New Book loading

It has taken over 12 months of intense research and writing but it is finally done. Our partner’s new book – “AI Governance: A Necessity and Imperative ” – comes out before the end of the month.

The book examines the origins of AI, its risks, opportunities and challenges. It also looks at global and regional efforts at AI strategy and AI governance. With some useful insights and tips for AI stakeholders and AI actors. Attached is a sneak peek at the “Table of Contents” and “Preface.”

Watch this space for more information and details.

hashtag#AI hashtag#AIGovernance hashtag#AIEthics hashtag#AISafety hashtag#DataPrivacy hashtag#DataProtection hashtag#Copyright hashtag#Knowledgeispower hashtag#Gratitude

AI Gov Book Table of ContentDownload

AI Governance: A Global Approach

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is perhaps the most disruptive and transformative technology of our time. AI has huge implications for humans and society. AI models and AI systems have been deployed in multiple domains like finance, health, argiculture, autonomous vehicles, employment, law enforcement and cybersecurity.

However, just as AI comes with potential benefits it also has potential risks. There are concerns raised about privacy and copyright violations, algorithm bias and discrimination, energy consumption and environmental impact, deepfakes, misinformation and disinformation. It is, therefore, necessary and imperative that a robust AI governance framework is established by AI stakeholders (policy makers and consumers) and AI actors (organizations and individuals active in the design, development and deployment of AI) to promote a humancentric, “innovative” and “trustworthy” AI. AI governance comprises the policies, procedures, processes and standards adopted by an organization to ensure compliance with extant laws and regulations, adherence to core AI principles (like fairness, transparency, accountability, explainability, safety, data privacy and security) assess and manage AI risks to ensure ethical, safe and responsible AI.

Our paper on AI Governance delves into the origins of AI; the importance of AI governance; and the efforts, across jurisdictions, being made by policy makers, academics, civil society and AI actors to establish AI strategies and frameworks to govern the design, development and delployment of AI models and AI systems. The paper examines the OECD AI principles; NIST AI RMF; UNESCO Recommendations on the Ethics of AI; ISO 42001; and the EU AI Act. Country experience(s) are also x-rayed – US. UK, Canada, China, Nigeria, and Singapore.

Recommendations made for assessing and managing AI risks throughout the AI lifecycle. How to set up an AI Oversight Committee, Align AI practices with business goals and objectives; ensure AI literacy (training and awareness programs); and how to develop and implement an AI governance program while leveraging the organization’s existing expertise and GRC architecture.

The objective of the paper is to deepen understanding about AI, its capabilities and limitations, and the global best practices for fostering ethical, innovative, responsible, safe, and trustworthy AI.

The paper is the basis of the upcoming book, AI Governance: A Necessity and Imperative by Alex Wodi and the AI Legislation Tool Kit Project.

AI Governance An Overview AlexWodi SSRNDownload

The Fascinating World of Styrofoams and Single Use Plastics: Why the Recent Lagos Ban of Styrofoam matters

Lagos State Bans Styrofoam to Protect Residents and the Environment

On Sunday 28 January 2024 the Lagos State Government took a decisive step to protect its residents and the environment by prohibiting the use and distribution of Styrofoam and other single-use plastics within the state. This decision, announced by Tokunbo Wahab, the Commissioner of Environment and Works, aims to address the menace of plastic waste in Lagos, Nigeria’s vivacious economic capital and most populous city in Africa.

                                                                 Abe Bridge (Under Bridge). © Benson Ibeabuchi

Styrofoam boxes and single-use plastics have become common-place on the streets of Lagos, from trash-strewn pavements and gutters to street vendors packing hot meals into polystyrene containers. The ban, which took many Lagosians by surprise, is a welcome move for environmentalists who believe it can significantly reduce waste and carbon emissions. However, some critics question the feasibility of an immediate ban, especially for businesses that rely on these materials for their livelihoods. The transition from polystyrene boxes would be a challenge, but it is a step toward a cleaner and more sustainable Lagos.

Nigerian fast-food chain Food Concepts, known for its popular restaurants Chicken Republic, PieXpress and The Chopbox, has already applauded the measure and encourages its customers to bring their own containers. The NGO Initiative for Climate and Ecological Protection emphasizes that proper management of the action plan is crucial for success. In a megacity with over 20 million inhabitants, effective waste management is essential to prevent blocked sewers, floods, and the proliferation of mosquitoes during the rainy season. Nigeria is one of largest importers and consumers of plastics with over 130,000 tonnes ending up in Nigerian waters each year. It has been estimated that its consumption and import could exceed 40 million tonnes by 2030 if nothing is done, with a significant volume ending up in its aquatic system. Plastic bottles, Styrofoam packs, plastic bags, and plastic sachets (popularly referred to as “pure water”) are the usual suspects. Styrofoam is the first to fall among the ignoble ilk of pollutants. Is this the first of other bans? Activists have advocated for more bans and adoption of more environmentally friendly options like paper bags and glass bottles. Will the Government yield? Only time would tell.

The Lagos State Styrofoam Ban, albeit a bold step aims to create a cleaner, greener environment for its residents and set an example for other cities facing similar challenges across the Country and the globe. 🌍🌱

Why is Styrofoam Bad

Styrofoam, also known as polystyrene foam, has a significant negative impact on humans and the environment. Let’s delve into the reasons why:

I Health Concerns for Humans

Styrofoam Takeaway Food Pack © Benson Ibeabuchi

II Climate Change and environmental Concerns

  • Non-Biodegradability and Non-Recyclable: Styrofoam is non-biodegradable, meaning it takes an astonishingly long time to decompose. In fact, it can persist in the environment for up to 1 million years. This longevity exacerbates the problem of waste accumulation.

The UNEP has done extensive work to raise awareness about the menace of single-use plastics.

In summary, Styrofoam harms both humans and the environment. It’s crucial to reduce our use of this harmful material and explore more sustainable alternatives. Many cities and countries have already taken steps to ban commercial Styrofoam use, recognizing its detrimental effects.

Remember, reducing the use of containers made with polystyrene benefits not only your health but also the environment 🌎🌿. #climatechange #climateaction #UNEP

The Lagos State Styrofoam is a step in the right direction, even though it has been met with applause and concerns by Businesses and Environmental Activists alike. The directive would require re-education of food vendors and sellers of takeaway packs including members of the public. I am not sure it would be easy to bring about a culture change in respect of a practice that has lingered for such a long time and has become part and parcel of Lagos and her people. Lagosians love their party packs and takeaway food packs. They have become so ubiquitous over the years. It would be interesting to see as things unfold within the next few months as the Government begins to clamp down on defaulters. As an ex-Las Gidi resident, I can appreciate where the authorities are coming from. I wish them godspeed on this one. Eko oni baje !

#leadership #goodgovernance

LENDING MORE INK TO THE CBN V. INTERSTELLA CONTROVERSY: A PRACTICAL RESOLUTION

Garnishment or garnishee proceedings is a mode of debt recovery or enforcement of judgment debt. The procedure involves wage garnishment or attachment of funds in custody of a third party, referred to as a garnishee. Depending on your jurisdiction (Nigeria, US, and UK), the debt may include spousal or child support, credit card debt, student loans, and money judgments delivered by a court of competent jurisdiction.

In Nigeria, section 84 of the Sheriff’s and Civil Process Act (SCPA) requires the consent of the Attorney General (AG) to first be obtained before the commencement of garnishee proceedings for the attachment of money in the custody of a public officer. There are discordant opinions amongst lawyers and judges over whether the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) is a “public officer” within the context of section 84 SCPA to require the AG’s consent in garnishee proceedings against the apex Bank?

On 15 December 2017 the Supreme Court decision in CBN v. Interstella appeared to have settled the issue, but the controversy rages on with conflicting decisions and interpretations in subsequent Court of Appeal cases. I had earlier examined the issue, among other interesting issues arising from garnishee proceedings in my book, Garnishment Law and Practice in Nigeria, UK, and US. (2023). Recently, I re-read some of the conflicting decisions of the Court of Appeal (CBN v. Ezeanya, CBN v. Hydro Air Pty, CBN v. Njemanze, CBN v. Zakari, CBN v. Lafferi, CBN v. Okon, CBN v. Kakuri, CBN v. Tivfa, CBN v. Adejoh, CBN v. Kruggerbrent, CBN v. Barbedos et al). Weighing both sides of the arguments across the divide a few points reinforced my choice as to which side had a more convincing approach to settling the disceptation. I decided to lend more ink to the controversy in the hope of offering clarity and a practical resolution in this paper.

lending-more-ink-to-the-cbn-v.-interstella-controversy-Download

Data Privacy Week 2024

DATA PRIVACY WEEK (DPW): JAN 21 – 27, 2024

This week, Jan 21 – 27, is data privacy week, with the theme: “Take Control of Your Data.” Coincidentally this year’s DPW theme is similar to the new year (2024) mantra “No Agree for Anybody” made popular by Nigerian Youths via social media. “No ‘gree for anybody” is a metaphor for standing up for your rights and getting through tough times in the coming year. It is a recognition and expression of your constitutional and fundamental human rights.

The right to privacy and by extension data privacy is no exception. Over 120 years ago Louis D. Brandeis had described privacy as “the right to be let alone” in an article written with Samuel D Warren titled, “The Right to Privacy” in the Harvard Law Review (1890). Even then the article observed that advancements in technology have the potential to cause, “what is whispered in the closet to be proclaimed from the rooftops.” Given the current explosion and ubiquity of big data, IoT, and smart devices it is not difficult to relate to that observation. Brandeis, would later become a Justice of the Supreme Court decades later and, in the case of Olmstead v. United States 277 U.S. 438 (1928); adopted his earlier definition of privacy and canvass for the constitutional right of privacy under the fourth amendment.

100 years later the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) which came into effect in May 2018 with its extra-territorial applicability and consumer appeal elevated data privacy rights and data protection to a globally recognised fundamental human right. The GDPR via the Brussel Effect sparked off the passage of other data protection laws modelled after it in countries beyond Europe. Some of its popular legislative progenies are the LGPD of Brazil and the CCPA/CPRA in the US. China, India, Nigeria, and Saudi Arabia have also passed data protection laws recently.

The DPW is an expansion of Data Privacy Day. The goal is to promote online privacy awareness amongst individuals and organisations. All our online activity generates a digital footprint. Websites, apps, cookies, and services collect data about our online behavior, interests, and purchases. This data can be sold and used by big data companies (particularly social media and e-commerce companies) for behavioral profiling and targeted advertising. From our online activity we can also expose our personal data (e.g. driver’s license, social security number, even health information) to potential risks. The theme of this year’s DPW, “Take Control of Your Data,” encourages individuals to acquaint themselves about their data privacy rights to engender greater management and control over their personal data, while organisations are made to understand the importance of respecting the privacy of consumers/user’s data.

Data Privacy Week began as Data Privacy Day in the United States and Canada in January 2008 as an extension of the Data Protection Day celebration in Europe. Data Protection Day commemorates the Jan. 28, 1981, signing of Convention 108, the first legally binding international treaty dealing with privacy and data protection.

For simple steps and tips about staying safe online visit the National Cybersecurity Alliance (NCA) website: NCA, is the leading nonprofit, public-private partnership promoting cybersecurity and privacy education and awareness in North America.

https://staysafeonline.org/programs/data-privacy-week/

The Federal Privacy Council also has on its website useful links and videos on this year’s DPW, Data Privacy and Protection; Data Subjects’ rights; and Fair Information Privacy Practices (FIPPs).

Visit: https://www.fpc.gov/data-privacy-week-2024/

#dataprivacy #gdpr #dataprivacyweek #dataprotection #iapp

A few quotes to ponder as the year ends.

It’s a beautiful day. Looking at the dry leaves on the lawn and condensation dripping down the misty window I am wrapped in the warm feeling of the festive season and the anticipation of the new year like a knitted cozy.

This morning I received a list of favorite quotes in my mail. They were comprised of the wisdom of World Leaders, Poets, CEOs, and Entrepreneurs referenced by talented Executives interviewed in 2023. I found them insightful and decided to share. Let me know which ones resonated with you in the comment section. I wish you all a prosperous New Year (2024). Happy Holidays.

1. Ann Kirschner (President, Hunter College)
“I never lose. Either I win, or I learn.”
– Nelson Mandela

2. Amy Gershkoff Bolles (Chairperson, Boats Group)
 “Hire for potential, not experience.”

3. Lynley Sides (Co-founder & President, REX)
 “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.”
– Winston Churchill

4. Jocelyn DeGance (Board Member, SpeedLegal)
“What you seek is seeking you.”
– Rūmī’

5. Lisa Shalett (Co-founder, Extraordinary Women on Boards)
“Live your life by design, not default” and “If you’re not having fun, you’re playing someone else’s game.”
– Carolyn Buck-Luce

6. Maria Garcia Nielsen (Founder, Wharton Alumni for Boards)
“Wanderer, there is no road, the road is made by walking. By walking one makes the road, and upon glancing behind one sees the path that never will be trod again.”
– Antonio Machado

7. Sharon Knight (Venture Partner, JAZZ Venture Partners)
“Do one thing per day that compound. Act fast on things that compound. Never let a day pass without doing something that will benefit you in a decade.”
– James Clear

8. Beth Gumm (Board Member, Altwork)
“Be the change you want to see in the world.”
– Mahatma Gandhi

9. Beth Ann Eason (Board Member, Quad)
“People will forget what you said, people will forget what you did, but people will never forget how you made them feel.”
– Maya Angelou

10. Marci Goldberg (President, K-12 Market Advisors)
“At the end of the day, relationships matter. How you treat people matters.”

#leadership#people#relationships#excellence

OpenAI embroiled in an Alphabet Soup of copyright infringement claims

17 prominent authors, George RR Martin of “Game of Thrones” fame inclusive, have filed copyrights violation claims against OpenAI, creators of Generative AI chabot, chatGPT and GPT4 which responds to prompts to generate text, images, or audio output using large datasets and material scraped from the internet via its Large Language Model (LLM) used to train the chatbot. The suit claims that OpenAI used those copyrighted materials without permission, and that same did not fall under the “fair use” exception. Fair use essential allows the use of copyrighted works for non-commercial purposes like for research, review, or commentary. Especially in academia. Most research papers contain references to other works that are duly acknowledged. Otherwise, a researcher could be accused of plagiarism, which is strictly frowned upon and could have grave implications in academic circles.

The outcome of this lawsuit could spark off fresh debates about copyright and data privacy & protection in relation to Generative AI and point the direction of the operations of companies developing genai in the future. OpenAI in its defence claims to be in talks with creators and the authors guild about these concerns with a view to educating authors and creators about its operations and arriving at a mutually beneficial understanding/ arrangement that pushes the technology forward.

https://abcnews.go.com/Technology/authors-lawsuit-openai-fundamentally-reshape-artificial-intelligence-experts/story?id=103379209

Central Bank of Nigeria v. Barbedos Ventures Ltd & Ors. : AG’s Consent Put to Rest ?

(2023) LPELR-61120(CA)

Another win for the Supreme Court decision in CBN v. Interstella (2017) LPELR 43940 (SC) and the proponents of the abolition of the requirement of the Attorney General’s (AG’s) Consent in section 84 of the Sheriffs and Civil Processes Act (SCPA). The learned Justices in CBN v. Barbedos (2023), (coram Williams-Dawodu, Tukur, and Senchi, JJCA) of the Court of Appeal sitting in the Abuja Division on 25 August 2023 followed and illuminated the purport of the SC decision thus:

Whether the consent of the Attorney General of the Federation should only be sought for (sic) and not obtained for the trial Court to grant an order absolute in view of Section 84(1) Sheriff and Civil Process Act Cap S6 LFN 2004.” Section 84(1) “Where money liable to be attached by garnishee proceedings is in the custody or under the control of a public officer in his official capacity or in custodia legis, the order nisi shall not be made under the provisions of the last preceding section unless consent to such attachment is first obtained from the appropriate officer in the case of money in the custody or control of a public officer or of the Court in the case of money in custodia legis, as the case may be. (3) In this section “appropriate officer” means:- (a) In relation to money which is in the custody of a public officer who holds a public office in the public service of the Federation, the Attorney-General of the Federation. (b) In relation to money which is in the custody of a public officer who holds a public office in the public service of the State, the Attorney-General of the State.” The parties have both submitted with respect to the foregoing provision of the law particularly the status of the Appellant. The Appellant invoked Section 84(1) and anchors on it in its defence as well as for the 2nd, 3rd and 4th Respondents as it would appear. The case of CENTRAL BANK OF NIGERIA V. INTERSTELLAR COMMUNICATIONS LIMITED by the apex Court throws a lot of light on the issue at hand. The issue was instructively and lucidly explained in the case of CENTRAL BANK OF NIGERIA V. LIDAN ENGINEERING LTD & ORS 2021 LPELR-52622 CA where this Court per MONICA DONGBAN-MENSEM PCA, affirmed as follows the bindingness of the case of CBN V. INTERSTELLA COMMUNICATIONS LTD supra as earlier stated on the position that the Appellant is not a public officer with regard to the funds in its custody. I therefore quote extensively therefrom as follows: “In determining this issue, the question is whether or not the Appellant is a Public Officer in relation to the instant case. The relationship between the Appellant, Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) and the Judgment Debtors is said to be one between a banker and its customer and by the provisions of Sections 2(e) and 36 of the CBN Act, the CBN acts as a banker to the Federal Government and its Agencies. Government bank accounts are to be treated no differently from the bank accounts of every other juristic personality or customers. The CBN therefore does not fall under the category of Public Officers in the context of Section 84 of the Sheriffs and Civil Process Act. In the case of CBN V. INTERSTELLAR COMMUNICATIONS LTD & ORS(2017) LPELR – 43940 (SC), the Apex Court held thus; “It is apparent herein, on the facts of this case that the CBN acts as a Banker to the Federal Government with respect to Government funds in its custody. Section 2(e) of the CBN Act provides thus: “act as a banker and provide economic and financial advice to the Federal Government.” Section 36 of the CBN Act also provides: “The Bank shall receive and disburse Federal Government moneys and keep accounts thereof,” The appellant does not stand as public officer in this situation. Therefore, it follows that the need to seek the consent of the Attorney- General of the Federation does not arise… “Per Ogunbiyi, J.S.C. (Emphasis Supplied). Having established that the Appellant is not a Public Officer, the requirement of obtaining the consent of the Hon. Attorney-General of the Federation before funds can be released to the 1st-4th Respondents does not apply to the instant case. It can be seen from the Record of Appeal on Pages 44-45 that the lst-4th Respondents performed their due diligence by seeking the consent of the Hon. Attorney-General which application as duly received but ignored it for an entire year. See PURIFICATION TECHNIQUES (NIG) LTD V. ATTORNEY GENERAL, LAGOS STATE (2004) 9 NWLR (Pt. 879) 665. It is important at this point to re-emphasize that the principle underlying securing the consent of the Hon. Attorney-General as prescribed in Section 84 Sheriffs and Civil Processes Act is to avoid embarrassment on the Government of not having the prior knowledge that funds earmarked for some purposes have been diverted in satisfaction of a Judgment debt, which the Government may not know anything about. Judgment creditors should not be deprived of their monies in the name of requiring consent from the Hon. Attorney-General as other Federal Government Agencies will exploit this avenue to owe private bodies, which would be harsh and unfair. In the interpretation of Laws and Statutes, it is important to put into consideration, the intendment of the makers of the legislation. “It could not have been the intention of the legislature that Section 84(1) of the SCPA should be used as an umbrella for the 3rd and 4th respondents to evade a debt owed, by simply putting its funds in the hands of the appellant; it is not also the intention that a judgment creditor should first obtain the consent of the debtor before proceeding against the debtor to recover his money. “Per Ogunbiyi J.S.C, in the case of CBN V. INTERSTELLAR COMMUNICATIONS LTD & ORS (Supra), See also the case of PURIFICATION TECH (NIG.) LTD V. A.G. LAGOS STATE (2004) 9 NWLR (PT 8790 665. In resolving this issue against the Appellant, I am bound by the decision of the Apex Court in CBN V. INTERSTELLAR COMMUNICATIONS LTD & ORS (Supra) that the Appellant is not a Public Officer, therefore the consent of the Hon. Attorney- General of the Federation is not required.” The foregoing has without any doubt cleared whatever grey areas if any in the question of the status of the Appellant herein. One is therefore fortified to hold as submitted by the learned Counsel for the 1st Respondent that the need for the consent of the Attorney-General either for the Federation or the State did not arise in the instant appeal, as the Appellant is not a public officer with respect to the Section 84(1) of the Sheriffs and Civil Process Act. Indeed, it needs be noted further that the officers of the Office of the Attorney-General for Zamfara State from the Record, participated in the whole proceedings just as in the CBN V. INTERSTELLAR case. That being the case, it would have been unfair to still seek the consent of one who had participated in the matter whether or not the money should be attached. [emphasis added] {Per JAMILU YAMMAMA TUKUR ,JCA (Pp. 10-15, paras. C-E)}

The Garnishee is not Don Quixote! The Garnishee is neither a Knight Errant nor an advocate of the judgment debtor. The Court frowns on attempts of any garnishee to evade his legal duty. The primary role of the Garnishee upon being served with an order nisi is to inform the court via affidavit evidence and statement of account (if available) about the status of the judgment debtor’s account/funds with the garnishee available for attachment and defrayment of the judgment debt. The Court of Appeal clearly and emphatically stressed this point:

The Appellant being one of the Garnishees, the 19th, and was given an opportunity to state by oath whether or not it owed funds to the 3rd Respondent before the order nisi was made absolute, had a duty as instructively stated by the apex Court in the CBN V. INTERSTELLAR case thus on page 350: “Basically, the restrictive role and legal duty of a garnishee; in a judgment enforcement proceeding is to conscientiously and truthfully appear before the Court in order to disclose the judgment debtor’s state of account in its custody. So it is not the garnishee’s business to play the role of an advocate for a judgment debtor by trying to shield and protect the money of the judgment debtor The role of a garnishee in any proceeding is delimited. And it is not envisaged that after a judgment creditor had gone through the rigours of establishing his rights through the legal system, the garnishee, who is asked to surrender the judgment debtor’s money in its possession should engage the judgment creditor in another bout of legal battle. In this case, the garnishee/appellant took so much interest and appeared to have forgotten its role as a banker to the Federal Government.” See also the case of OCEANIC BANK PLC. V. OLADEPO 2012 LPELR-19670. From the Record herein, the Appellant’s affidavit is seen as not being frank in terms of the necessary information needed to decide whether the order nisi be made absolute. The apex Court posited thus in that regard in the CBN V. INTERSTELLAR’S case page 304; “A garnishee who chooses to play a game of hide and seek with the Court by failing or refusing to depose to affidavit to show cause; that is, to disclose the true account status of the judgment debtor only exposes itself to trouble, daring the Court to do its worst. It can therefore be made to pay the judgment debt, if the Court has cause to believe that the failure or refusal to show cause is a deliberate attempt to evade a legal duty under the law to disclose the true state of account of the judgment debtor in its custody. [Emphasis Mine] {Per ELFRIEDA OLUWAYEMISI WILLIAMS-DAWODU ,JCA (Pp. 15-17, paras. F-D)}.

The Judgment of the Court of Appeal was delivered in August 2023 and appeared have put paid to the controversy of the AG’s Consent under the SCPA. However, on 4 September 2023 a different panel of judges (coram Mustapha, Waziri, and Abundaga, JJCA) sitting in the same Abuja Judicial Division in the case of CBN v. Adejoh (2023) LPELR 61118 (CA) held a contrary view and held that the CBN was a public officer within the context of section 84 of the SCPA and that the AG’s Consent was required. The learned Justices would do well to re-read the decision of the Supreme Court in CBN v. Interstella and the decision of their learned brothers in CBN v. Barbados. If they are still not convinced they may wish to read the Book of A Wodi, Garnishment Law and Practice in Nigeria, UK and US (2023) where the issue of AG’s Consent among other interesting issues (national, international and across jurisdictions) were extensively considered and discussed with clarity of expression and academic rigour.

Perhaps it is time the various Judicial Divisions of the Nigerian Judiciary begin to centralise records of their judgements for consistency, certainty and clarity. An automated and centralised data base would definitely help to solve this problem. It would deepen and enrich Nigerian jurisprudence and the efficacy of justice delivery.

See link below: . Garnishment Law and Practice in Nigeria, UK, and U.S.: Wodi, Alex: 9798987288306: Amazon.com: Books

Five Years of GDPR: A Review

The General Data Protection Regulation is the most recognizable and comprehensive data protection law that came into effect on 25 May 2018. The passage of the GDPR propelled data privacy into prominence at the world stage. Many countries’ data protection laws have been modeled after the GDPR at the national and subnational level (Brazil – LGPD, Canada – PIPEDA, Nigeria – NDPA, and California – CPRA). There has been increased awareness about individual privacy rights. There have also been big Fines and Penalties against companies in the social media and e-Commerce space for noncompliance with GDPR principles ( e.g., Facebook – 1.2 bn Euros and Amazon – 746 m euros). This article by our managing partner is a review of the impact of GDPR in the last five years and a snapshot of the future of data privacy and security.

gdpr-five-years-after-a-review-1Download
Continue reading “Five Years of GDPR: A Review”

The CIPP/US Certification

We are happy to announce that our managing partner is a certified data privacy professional.

The Certified Information Privacy Professional (CIPP) is the global standard in privacy certification. Developed and launched by the International Association of Privacy Professionals (IAPP) with leading subject matter experts, the CIPP is the world’s first broad-based global privacy and data protection credentialing program. The CIPP/US demonstrates a strong foundation in U.S. private-sector privacy laws and regulations and understanding of the legal requirements for the responsible transfer of sensitive personal data to/from the U.S., the EU and other jurisdictions. These include, GDPR, COPPA, GLBA, FCRA, CPRA, FERPA, HIPAA, PIPEDA, NDPA, LGPD, PIPL among other National and Subnational data protection laws.