You are using an outdated browser and your browsing experience will not be optimal. Please update to the latest version of Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox. Install Microsoft Edge

May 9, 2023

AI, Privacy, and Data Protection: Legal Considerations in Southeast Asia

Subscribe to Updates

The significance of artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly increasing worldwide, and Southeast Asia is no exception, as it plays a leading role in the technological development of many industries. AI has already proven its importance for driving business growth in areas such as e-commerce, finance, and healthcare, but its remarkable potential also raises concerns around privacy. As AI systems are designed to collect and process large amounts of data to improve their operation, it is necessary to balance the development of technology with the protection of individuals’ privacy.

Current Frameworks in Southeast Asia

This concern has been on regional policymakers’ agendas for many years. The ASEAN Framework on Personal Data Protection, which was adopted in 2016, is not legally binding and has no enforcement mechanism, but it serves as a guide for ASEAN member states in developing their own data protection laws and regulations.

Domestic data privacy laws are currently in force in five ASEAN member countries—Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Thailand, and Singapore—while Vietnam’s Personal Data Protection Decree is scheduled to take effect on July 1, 2023. This presents a challenge for ASEAN members, as adopting AI-related technology can further complicate data protection efforts due to the amount of personal data AI systems collect, as well as the complexity of the data used to train the AI algorithm.

Some ASEAN members have also made progress in regulating AI. For instance, Singapore released the Model AI Governance Framework in 2019 and launched the AI Governance Testing Framework and Toolkit in 2022—the world’s first such framework. Similarly, Thailand issued the Artificial Intelligence Ethics Guideline in 2019 to help government agencies in the development, promotion, and use of AI, and in 2023 adopted the Thailand Artificial Intelligence Guidelines to help the private sector develop AI-related work. These guidelines primarily focus on principles and ethics in developing AI-related technology, but lack a step-by-step implementation process that connects with privacy laws. Despite these early steps by some countries in ASEAN, there are no regional policies or consensus frameworks on how to implement and regulate AI in accordance with privacy laws in ASEAN member countries.

Legal Risks

If AI-related technology is developed without consideration for data protection, there is a risk of breaching personal data and affecting numerous data subjects, potentially resulting in mass litigation. Moreover, the lack of robust privacy laws and frameworks in many ASEAN member countries, coupled with the growing use of AI-related technology, also increases the risk of legal liabilities for companies that make use of this increasingly common technology.

In the event of a data breach or misuse of personal data, affected individuals may seek legal recourse against the companies that collected and processed their personal information. Such legal actions can result in significant financial and reputational damages for businesses, highlighting the need for effective data protection regulations and AI-related technology frameworks in ASEAN countries.

Technology companies with connections to developing AI systems are especially vulnerable. With the vast amount of data required for developing AI systems, these companies will face the challenge of lawfully collecting and processing data from a huge range of sources and data subjects.

Outlook

As AI-related technology continues to evolve and play a crucial role in the growth of many industries in Southeast Asia, it is important to ensure that its development is balanced with the protection of individuals’ privacy. While some ASEAN members have made progress in adopting AI regulations, more needs to be done to enforce data privacy laws and develop consensus frameworks for regulating AI in accordance with privacy laws. Such efforts will not only help protect individuals’ privacy but also mitigate legal risks associated with the use of AI-related technology. ASEAN member countries must continue to work together to achieve a balance between technological development and data protection in support of sustainable and ethical innovation for our digital future.

Related Professionals

Industries

Technology

Locations

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

July 11, 2023
Can computer programs resolve legal disputes? For decades, the answer from much of the legal community has been no. However, developments in artificial intelligence (AI), and in particular natural language processing and machine learning, have led to renewed discussions of this possibility. Increasingly, tools are being developed to assist parties with litigation outcome prediction and judges with litigation outcome determination. However, while some argue that the use of AI in legal disputes can reduce the length of proceedings, cut costs, and improve access to justice, others raise concerns that “black box” AI systems could reduce transparency, entrench bias, and harm the development of the law. Litigation Outcome Prediction The use of computers to predict the outcome of legal cases is not new. As early as the 1980s, researchers developed outcome prediction tools, often in the form of decision-tree algorithms. However, developments in AI have allowed the creation of more sophisticated prediction models. In 2017, a model built by Katz et al. predicted US Supreme Court decisions with an accuracy of 70.2%, while in 2019, a model built by Medvedeva et al. predicted decisions of the European Court of Human Rights with an accuracy of 75%. In various studies, AI tools have been able to predict case outcomes more accurately than expert lawyers. Companies such as Solomonic and Lex Machina, owned by LexisNexis, now provide commercial litigation prediction and analytics tools. Outcome prediction tools can be used by parties and their legal representatives to craft arguments and facilitate settlement negotiations, or by third-party litigation financers to assess the risk of providing funding. More broadly, outcome prediction may be used by the likes of insurance companies to help calculate claim payouts. However, those using such tools must take care to ensure that they do not breach any professional or legal obligations.
Read More
July 10, 2023
One of the more positive outcomes of the COVID-19 pandemic is that telemedicine has become remarkably important as an interactive system between patients and healthcare professionals. Thailand, which ranks near the top as a world medical hub, is a highly favored destination in Asia for expat workers. Currently, the Thai market has both Thai-based and foreign-based platforms with information about healthcare providers and telemedicine readily available. “Doctor Locator,” “Weed Map,” and “Find a Teeth Aligner Dentist” are examples of online platforms connecting patients with medical and telemedicine services. These digital platforms provide information about the location of specialized clinics, cannabis dispensaries, pharmacy stores, and orthodontic practitioners in Thailand. These platforms act as intermediaries between medical care businesses and consumers. As actual medical services are not offered or provided, these digital platforms do not have to be regulated under the Medical Facility Act of Thailand. However, healthcare digital platform services that act as an intermediary or conduit managing information used to connect medical clinics or cannabis dispensaries with patients or customers via a computer network are now regulated under the soon-to-be-implemented Royal Decree on Digital Platforms, regardless of whether payment is actually made via the platform. The regulatory authority for this is the Electronic Transactions Development Agency (ETDA). Under this royal decree, digital platform providers that intend to operate a digital platform service must notify the ETDA prior to initiating operations. The extent of the details to be included in the notification to the ETDA will be more comprehensive if the digital platform: has annual revenue (before expenses) for digital platform services within Thailand exceeding THB 1.8 million (approx. USD 51,200) for an individual operator or THB 50 million (approx. USD 1.42 million) for a corporate or entity operator; or has more than 5,000 users (on average) per month. Apart
Read More
June 26, 2023
Vietnam’s Ministry of Information and Communications (MIC) organized a workshop with industry representatives on June 19, 2023, to discuss its future policy direction for over-the-top (OTT) telecom services and internet data center (IDC) and cloud computing services. OTT telecom services, in the MIC’s interpretation, are communication services such as text messages or voice calls provided over the internet—for example, the services of Zalo, WhatsApp, WeChat, etc. The workshop, the first in an expected series, focused only on the discussion of policy on how to regulate these services. Light-Touch Management Approach A very positive signal of the MIC in the workshop was its clear intention to apply a “light-touch” approach to management. For cross-border provision of OTT telecom services and IDC/cloud computing services, the MIC intends to require notification and a post-check mechanism, instead of a heavy licensing or commercial arrangement regime like the one applicable to traditional telecom services. In addition, there is no limitation on foreign investment if foreigners would like to provide these services in Vietnam. With regard to domestic service providers, the MIC proposes a registration regime with a similar post-check mechanism. The MIC’s reason for registration instead of notification is because the provision of these services by domestic companies may involve setting up data center/cloud systems which require consideration of various issues including location, electricity sources, and connection with telecom infrastructure such as marine cable. However, the MIC is also hoping to make the registration process as light as possible for enterprises (for example, using online registration) to provide a favorable environment and conditions to facilitate development of the industry without obstacles or cumbersome administrative procedures for companies’ operations. For providers of these services, the MIC is also considering an exemption from the responsibility to pay fees for telecommunications activities rights, and from payment to
Read More
June 8, 2023
At a conference organized by Vietnam’s Ministry of Public Security (MPS) on June 7, 2023, government officials provided more guidance on the recently issued Personal Data Protection Decree (PDPD), which is set to take effect on July 1, 2023. Key takeaways included the following: A national portal on personal data protection for online submission of notifications and registrations will be launched before July 1, 2023. The MPS also plans to issue templates for data processing impact assessments (DPIAs) and transfer impact assessments (TIAs) in the near future. The PDPD requires data controllers, data processors, and data controller-processors to prepare a DPIA at the start of personal data processing. The MPS clarified that the DPIA is expected to be prepared and submitted once. Only changes to its content would require submission of an updated DPIA. Both DPIAs and TIAs (which are for cross-border data transfers) must be prepared in Vietnamese. Since the sale and purchase of personal data is strictly prohibited unless explicitly permitted by law, the MPS has handled approximately 14 cases involving unlawful trading of personal data, including sensitive data. Under the PDPD, sensitive data has a broader definition than under the GDPR (the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation), and also includes location data, creditworthiness, and personal financial data. Consent is not a legal basis for the trading of personal data, including sensitive data. The 72-hour timeline for responding to a data subject’s request does not mean 72 working or business hours. Rather, it means 72 actual consecutive hours. Any organization transferring the personal data of Vietnamese citizens outside of Vietnam must comply with the PDPD, regardless of the organization’s location. For organizations incorporated overseas that must comply with the PDPD, there is no requirement to appoint a local representative (unlike the GDPR)—but appointment of a data
Read More