Separation of Powers For Consent Conformance

Owned by Mark Lizar (Unlicensed)
Last updated: May 28, 2020

Due to the multi-community nature of the Notice & Consent work inputs there is a requirement to explore what a clear separation of powers between the various parties and the governance ecosystems this work pertains too. At the moment, a separation of powers is not defined in this this context so, this is also hard to use with out more digging and more research into this context.  

 Separation of powers is a doctrine of constitutional law under which the three branches of government (executive, legislative, and judicial) are kept separate. This is also known as the system of checks and balances, because each branch is given certain powers so as to check and balance the other branches. 

DLC tech and its conformance can be a tool for this, and the contribution of the fields for DLC to this work, could be all that is required. 

The topic for discussion is how and if anything needs to be done in consideration of separation of powers, should other efforts contribute related work here or be able to do work in other communities and contribute it to the work stream?  Are their IPR issues for this which can be addressed ?  

  • Hyperledger Consent Lifecycle Project has exploring the work continuing in the newly setup ToiP governance community, in which  Digital Ledger Consent technology might be suited.
  • Key elements for Separation of Powers should be considered by the parties, these can include; 
    • Kantara Requirements: 
      • Review by LC and perhaps Kantara ISO - BOT Liaison Committee
    •  
    •  what ever approach for separation of powers is taken, it should be flexible so that future SDO's, industry and trade associations, or standards and blockchain communities can feel comfortable with the approach chosen
    • that the Notice&Consent group is scoped to focus on the legal requirements and agnostic to specific group or community requirements   
      • legal meaning the OECD Guideline, EU Convention 108 +, ISO 29184 ( and ISO/IEC 27560 Privacy technologies: Consent record information structure) 
        for international conformance with national and regional privacy laws

References

  • the OASIS - COEL standard is an adopter of the Consent Receipt v1.1 and has provided  requirements back to this effort, after adoption the CR V1.1 works.  This Feed back is directed at section  pages 72 & 73: http://docs.oasis-open.org/coel/COEL/v1.0/cs02/COEL-v1.0-cs02.pdf 
  • This section provides a requirement for separation of concerns, and provide some insight into this process. 
  • In addition, the OASIS-COEL Specification is under RF-RAND - in order to be compatible with the IPR governance if they were to be require to interoperate with the IPR of the Consent Receipt v1.1 which is written under a very similar RF-RAND IPR,


Suggestions 

  • agree to work on and use the Kantara ISI fields for ISO, 
  • contribute - the work - schema and inputs for these fields back to the N&C 
  • don't hinder others from using it -