De-anonymization' and 'Re-anonymization'. Why Traditional Assumptions No Longer Apply

• Author: Karen Eltis
• Pages: 93-99

93

CHAPTER 4

“De-anonymization” and “Re-anonymization”

Why Traditional Assumptions No Longer Apply

Notwithstanding what was said previously, and in a sincere but at times

misguided eort to enhance access, courts and quasi-judicial bodies are

increasingly eager to digitiz e. Not only are individual judges (for the most

part) electing to go digital, judicial associations such as the Canadian Ju-

dicial Council (CJC) actively encourage online publication,1 and some

jurisdictions legally require it.2 us, for instance,“Quebec has perhaps

the most distinct legislative framework of all for publication of decisions

made by tribunals. Quebec access to information law captures adminis-

trative bodies, but, unlike other jurisdictions, the legislation specically

requires public disclosure of tribunal decisions . . . .”3 us, the re gulation

applicable to Québec’s access and privacy legislation reads as follows:

A public body that makes reasoned decisions in the exercise of adjudi-

cative functions must send the decisions to the Société québécoise

d’information juridique, which must distribute them, in accordance

with the by-law made under section 21 of the Act respec ting the Société

1 David Loukidel is, Privacy and Openness in Tribunal Deci sions (Victoria, BC:

Oce of the Information & Pr ivacy Commissioner for British Columbia, 2 008),

online:www.cba.org/cba/cle/pdf/loukidelis_david.pdf. At 13, Loukidelis ind i-

cated that the Ca nadian Judicial Council “concluded in a 20 05 publication that

all judgments should be publ ished on the internet to enhance access to ju stice

and facilitate lega l research.”

2 For example, the United States. See Louk idelis, ibid at 6, citing Canad ian Judi-

cial Council , Judges Technology Advisory C ommittee, Model Policy for Access

to Court Records in Can ada (2005) at para 19, online: CJC www.cjc-ccm.gc.ca/

cmslib/general/news_pub_techissues_AccessPolicy_2005_en.pdf.

3 Loukidelis,above note 1 at 10.