Digital Document Treatment, Videovigilance

The part of the complaint relating to the treatment of images recorded by video surveillance cameras in the municipality is archived, because when the complainant submitted applications for the right of access (art.15 GDPR) and opposition right (art.21 GDPR) the cameras were not yet working. Nor can the city council be held responsible for the actions of an agent who had archival documents concerning third parties in his digital folder, as it would be to demand an almost impossible degree of diligence to control the contents of all personal folders of agents. Advertisement to the City Council (Art.58.2.a GDPR) and is required to remove undue documentation, and it is proposed to initiate disciplinary actions (Art.77.3 LOPDGDD).