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​ 

October 7, 2022
Thailand’s Office of the Personal Data Protection Committee (PDPC) has opened a public hearing period on its draft notification regarding cross-border transfer of personal data. The public hearing is open through October 24. The notification, once issued, will supplement the principle of cross-border transfer of personal data outside of Thailand set out in the Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA). The notification sets out the following key matters: Definitions “Transfer of personal data” means any sending or transferring of personal data by a transferor of personal data, either by way of a physical transfer or a remote transfer through a computer system or an internet network to the recipient of the personal data. It does not include sending personal data through an intermediary by transiting between computer systems or internet networks, or any storing or retaining of personal data, either permanently or temporarily, by a cloud computing service provider, whereby the personal data transferor and the personal data recipient (1) are not making the order, (2) are not involved with any data selection or the content of the personal data sent and received through the computer systems or internet networks, or (3) have the purpose of entering into an agreement or any juristic act. “Binding corporate rules” means the agreed terms or policy on personal data protection made between the personal data transferor and the personal data recipient to establish appropriate measures for safeguarding personal data within a group of corporations or companies. “Standard contractual clauses” means the contractual terms made between the personal data transferor and the personal data recipient to establish appropriate measures for safeguarding personal data. “Code of conduct” means a code that sets out the obligations of a personal data transferor and a personal data recipient outside of Thailand. “Certification” means an undertaking in relation to
Read More
September 21, 2022
Thailand’s Personal Data Protection Committee (PDPC) has released separate guidelines for data controllers to follow in obtaining data subjects’ consent and notifying data subjects of required information (i.e., regarding collection, use, or disclosure of their personal data). By following the guidelines, data controllers can mitigate the risk of violating the Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019) (PDPA). The Guidelines on Obtaining Consent from the Data Subject according to the PDPA and the Guidelines on Notification of Purposes and Details upon the Collection of Personal Data from the Data Subject according to the PDPA were issued on September 7, 2022. Consent Guidelines The PDPC’s guidelines on obtaining consent list the requirements for consent to be considered valid. These requirements include stipulations on timing of requests, elements that need to be included in requests, and the nature of requests. For instance, consent must be obtained before or at the time of obtaining personal data, and data subjects must be informed of both the purposes and details of the personal data handling, among other specific requirements. In turn, there must be a clear affirmative act of the data subject in giving consent. Obtaining consent from minors is subject to more stringent requirements, and data controllers should implement appropriate identification and age-verification measures when collecting personal data about minors. The guidelines give two sets of requirements, depending on the age of the minor—between 10 and 20, and under 10. In general, with the older age group, parental consent is not required in all circumstances, while for the younger age group, parental consent is compulsory for giving consent on behalf of the minor. For a person deemed to be “incompetent” or “quasi-incompetent,” consent must always be given by the legal guardian. Notification Guidelines The guidelines on notifying data subjects when collecting personal data
Read More
September 16, 2022
Thailand’s Personal Data Protection Committee (PDPC) has issued a regulation establishing procedures for filing and processing data subjects’ complaints under the Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019) (PDPA). The Regulation Re: Complaint Filing, Rejection, Termination, Consideration, and the Period for the Consideration of the Complaint B.E. 2565 (2022) was issued in July 2022 and took effect on July 12, 2022. The PDPA entitles data subjects to file complaints against data controllers, data processors, and employees or service providers of either whose operations fail to comply with the PDPA. This article lays out the various requirements and procedures for the filing and processing of such a complaint. Complaint Submission The body designated by the PDPA to be responsible for handling complaints and imposing administrative penalties is called the “Expert Committee.” Data subjects who would like to make a complaint can submit it to the Expert Committee directly at the Office of PDPC, send it to the office by post, or submit the complaint electronically. The written or electronic complaint must use clear, plain, polite, and appropriate language, and must not give an impression of being directly or indirectly extorting or intimidating. The complaint must include at least the following information: Name, address, and telephone number or email address of the complainant (or an authorized representative), together with identification card, passport, or other official identification document (plus a power of attorney if submitted by a representative); Details and facts of the noncompliance with or violation of the PDPA; Details of resulting damages or impact; Supporting evidence (e.g., documentary evidence, physical evidence, witness statements); and Action desired of the offender. The complaint must include a statement certifying its veracity, and must be signed by the complainant or the authorized representative. Complaint Consideration When a complaint is submitted, the receiving official will
Read More
September 8, 2022
While much attention has been paid to the data localization requirements for foreign enterprises under Vietnam’s 2018 Cybersecurity Law (“CSL”) and the recently issued Decree 53 guiding its implementation, the corresponding requirements for domestic enterprises are often overlooked, despite being potentially more troublesome. Under Decree 53, “domestic enterprises” are defined to mean enterprises established or registered for establishment under Vietnamese law and having their head offices in Vietnam (Article 2.11), so this designation includes not only Vietnamese companies, but foreign-invested enterprises as well. Background Before analyzing the stipulations in Articles 26 and 27 of Decree 53 further guiding the data localization/storage requirements, it is worth restating the very problematic Article 26.3 of the CSL, which reads: “Domestic and foreign enterprises providing services on telecommunication networks or the internet or value-added services in cyberspace in Vietnam with activities of collecting, exploiting, analyzing, and/or* processing personal information data, data on the relationships of service users, or data generated by service users in Vietnam must store such data in Vietnam for the period prescribed by the government. Foreign enterprises mentioned in this clause must open branches or representative offices in Vietnam.” [* Note: The Vietnamese text simply uses a comma here, without specifying whether this should be “and” or “or,” leading to additional problems in interpretation.] Because of this very broad and ambiguous wording, Article 26.3 of the CSL required further guidance from the government and remained unenforced for more than three years after the CSL took effect on January 1, 2019. Decree 53 guiding the implementation of the CSL was finally issued on August 15, 2022, and provides additional clarity on this matter. But does Decree 53 provide sufficient guidelines for implementation with regard to domestic enterprises? Scope of Application With regard to foreign enterprises, although there remains some ambiguity, Decree
Read More