Constitutional Court Amicus Curiae Brief | National Health Insurance Database Constitutional Litigation Case

Regarding the National Health Insurance Database Constitutional Litigation Case (Case Hui-Tzu-13769) initiated by civil society organizations, the Constitutional Court held oral arguments today (April 26) on the constitutionality of Article 6, Paragraph 1, Subparagraph 4 of the "Personal Data Protection Act"—which stipulates that "Data pertaining to a natural person's medical records, healthcare, genetics, sex life, physical examination and criminal records shall not be collected, processed or used unless on any of the following bases: ... 4. where it is necessary for statistics gathering or academic research by a government agency or an academic institution for the purpose of healthcare, public health, or crime prevention, provided that such data, as processed by the data provider or as disclosed by the data collector, may not lead to the identification of a specific data subject"—as well as Article 16, Subparagraph 5 of the same Act "where it is necessary for statistics gathering or academic research by a government agency or an academic institution for public interests; provided that such data, as processed by the data provider or as disclosed by the data collector, may not lead to the identification of a specific data subject."

The eID Litigation Pro Bono Legal Team maintains that when reviewing digital privacy cases, the Constitutional Court should examine Taiwan's digital policies from a holistic perspective. Observing the government's vigorous promotion of digital transformation for a smart government—specifically eID and T-Road, which forcibly digitize citizens' information—reveals that the provisions at issue in the National Health Insurance Database Constitutional Litigation Case serve as the pivotal nexus for linking data across numerous government databases, carrying immense symbolic and guiding significance. Consequently, through an application filed by the Judicial Reform Foundation, the eID Litigation Pro Bono Legal Team was approved by the Constitutional Court on March 3 to act as an amicus curiae. They subsequently submitted an amicus curiae brief on March 18 and a supplemental amicus curiae brief on April 19 (Note: As the Justices are still deliberating whether to accept this supplemental brief, it has not yet been published on the Constitutional Court website). It is hoped that when determining the constitutionality of the disputed provisions, the Constitutional Court will concurrently assess the implementation trajectory of our nation's overall digital policy and apply a strict standard of constitutional review to governmental infringements upon citizens' rights to privacy and informational self-determination in the digital age, particularly given the absence of up-to-date protective mechanisms and measures.

The eID Litigation Pro Bono Legal Team has authorized the public release of the two amicus curiae briefs for public reference, and welcomes feedback and comments from all sectors.

Supplemental Brief