, optional participation may be unavoidable for the time being. The ministry expects Yokohama, for one, to take part fully in the future, saying the city is in a "transition period of phased participation."

In the meantime, the government would do well to avoid creating the impression, particularly among wary residents, that it is imposing a tighter grip on personal information. It would be unwise, for example, to set up too strict an identification system. What is needed is the realization that the Juki Net exists for the residents, not the government.

The Japan Times Weekly
July 5, 2003
(C) All rights reserved

      本格運用で、中央政府と地方自治体はネット上の個人情報を行政サービス改善に利用することができ、国民は住基カードの交付を受ければ居住地以外の自治体でも住民票を入手できる。

      インターネット接続による住基ネットからの情報漏洩の可能性は深刻な問題だ。政府は効果的な漏洩予防策を導入し、国民に分かりやすく説明すべきだ。

      住基ネットの情報保護の基本的責任は地方自治体にあるが、多くの自治体は人手、予算不足を理由に民間業者に業務を依託する意向である。

      これは危険だ。長野県の個人情報保護審議会は、県内の多くの自治体は情報保護措置を取っていないとして、住基ネット参加を当分見合わせるよう求めている。

      総務省の調査によれば、地方自治体の役所のうち10%はインターネットに接続されているという。これでは情報漏洩に対する懸念はなくならない。

      5月に成立した個人情報保護法も情報漏洩に対する保証にはならない。長野県の問題について片山総務相は県当局と論議すると言うが、論議は公開でなされるべきだ。

      また、情報保護の問題が解決されても、住基ネット参加を拒否する住民はどうするかという問題がある。横浜市では80万人の市民が参加を拒否している。

      政府は、個人情報の管理強化をしているという印象を避けるべきだ。例えば、厳しすぎる本人確認システムを導入するのは賢明でない。住基ネットは政府のためでなく、国民のためのものである。