Cases
Jeff Nduko vs One Acre Fund
Case Summary
Jeff Nduko lodged a complaint with the Office of the Data Protection Commissioner (ODPC) on April 14, 2023, against One Acre Fund, alleging unlawful use of his personal data. The Complainant received unwarranted messages and calls from the Respondent demanding repayment of a loan he had not taken, despite never having subscribed to their services. The ODPC investigated under the Data Protection Act, 2019, and relevant regulations. The Respondent admitted to mistakenly entering the complainant’s phone number (07XXXX6877) into their database instead of their client’s number (07XXXX6977), resulting in the erroneous communications. The Respondent took remedial actions, including ceasing the messages, planning additional staff training, implementing data validation mechanisms, and developing a Know Your Client (KYC) policy. On June 19, 2023, the Complainant confirmed via email that he no longer received the messages, resolving the issue.
Issues for Determination
• Whether the Respondent violated the principles of data protection as outlined in the Data Protection Act, 2019, by processing the Complainant’s personal data without consent.
Determination
The Respondent was found to have violated the data protection principle of accuracy under Section 25 of the Data Protection Act, 2019, by erroneously capturing and processing the Complainant’s phone number. The Respondent rectified the error promptly upon notification, and the Complainant confirmed the cessation of the unwarranted messages. The complaint was resolved and marked as closed, with the parties advised of their right to appeal to the High Court of Kenya.
Analysis
This case emphasizes the importance of the data protection principle of accuracy under Section 25 of the Data Protection Act, 2019, which mandates that personal data be accurate and kept up to date. The Respondent’s error in recording the Complainant’s phone number instead of that of their client, led to an infringement of the Complainant’s right to privacy. The Respondent’s swift corrective actions, including stopping the messages and enhancing data validation processes, demonstrate a commitment to addressing the violation. However, the case highlights that compliance with data protection laws requires ongoing practical implementation beyond registration as a data controller. The ODPC noted that the Respondent, while registered as a data controller, should also register as a data processor, given its dual role in processing client data. The resolution of the complaint through the ODPC’s intervention and the Respondent’s remedial measures underscores the importance of robust data handling practices to prevent privacy breaches.