Latest news with #POPIA
Eyewitness News
6 days ago
- Business
- Eyewitness News
Spam calls NOT stopping? Here's what POPIA says and where you can report them...
Unwanted spam calls have consumers pulling their hair out in frustration. No matter who you are, how important you are or how much you earn, you are not exempt from these calls. RELATED: Rise in spam calls leads to increased use of caller identification apps The Protection of Personal Information Act (POPIA) does not prohibit direct marketing but aims to strike a balance between the right to market and the right to privacy. The Act states that your telephone number can only be obtained from a legitimate source – in other words, you have personally given your contact details.
TimesLIVE
11-06-2025
- Politics
- TimesLIVE
Higher education minister keeps up stonewalling on 'SETA panel'
Higher education and training minister Nobuhle Nkabane continues to dig in her heels over the submission to parliament of the names of the 'independent selection panel' she relied on to make controversial appointments to SETA boards last month. Nkabane had until the close of business on Wednesday to submit records and minutes of the meeting of the 'independent panel' that she says advised on the appointments of the chairpersons of Sector Education and Training Authorities that she was last month ordered to reverse by the presidency. But at the eleventh-hour on Wednesday, it emerged that Nkabane wrote a letter dated June 10 to Tebego Letsie, an ANC MP who chairs the portfolio committee on higher education, asking that the June 10 deadline be extended by a further 20 days, to June 20. The higher education committee had given her the deadline of June 11 last week after she refused to disclose the names and full details of her 'independent panel' at a heated meeting, with Nkabane citing the Protection of Personal Information Act. Nkabane landed in hot water several weeks ago after it emerged that she had appointed controversial and politically connected people to chair the boards of the SETAs. Among them were Buyambo Mantashe, the son of minerals minister Gwede Mantashe who was once deputised by Nkabane in that portfolio. Also on the controversial list were former KZN premier Nomusa Ncube-Dube, former KZN MEC Mike Mabuyakhulu and Johannesburg MMC Loyiso Masuku. The move has pitted Nkabane against President Cyril Ramaphosa, who first ordered her to withdraw the names and most recently also asked her to submit a report to him on the matter. Sources in the higher echelons are adamant that Nkabane's stonewalling on this issue is slowly catching up with her and she will soon run out of options, with some casting doubt on the existence of the 'independent selection panel'. In her letter to Letsie, which has since been shared with all members of the higher education committee, she placed on 'record and confirm my full intention to comply with the portfolio committee's request'. Again citing the POPIA and the Promotion of Access to Information Act, Nkabane said she needed more time to ensure that the information she was preparing to send to parliament would be disclosed in a lawful manner. She told her oversight committee that she had been 'assured that I am legally permitted to disclosed the panellists' details in a lawful manner'. 'For these reasons and in acknowledgment of the panellists' rights to privacy, I have written to each of the members of the selection and evaluation panel and advised them of my intention to comply with the portfolio committee's request. 'However, it remains unlikely that my engagements with them will be completed by the 11 June 2025 deadline. In the circumstances, and to allow the panel members an opportunity to respond to my letter or exercise whatever right they may have, I request an extension of the deadline to 30 June 2025.' The higher education committee was expected to discuss its response to Nkabane's deadline request in the coming days.
Yahoo
06-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Rocketseed launches essential email signature guide for healthcare organizations
New resource helps healthcare providers improve branded communication, ensure HIPAA compliance, and boost patient engagement through smart email signature management. CHARLOTTE, N.C., June 6, 2025 /PRNewswire/ -- Rocketseed, a global leader in business email signature management and marketing, has released a new comprehensive resource, Healthcare Email Signature Management: An Essential Guide. Specifically developed for hospitals, clinics, and other healthcare providers, the guide shows how professionally managed email signatures can support compliance, strengthen branding, and enhance communication across the sector, increasing engagement amongst both patients and staff. With healthcare professionals under increasing pressure to meet data protection regulations like HIPAA, maintain patient trust, promote new treatments and key services, and strengthen workplace inclusivity, this guide offers practical, actionable advice for IT leaders, marketers, and frontline staff alike to achieve these goals - all through everyday email. Helping Healthcare Providers Stay Professional, Compliant and ConnectedThe guide outlines how to design, manage and run marketing campaigns with email signatures and banners to meet specific healthcare industry challenges and maximize results. Key topics include: Best practice email signature design tips and examples for healthcare professionals, including doctors and administrators. Benefits of centralized signature management, including guaranteed brand consistency, and saving IT time through automating all staff signature updates. Importance of using HIPAA (plus ISO27001, GDPR and POPIA) compliant email signature management software to ensure patient confidentiality and data protection. Use of targeted, interactive email banners for promoting seasonal health campaigns, patient education, and new treatments and services - all illustrated with examples. Internal email banner use for HR, training, and strengthening workplace culture. Role of robust analytics and real-time reporting in measuring email signature and banner success and ROI. Rocketseed's platform is HIPAA compliant, works across all email clients (including Microsoft 365 and Google Workspace) and devices, and helps healthcare IT teams save hundreds of hours through automation and user directory synchronization. "In today's highly-regulated healthcare environment, clear and compliant communication is essential," says Damian Hamp-Adams, North America CEO at Rocketseed. "Our guide shows how email signatures - when centrally managed and professionally designed - can do more than meet HIPAA requirements. They become a trusted communication tool across the entire organization." Driving Engagement Through Data and DesignThe guide also explores how analytics and real-time reporting can optimize engagement. Healthcare organizations can track all recipient interactions with their email banners and signature content, enabling smarter campaign decisions, such as refining designs and optimizing targeting, to generate greater return on their communication efforts. "Our goal is to help healthcare providers meet compliance needs while turning every email into a powerful communication channel," adds Damian. "This guide shows that with the right tools, even email signatures can play a vital role in delivering better patient care and stronger internal communication." This new release joins Rocketseed's growing library of industry-focused resources, including essential guides for hotels & hospitality, transportation & logistics, insurance, pharmaceutical and construction industries - each tailored to the unique compliance, branding, and communication needs of their sectors. About Rocketseed Rocketseed is a leading provider of email signature management and marketing solutions, used and trusted by businesses worldwide. With tools for centralized signature control, automated updates, targeted banner campaigns, and robust analytics, Rocketseed helps organizations maintain brand consistency, drive engagement, and ensure compliance — all through their everyday email. Learn more at Jennifer 547354 View original content to download multimedia: SOURCE Rocketseed (United States) Inc
IOL News
29-05-2025
- Politics
- IOL News
Lesufi's government undermines the role of opposition by withholding information
Panyaza Lesufi The Gauteng Premier, Panyaza Lesufi, has refused the request for access to the records requested, says the writer. Image: Oupa Mokoena Independent Newspapers The Democratic Alliance (DA) Gauteng, the official opposition in the province, is committed to safeguarding South Africa's constitutional democracy, the principles and values espoused in the founding document. Nonetheless, our efforts as the opposition to conduct oversight over the elected executive are increasingly thwarted. The growing barriers to effective and meaningful conduct oversight are deliberate withholding and denial of crucial information, procedural delays and protracted legal battles that severely undermine our oversight role. The affected areas are irregular procurement and contract management, unlawful appointments, and the lack of consequence management due to not enforcing recommendations from disciplinary action. The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa explicitly highlights the separation of powers among the legislature, executive and judiciary, establishing much-needed mechanisms for effective oversight, a fundamental pillar of good governance. In a healthy democracy, transparency and accountability are important principles. Laws regulating access to information are put in place to ensure that the public has access to the decision-making processes of those in power to hold them accountable for their actions. There has been a growing reluctance or outright refusal by the governing party and those in leadership to provide vital information to enable effective scrutiny. Effective legislative oversight relies heavily on access to accurate, timely and complete information. The legislature's ability to scrutinise government actions, expenditure, and hold public officials accountable centres on this access. When the executive withholds information, be it through vague, sub-par or incomplete responses to questions in the house, dismissing Promotion of Access to Information Act (PAIA) requests, or invoking the Protection of Personal Information Act (POPIA) to shield data, our capacity as opposition to fulfil this oversight mandate diminishes. This casts a shadow on the executive promise of good governance and fulfilling their mandate. This increase in information withholding has profound implications. Without transparency, there is no way to verify whether departments are acting in the best interests of the public or if resources are being misappropriated. This lack of transparency and accountability becomes a breeding ground for corrupt and unethical conduct, financial mismanagement and misconduct, which ultimately leads to poor service delivery. Through the Promotion of Access to Information Act (PAIA), the DA has since October last year demanded full access to 177 forensic reports dating from 2016 to the present. The Gauteng Premier, Panyaza Lesufi, refused the request for access to the records requested. However, the refusal did not provide adequate reasons based on the provisions of the Promotion of Access to Information Act (PAIA) that the Office of the Premier relied on. The DA Gauteng appealed the decision to refuse access to the reports internally in November, but the appeal was dismissed the following month. In January, we approached the Information Regulator, where the pre-investigation report found that 'there is a prima facie case that the complainant met the minimum requirements prescribed in PAIA, in that the request form was duly submitted to the public body.' According to the Information Regulator, the alleged refusal by Lesufi's office to grant access and failure to state adequate reasons for the refusal, including the provisions of PAIA relied on, necessitates an investigation of the complaint to ascertain whether the requester (DA) must be given access to the records. The use of legal provisions such as POPIA to justify withholding information raises concerns about the misuse of privacy laws as shields rather than safeguards. While protecting personal data is essential, these laws must not be weaponised to conceal misconduct and prevent public scrutiny. There must be a balanced approach that respects individual rights without compromising the public's right to know when such disclosure is both lawful and justifiable. Furthermore, any reliance on privacy concerns must be weighed against the public interest in disclosure, particularly in cases where the public interest outweighs any purported confidentiality claims. While POPIA is designed to regulate the lawful processing of personal information, it balances the right to privacy with the right to access information. The Act explicitly provides for instances where disclosure is necessary and lawful. The ruling, therefore, emphasises how difficult it is for the public and government to balance between privacy, transparency, and due process. This is not the first time that our PAIA applications have been unsuccessful in what we increasingly view as the shielding of corrupt officials, politicians, and activities within the Gauteng Provincial Government (GPG). The biennial report of the Gauteng Ethics Advisory Council (GEAC) for 2025 has restated what the DA Gauteng has been exposing about corruption, maladministration, non-compliance with relevant legislation and regulations and ethical violations severely affecting the delivery of services to residents of Gauteng.
IOL News
15-05-2025
- Politics
- IOL News
Why South Africa's leaders should lead by example with lifestyle audits
Integrity activist Devoshum Moodley-Veera says South African leaders must undergo lifestyle audits to restore public trust and combat corruption. Image: Ayanda Ndamane/ Independent Newspapers Suppose South Africa is to turn the tide on fraud and corruption. In that case, the country's political leaders, including President Cyril Ramaphosa, need to lead by example and subject themselves to lifestyle audits and be transparent with the process and findings to the public. This is according to Devoshum Moodley-Veera, an Integrity Activist, PhD Student at the School of Public Leadership and ACCERUS at Stellenbosch University. Lifestyle audits have become topical after a recently released report revealed that 37% of senior Gauteng provincial government officials failed their mandatory lifestyle audits, designed to expose corruption and financial misconduct. On the other hand, the National Home Builders Registration Council (NHBRC), an entity of the Department of Human Settlements, said it has referred more than 150 employees for lifestyle audits. Moodley-Veera describes a lifestyle audit as one of the many tools to combat fraud and corruption in the public sector. It is a detective, preventative, corrective, and monitoring tool. 'Political leaders must have lifestyle audits instituted against them, and be very clear and transparent about their lifestyle audit process. They need to start with the change. If they are calling for lifestyle audits, why are lifestyle audits not done on them as well? 'In the public service, lifestyle audits need to be done throughout. The ministers, deputy ministers, Director-Generals, Members of Parliament, Portfolio Committee Members, Chief Directors, Directors, the deputy directors, the ANC's top six and members of other political parties must also undergo lifestyle audits. Even the president and the deputy president need to go through this,' Moodley-Veera said. She said this would be a step in the right direction for the state towards regaining public trust, because it is necessary to perform lifestyle audits on individuals entrusted with the resources of 'our' country. She added that if the government is trying to be transparent, they need to make sure that the whole report is published, so that it can be discussed and people can understand what exactly the lifestyle audit entails, what the findings were, and the issues raised. 'There also needs to be a media briefing, explaining the number of people subjected to lifestyle audits and those found to be wanting. You need to name a shame at times. You can't use secrecy or privacy as an excuse. 'And I do understand that we need to take into account the two laws that we have, which are the Promotion of Access to Information Act (PAIA) and the Protection of Personal Information Act (POPIA). Where there is public interest, you need to ensure transparency in dealing with lifestyle audits,' she said. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Next Stay Close ✕ "Even in my lectures, I always say you need to live by ethics. Be the change you want to see, as Mahatma Gandhi put it. It shouldn't be a passing thing that you want to improve ethics in the country and then start implementing lifestyle audits, whistleblowing, unexplained wealth audits, etc. If you're not being ethical when doing your work, it won't change," Moodley-Veera said. 'Corruption is very high in our country. Certain laws limit lifestyle audits, for example, the POPIA, which limits the processing of personal information. So, for example, if a forensic auditor or a forensic investigator or an internal auditor needs to perform a lifestyle audit, there needs to be a lot of processes to try and get consent to actually institute a lifestyle audit, because people claim privacy and defamation issues. 'So, as someone conducting a lifestyle audit, you end up having a number of legal actions against you. You find that PAIA, on the one hand, promotes access to information. But POPIA says no, you can't process personal information. So there are limitations with these two acts when trying to implement lifestyle audits in terms of legislation,' Moodley-Veera said. She added that public servants generally use these two acts to avoid lifestyle audits in the public service. They say that it is an infringement of their privacy rights. They were not supposed to communicate their income and expenditure and assets, and verification processes. The consequences for failing lifestyle audits in South Africa are inadequate because they depend on whether the leadership (political or organisational) wants to take action or not. It is very secretive on how you really deal with the findings of a lifestyle audit, she said. 'But then you do get situations from a criminal point of view, where, for example, the SIU does have the power to institute criminal charges against an individual that they found to have not lived according to their means. But that is in cases of a very high level, for example, State Capture. The National Prosecuting Authority also has the power to institute legal action. 'With SARS, which does lifestyle audits on their taxpayers, what happens is they do freeze the individual's assets, they do recoup the assets, but also it is limited. It's limited in the sense that SARS would do their investigation and then it needs to go through a court process to try and institute criminal proceedings,' she said. South Africa needs to have a single legislation to deal with lifestyle audits, which will be a blanket approach for the public and private sectors. She said the private sector currently does lifestyle audits at its discretion. 'There actually should not be any thresholds, for example, in the legislation, you must not even say that if you are an organisation of more than 50 people, then only you submit or institute lifestyle audits. It needs to be for everyone. For example, your big retailers, small shops, etc, because corruption comes in different forms and ways. So if you are trying to address this, you need to use a balanced approach and be consistent in dealing with this,' Moodley-Veera said. The Guide to Implement Lifestyle Audits in the Public Service, signed by the then Minister of Public Service and Administration, Senzo Mchunu, came into effect on April 1, 2021, and mandates lifestyle audits for National and Provincial Government Departments, in line with the Public Service Regulations of 2016. However, Moodley-Veera said it is not an Act, but a directive that guides public service, public servants to undergo lifestyle audits, and the role players involved. But it is only a directive, not legally binding. The second biennial report recently released by the Gauteng Ethics Advisory Council (GEAC) revealed that nearly 37% of senior Gauteng provincial government officials failed their mandatory lifestyle audits, designed to expose corruption and financial misconduct. Over 150 engaged in illegal business dealings, despite legal prohibitions, in key departments like Education, Sport, Health, and Infrastructure Development. Gauteng Premier Panyaza Lesufi has since welcomed the report and said the provincial government will respond in detail within 14 days after assessing and engaging with the findings. Opposition parties have also demanded that action be taken. Alec Moemi, Director-General for the Department of Human Settlements, this week told the Parliamentary Portfolio Committee on Human Settlements that over 150 employees at the NHBRC have been referred for lifestyle audits, requiring them to explain their financial income. He said the audit started in 2024 after a directive by former minister Mmamoloko Kubayi across the department's entities. The SIU has completed the audit at the Community Schemes Ombud Service. The audits were not finalised and were not ready for presentation to the portfolio committee. Phases one and two of the audits of 82 executives and management personnel were completed at NHBRC. Phase 2 of the audit involves 152 employees being interviewed to provide explanations, he said.
