Anonymised respondent
Referred to police for prosecution (s.20). DPO, 12 June 2012.
The facts
The complainant received an unsolicited political SMS on his mobile and alleged that the operator's confidential database of subscriber numbers had been supplied to an unauthorised third party. The named marketing officer denied ever speaking to him, a call trace found no call routed between the parties on the alleged date, and site-visit logs could not confirm the extension used. The operator explained that bulk-messaging systems can generate numbers at random independently of its network.
Orders and outcome
The Commissioner found evidence on record to suggest the offence of unlawfully disclosing a subscriber's mobile number to an unauthorised party may have been committed, punishable by a fine not exceeding Rs 200,000 and imprisonment not exceeding 5 years, and referred the matter to the police for further investigation and prosecution if required. The respondent was reminded of its duties on consent and purpose limitation. Dated 12 June 2012.
Cite this decision
Same respondent
- 17 August 2011 · violation established
- 26 August 2011 · inadvertent disclosure found
- 20 August 2015 · enquiry closed for lack of complainant collaboration
- 20 January 2016 · no offence found
- 14 December 2016 · no offence found
- 6 January 2017 · no offence found
- 6 April 2017 · no breach found after clarifications
- 14 October 2016 · enquiry closed
- 6 May 2019 · no offence found
- 12 June 2013 · s.22 offence found proved
- 9 March 2017 · enquiry closed under section 6 (resolved to the satisfaction of all parties)
- 17 December 2018 · enquiry closed under section 6 (resolved to the satisfaction of all parties)
- 10 October 2019 · no offence found
- 17 October 2019 · no offence found
- 22 June 2020 · enquiry closed under section 6 (resolved to the satisfaction of all parties)
- 28 June 2019 · no offence found
Track Mauritius enforcement
Tell us your jurisdictions and we email you when a regulator's decision passes verification. Privacy.