個人情報保護法
昨年４月、個人情報保護法全面施行当初から法の解釈や取組み、また、その有り方などに疑問を呈して来たが、
実際に多方面で色んな問題が生じており、各種報道機関も「匿名社会」の到来を危惧し、
「安心社会の崩壊背景」（読売新聞）と題しての討論なども報じられている。そんな中で、
東京弁護士会が法施行１年を控え、「これでいいのか個人情報保護？、法施行１年・
匿名社会の今」と題し、３月２２日に霞ヶ関の弁護士会館でシンポジウムを開く。その為に、
個人情報保護に対する意見や体験談の募集を始め、メールで受付をしている。
そこで、わが意を得たりと、調査業者からみた意見と体験談をしたため東京弁護士会へメールすることとした。
個人情報保護法施行後の状況
昨年４月の個人情報保護法施行以後、国民の多くが個人情報とプライバシーを混同、個人情報は全てプライバシーと考え、
あらゆる個人情報に自己コントロール権があると解釈し、本人の承諾無くしては個人のことは公開できない、と考えているようである。また、
個人情報保護という新たな考え方に馴染みが薄い日本人（企業）は、事なかれ主義に徹し、共同社会の仕組みなど全く度外視して、
「個人情報は出さなければ問題視されることは無い」と短絡的に考え、それに徹している。その為にどんな弊害が起きようが、
そんなことはお構いなし。ただただ自分の所（個人、企業）が問題にならなければそれで良し、との利己主義に徹しているようである。
このままで今の個人情報保護の考え方が一人歩きし始めると、日本のよき伝統は崩壊し、人情味溢れるムラ社会は保てず、
共同社会はギクシャクとした住みにくいものとなり、個人主義の横行に伴い、悪いやつほどよく眠る犯罪社会の到来が多いに予見される。
調査業者としての体験談
私の会社は、企業が行う中途採用時の人事調査（採用調査、雇用調査）を主に行っているが、
個人情報保護法全面施行に伴い企業や官公庁の大半は、応募者が提出した履歴書の確認に応じなくなっている。理由は、
「保護法施行に伴い個人の事は一切お応え出来ません」というものである。学校関係も同様で、卒業確認に応じてもらえない。
元々就職の際の履歴書詐称は非常に多く、弊社で行う採用調査の約３０％に経歴の違いが確認されるが、
今の状況からするとその確認が殆ど取れなくなる可能性が非常に高い。結果、履歴書は書き放題という事になり、
履歴書を如何に作って書くかが採否の分かれ道になる状況下にある。
先般行った採用調査ですが、被調査人は４５歳の男性。大学卒業後、転職回数３回で昨年１２月に大手建設会社を退職し、
求職活動をしているという人であった。ところが前職（勤続３年）、前々職（勤続１５年）ともに個人情報を理由に職歴確認に応じない、
そこで仕方なく、居住地周辺での取材を試しみたところ、「以前は某スーパーに勤務していた・・」との情報が得られた。
履歴に疑問をもった調査員は、その情報に基づきスーパーに工作をかけたところ、「内に５年ほど居た人」との確認が得られた。何故、
職歴を詐称したのか疑問を持ち、調査を進めたところ、職場で３００万円強の横領を働き半年前に解雇されていた事実が判明した。
正直、こんなケースは日常茶飯事にあるが、厚生労働省などは個人情報云々以前に、採用時の調査は「差別につながる恐れがあるから」
との理由で、調査そのものを行わないよう行政指導している。
昨年４月の個人情報保護法施行以来、官公庁は退職者の職歴確認には全く応じない。役所によっては現職の人が、
実際に勤めているかどうかさえ応じない。これは民間企業にも言えることだが。尚、学歴確認は全校ほぼダメ。
それに輪をかけて、法務省や総務省は、身分を公証する唯一の証明書たる戸籍や住民票を原則公開から非公開に法改正しようとしている。これも、
個人情報保護の流れから来ているようであるが、身分を公証するものを非公開としてしまえば、
何時でも何処でも他人になりすますことが出来ることになる。先ず間違いなく、
こんな法改正を行えば詐欺は現状の２倍３倍に膨らむことでしょう。
そこでお尋ねしますが、就職の際の履歴書や、契約ごとでの申告内容、結婚の際の履歴申告（釣書などを含む）などは、相手に提出した時点で、
確認されることには「黙示の同意」がある、
と解釈するのですが如何でしょうか・・？
何れにしても、個人情報は全て本人の承諾無くしては出せない、話せない、取れない、等とされたら大変なことです。
Since April last year, when the Personal Information Protection Law came into full effect, we have questioned the interpretation of the law and the way in which it should be interpreted and tackled.
In fact, various problems have arisen in various fields, and various news organizations are worried about the coming of the “anonymous society”.
A debate titled “Background to the Collapse of a Secure Society” (Yomiuri Shimbun) was also reported. In the midst of all this.
The Tokyo Bar Association, in preparation for the first year of the law’s enactment, asked “Is this right for personal information protection? One year after the law came into force.
A symposium titled “Today’s Anonymous Society” will be held on March 22 at the Kasumigaseki Bar Association. To that end.
We have started soliciting opinions and stories about personal information protection and are accepting e-mails.
Therefore, I decided to send an e-mail to the Tokyo Bar Association to give my opinion and experience from the point of view of a research company.
Situation after the enforcement of the Act on the Protection of Personal Information
Since the enactment of the Personal Information Protection Law in April last year, many people have confused personal information with privacy.
They seem to think that they have the right to self-control all personal information and that they cannot disclose personal information without the consent of the individual. Also.
The Japanese people (companies), who are not familiar with the new way of thinking about personal information protection, are completely oblivious to the mechanism of the community, and they are trying to protect personal information.
The short-sighted view is that “if you don’t give out your personal information, it won’t be a problem,” and they’re sticking to that. I don’t care what the harm is done to it.
I don’t care about that. He seems to be committed to selfishness, believing that if his own place (individual or company) does not become a problem, he is fine with it.
If the current way of thinking about protecting personal information begins to walk alone, the good tradition of Japan will collapse, and the humane society of mullahs will not be able to be maintained.
Communities will become awkward and uninhabitable, and with individualism rampant, we can foresee the arrival of many criminal societies where the bad guys sleep better.
My experience as a surveyor
My company mainly conducts human resources research (recruitment and employment surveys) during mid-career hiring by companies, but
With the full implementation of the Personal Information Protection Act, the majority of companies and government offices are no longer responding to the verification of resumes submitted by applicants. The reason.
It says, “Due to the enforcement of the Act on the Protection of Personal Information, we are unable to respond to any personal matters. The same is true of school relations; they don’t respond to graduation confirmations.
In the past, there have been many cases of falsification of resumes at the time of hiring, and about 30% of the hiring surveys we conduct confirm the difference in background.
Given the current situation, there’s a very good chance that we won’t get much confirmation of that. As a result, I can write my resume at will.
The best way to write a resume can be the difference between being accepted and being rejected.
In a recent hiring survey, the respondent was a 45-year-old man. After graduating from university, I left a major construction company in December last year after changing jobs three times.
It was a person who said he was looking for a job. However, both my previous job (3 years of service) and my previous job (15 years of service) did not respond to my work history check because of my personal information.
So I had no choice but to try to find out what was going on around my place of residence, and I got information that I used to work at a certain supermarket.
When the investigators questioned the history, they placed a maneuver at the supermarket based on the information, and were able to confirm that it was “someone who had been inside for about five years. Why?
After questioning whether he had misrepresented his work history, he proceeded with the investigation and discovered that he had been fired six months earlier for embezzling over 3 million yen at his workplace.
To be honest, cases like this happen all the time, but the Ministry of Health, Labor, and Welfare (MHLW) is not concerned about personal information, but rather that the investigation at the time of hiring should be conducted because it may lead to discrimination.
We have given administrative guidance not to carry out the investigation itself for the reason that it is not necessary to do so.
Since the enactment of the Personal Information Protection Law in April of last year, government agencies have not responded at all to the work history checks of retirees. In some government offices, the incumbent
They don’t even respond to whether or not they’re actually working there. This is true for private companies as well, though. Please note that the educational background check is almost impossible at all schools.
On top of that, the Ministry of Justice and the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications are trying to amend the law on family registers and residence certificates, which are the only notarized certificates of identity, from public to private. This, too.
This seems to come from the trend of protecting personal information, but if you make your notarized identity private, you will not be able to use it.
You will be able to impersonate other people anywhere and at any time. There’s no doubt about it.
Such a change in the law would double and triple the current level of fraud.
I’d like to ask you about this, but when you submit your resume to the other party, the contents of your resume for employment, the contents of your declaration for each contract, the contents of your declaration for marriage (including your fishing card), etc.
There is an “implied consent” to be confirmed,
How would you like to interpret this?
In any case, it would be a big problem if all the personal information is prohibited without the consent of the person in question, cannot be discussed, cannot be taken, etc.
