Check out this new resource that explains the interaction between LA FOIP and The Municipalities Act in the province of Saskatchewan and as it pertains to personal information.

When AI Turns Dark–Warning: this blog contains details about suicide. If you are struggling with your mental health, call 988 for 24/7 voice or text support or visit 988.ca

Check out our latest blog on safeguarding your information during the holiday season

Privacy Commissioner finds that Canadians have a right to have information de-listed from online search engine results in limited circumstances.

Joint investigation of TikTok Pte. Ltd.

How systemic delays, a backlog of overdue requests, and process errors led to UBC having the lowest rate of compliance.

NEW Checklist for Healthcare Organizations Considering the use of an AI Scribe

Privacy Commissioner of Canada to investigate cybersecurity breach at WestJet

PowerSchool commits to strengthened breach measures following engagement with the Privacy Commissioner of Canada

Sask. information and privacy commissioner brings a focus on cyber security, AI

Statement from Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Saskatchewan on LifeLabs Privacy Breach

Statement from Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Saskatchewan on LifeLabs Privacy Breach

The office of the Commissioner is investigating a cyberattack affecting health care information of millions of customers in Canada and approximately 93,000 residents in Saskatchewan

 Thursday, December 19, 2019 – The Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Saskatchewan (IPC) is undertaking an investigation into a cyberattack on the computer systems of Canadian laboratory testing company LifeLabs. The office is working closely with the Information and Privacy Commissioner of British Columbia and the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario who are also undertaking investigations.

LifeLabs is Canada’s largest provider of general diagnostic and specialty laboratory testing services. The company has four core divisions – LifeLabs, LifeLabs Genetics, Rocky Mountain Analytical, and Excelleris.

On December 13, 2019, LifeLabs reported a cyberattack on their computer systems to the IPC. On December 17, 2019, they confirmed they were the subject of an attack affecting the personal information of millions of customers, in Ontario, British Columbia and Saskatchewan. They told us that the affected systems contain information of approximately 15 million LifeLab customers across Canada, including name, address, email, customer logins and passwords, health card numbers, and lab tests.

The IPC investigation will, among other things, examine the scope of the breach, the circumstances leading to it, and what, if any, measures LifeLabs could have taken to prevent and contain the breach. My office will also investigate ways LifeLabs can help ensure the future security of personal information and avoid further attacks.

If you have visited a LifeLabs for a test or received a test/service from LifeLabs Genetics and Rocky Mountain Analytical, then it is likely your information is in LifeLabs database.

LifeLabs has set up a dedicated phone line and information on their website for individuals affected by the breach. To find out more, the public should visit customernotice.lifelabs.com or contact LifeLabs at 1-888-918-0467.

Alternatively, persons who have questions or wish to file a complaint can contact my office at 306-787-0488 or 1-877-748-2298.

Note to media: My office will not discuss the details of the investigation while it is ongoing. My office will issue a public report once the investigation is complete.

Ronald J. Kruzeniski
Information and Privacy Commissioner of Saskatchewan

Media contact:
Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Saskatchewan
Kim Mignon-Stark
kmignon-stark@oipc.sk.ca 306-798-0173

Download PDF

Was this page helpful?

Canada’s access to information and privacy guardians urge governments to modernize legislation to better protect Canadians

Information and Privacy Ombudspersons and Commissioners from across Canada are urging their governments to modernize access to information and privacy laws.

In a joint resolution, Canada’s access to information and privacy guardians note that along with its many benefits, the rapid advancement of technologies has had an impact on fundamental democratic principles and human rights, including access to information and privacy. They further point out that Canadians have growing concerns about the use and exploitation of their personal information by both government and private businesses.

“Most Canadian access and privacy laws have not been fundamentally changed since their passage, some more than 35 years ago,” the resolution says. “They have sadly fallen behind the laws of many other countries in the level of privacy protection provided to citizens.”

While there have been legislative advances made in some Canadian jurisdictions, work is still required to ensure modern legislation is in place across the country in order to better protect Canadians.

The resolution notes that privacy and access to information are fundamental to self-determination, democracy and good government. It calls for:

  • a legislative framework to ensure the responsible development and use of artificial intelligence and machine learning technologies
  • all public and private sector entities engaged in handling personal information to be subject to privacy laws
  • Enforcement powers, such as legislating order-making powers and the power to impose penalties, fines or sanctions
  • the right of access should apply to all information held by public entities, regardless of format

Canada’s Information and Privacy Commissioners and Ombudspersons reaffirmed their commitment to collaborate, make recommendations to government, and to continue to study and make public how access and privacy laws impact all Canadians.

Related Documents

Joint statement – Modernizing Access and Privacy Laws

Was this page helpful?

Best practices when using USB drives

When thinking about this topic I decided to research how big of a USB drive I could actually purchase. I was surprised to see you can purchase one that stores 2 terabytes (TB) of data. Just think about that – something the size of a car key can 2 TB of data. With the ability to store that much data in a very small and portable way, it is important to be super vigilant when using memory sticks.

In January 2018, the IPC developed a resource – Helpful Tips: Mobile Device Security. This resource offers many tips and considerations that are helpful when using memory sticks, including administrative safeguards, technical safeguards and physical safeguards. However, here is a quick list of some things to keep in mind when using USB Drives:

  • Encryption/password protected devices: Only purchase USB drives that have encryption or password protection functionality.
  • Strong passwords: If you have a need to store personal information (pi), personal health information (phi) or other forms of sensitive or confidential information on a USB drive, be sure to have it locked by a strong password.
  • De-identify: When storing pi/phi on a USB, de-identify the information wherever possible.
  • Delete data: Immediately delete the data from the USB once it is no longer needed.
  • Unattended USBs: Do not leave USB’s in vehicles or unattended in public. If absolutely necessary, lock it in the trunk or glove box where it would be out of site. When not in use in your office, be sure to lock it up.
  • Access on a Need-to-Know Basis: When storing data on a device, access to that data should be on a need-to-know basis.
  • Lost or stolen USBs: Report lost or stolen USB’s immediately to your supervisor and the Privacy Officer.
  • Disposal: At the end of its lifecycle, be sure that all the data has been wiped from the USB. Once that is done, safely dispose of or destroy the USB before disposal.

For more applicable information on USB drive use, please see the following resources:

 

Was this page helpful?

Search Checklist

One government institution that we work with often has developed a search checklist “Responsive Records Search Log”, which has really assisted them and my office knowing that a thorough search was made. I asked permission and permission was given to take their search checklist and modify it so that it might be applicable to any government institution or local authority.

I encourage Access and Privacy coordinators to take a look at the sample search checklist and decide whether such a search checklist would help in ensuring thorough searches. Certainly, one should feel free to adapt the search checklist to the circumstances in one’s organization.

The search checklist could be distributed by the Access and Privacy coordinator to those that he or she has identified as part of his or her search strategy. Along with the search checklist, the Access and Privacy coordinator should give the recipient a timeline to complete the search and indicate whether he or she is only seeking a representative sample for building a fee estimate or a full search for responsive records.

I believe the search checklist is helpful when multiple employees in an organization have to do searches. I believe it assists the Access and Privacy coordinator in determining whether the organization has done a thorough search.

Please take a look at the sample search checklist on our website here. Of course if you have any suggests to improve this search checklist, please email my office.

Was this page helpful?

Technology and function creep

“I love technology,

But not as much as you, you see.

But I still love technology.

Always and forever.”

  • Kip from the movie Napoleon Dynamite

Technology takes on a central role in most, if not all, workplaces. It is difficult to imagine a workplace without computers. Further, cloud computing is enabling workplaces to organize themselves far more dynamically while completing tasks efficiently. With all of its benefits, we must be cognizant of technology’s impact upon employee privacy.

“Function creep” occurs when information is used for a purpose that is not the original specified purpose. For example, a workplace may install a security system that requires employees to sign-in or sign-out of the workplace. The purpose of the security system is to prevent unauthorized access to a particular workplace. However, organizations may end up using this information about individual employees to track employee attendance. This could be a privacy breach if the organization has not fulfilled the collections requirements in The Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FOIP) and The Local Authority Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (LA FOIP). For example, if the organization is collecting the information to track employee attendance without informing employees of the purpose for which the information is being collected pursuant to subsection 26(2) of FOIP or subsection 25(2) of LA FOIP, then this would be a privacy breach.

Function creep is often unintended. However, this is not an excuse for organizations to breach employee privacy. Below are some suggestions that organizations could undertake to avoid or stop function creep:

  • Have at least one employee designated as the privacy officer.
  • Have a process in place so that employees (or members of the public) can raise concerns and that those concerns are investigated.
  • Since function creep is often unintended, organizations who learn that technologies or processes that are committing function creep should be open to adjusting so that the function creep is discontinued.
  • Regularly undertake privacy impact assessments (PIA) so they can comprehensively analyze and evaluate how technology impacts privacy. A PIA is a process that should be undertaken not only by the privacy officer, but managers and employees implementing new technology, processes, projects, and/or programs. PIAs require teamwork!

For more information, check out my office’s resource called Technology’s Impact Upon Employee Privacy.

 

Was this page helpful?

Privacy versus Confidentiality

Privacy and confidentiality are two concepts often mistaken to be the same thing.

In terms of information, privacy is the right of an individual to have some control over how his or her personal information (or personal health information) is collected, used, and/or disclosed. In Saskatchewan, individuals’ privacy is maintained through FOIP, LA FOIP and HIPA. These three laws establish individuals’ right to privacy by setting out how government institutions, local authorities, and trustees are to collect, use, and/or disclose personal information or personal health information.

Confidentiality, on the other hand, is a far slimmer concept than privacy. Confidentiality is the duty to ensure information is kept secret only to the extent possible.

It is important to distinguish between these two concepts. This is because organizations often require employees to sign confidentiality agreements (i.e., keep information secret) but then offer very little or no privacy training.  There are certainly circumstances in which employees of government institutions, local authorities, and trustee organizations need to legitimately share information in order for their programs to function. However, sharing information may seem contrary to what confidentiality agreements require of them.

Privacy Officers play a vital role in ensuring that government institutions, local authorities, and trustee organizations are in compliance with FOIP, LA FOIP, and/or HIPA.  Privacy Officers should be experts in these three laws who can advise their organizations when it is okay to collect, use, and/or disclose personal information (or personal health information).

For fun, below are two haikus to help explain privacy and confidentiality

Privacy

Collecting, using,

disclosing and safeguarding,

personal info.

 

Confidentiality

Keep info secret.

Do not tell anybody.

Or else you lose trust.

Was this page helpful?

What Makes a Good Submission?

The staff at the OIPC recently watched a webinar called The Art of Persuasive Speaking put on by The Canadian Bar Association. Some of the points made in the webinar are relevant to public bodies providing submissions to our office. I thought I would share some further tips pulled from that webinar.

When you want to be persuasive in your arguments to our office:

1. Have a plan and prepare:

Your goal is to convince our office that the public body is in compliance with the legislation.

  • Assemble all the evidence (information) relevant for our office;
  • Lay out the facts, tests, law and argument;
  • Focus on the key disputed facts and issues; and
  • Understand the role of the public body as it pertains to burden of proof (section 61 of FOIP/section 51 of LA FOIP).

2. Know your audience:

Understanding the role of our office is important in tailoring your arguments. Our office is a neutral oversight body. Our office is being asked to make a decision and recommendations.  We have found that when dealing with other organizations, a cooperative approach really works. We are not on the side of the applicant, third party or the public body. We are the first level of appeal before the Court of King’s Bench (2nd level of appeal).

  • Remember, our office will also be receiving arguments from the opposing parties in the case; and
  • How persuasive a party’s arguments are will influence the outcome of the case and you want yours to be most persuasive.

3. Use persuasive techniques:

Your goal is to make our office want to decide in your favour. Show us how to get there.

  • Put yourself in the shoes of our office, and ask: “If I had to make this decision, what would I need to make it?” This will help you focus on the key issues and anticipate questions our office would likely ask;
  • Use solid arguments and deliver only true and accurate statements;
  • Put your best (strongest) arguments first;
  • Avoid filling your submission with endless details without context;
  • Broad general statements are not persuasive; and
  • Present arguments from reputable sources.

These are all effective means of putting your arguments forward, which is in turn more persuasive. For more assistance on preparing your submission, Index of Records and/or the record itself, you can refer to our resource, What to Expect During a Review with the IPC:  A Resource for Public Bodies and Trustees. 

Was this page helpful?

LA FOIP, Municipalities and Cities

Access to information under LA FOIP

One of the purposes of The Local Authority Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (LA FOIP) is to ensure that local authorities are transparent and accountable to the public. One way of facilitating transparency and accountability is to provide individuals with the right to access records in the possession or under the control of a local authority. Section 5 of LA FOIP provides individuals with the right to access to records in the possession or under the control of a local authority:

5 Subject to this Act and the regulations, every person has a right to and, on an application made in accordance with this Part, shall be permitted access to records that are in the possession or under the control of a local authority.

Individuals may use this form to submit an access to information request to a local authority: http://www.qp.gov.sk.ca/documents/Forms/L27-1R1-B.pdf.

When a local authority receives a written request, it should process the request formally under LA FOIP. This includes assisting the Applicant to identify the record he/she is seeking, issuing a fee estimate if it is appropriate to do so, conducting a reasonable search for records, consulting with third parties, and issuing a formal response in accordance with section 7 of LA FOIP. For more information, please consult my office’s Best Practices for Responding to Access Requests.

Are there records that citizens may access without submitting a formal request under LA FOIP?

A person is entitled under section 117 of The Municipalities Act (MA) to inspect and obtain copies of certain types of records, including contracts approved by council, financial statements prepared in accordance with section 185 of MA, and council’s approved meeting minutes. What this means is that individuals should not have to submit a formal request under LA FOIP to obtain the records they are entitled to under the MA.

Similarly, a person is entitled under section 91 of The Cities Act (CA) and section 133 of The Northern Municipalities Act, 2010 (NMA) to inspect and obtain copies of similar types of records described above. What this means is that individuals should not have to submit a formal request under LA FOIP to obtain the records they are entitled to under the CA.

Do councillors have a right to records?

As a part of their duties, councillors are to represent the interests of the citizens living within their constituency at council meetings and council committee meetings. Councillors must also be informed in order to effectively participate in such meetings. In order to stay informed, councillors should have access to records related to the municipality/city business without requiring them to make a formal access to information request under LA FOIP to gain access.

Municipalities and cities should have policies and procedures in place that enables councillors to have access to records related to municipality/city business. Councillors should also agree to keep matters confidential until the matter is discussed publicly at a council meeting or council committee meeting.

Section 92 of the MA outlines the duties of councillors as follows:

92 Councillors have the following duties:

(a) to represent the public and to consider the well-being and interests of the municipality;

(b) to  participate  in  developing  and  evaluating  the  policies,  services  and  programs of the municipality;

(c) to  participate  in  council  meetings  and  council  committee  meetings  and  meetings of other bodies to which they are appointed by the council;

(d) to  ensure  that  administrative  practices  and  procedures  are  in  place  to  implement the decisions of council;

(e) subject to the bylaws made pursuant to section 81.1, to keep in confidence matters discussed in private or to be discussed in private at a council or council committee meeting until discussed at a meeting held in public;

(f) to maintain the financial integrity of the municipality;

(g) to perform any other duty or function imposed on councillors by this or any other Act or by the council.

Section 65 of the CA and section 106 of the NMA is very similar to the above.

When should council meetings or council committee meetings be held in-camera?

The MA, CA, and NMA requires councils and council committees to meet in public. Parts or all of a meeting can be closed to the public if the matter being discussed is within one of the exemptions in Part III of LA FOIP. Part III of LA FOIP provides for limited and specific circumstances in which information should not be disclosed.  Generally speaking, councils and council committees should make efforts to conduct most of their meetings in public unless one of the limited and specific circumstances in Part III of LA FOIP exists.

An example of when councils or council committees should hold part of a meeting closed to the public is if a matter to be discussed includes personal information of a citizen. This is because Part III of LA FOIP includes the following exemption:

15 (1) A head may refuse to give access to a record that:

…

(b) discloses agendas or the substance of deliberations of meetings of a local authority if:

…

(ii) the  matters  discussed  at  the  meetings  are  of  such  a  nature  that  access to the records could be refused pursuant to this Part or Part IV.

Part IV of LA FOIP provides that local authorities must not disclose personal information unless it has consent of an individual or the disclosure is in accordance with section 28 or 29 of LA FOIP:

28 (1) No  local  authority  shall  disclose  personal  information  in  its  possession  or  under  its  control  without  the  consent,  given  in  the  prescribed  manner,  of  the  individual to whom the information relates except in accordance with this section or section 29.

To understand when a meeting should be closed to the public, municipalities and cities should have a sound understanding of LA FOIP. For support, municipalities should contact the Ministry of Government Relations. They should also contact the Ministry of Justice (Access and Privacy Branch) at 306-798-0222 or accessprivacyjustice@gov.sk.ca, who makes training available to cities and municipalities.

Open Government, proactive disclosure, and routine disclosure

Municipalities and cities across Canada are leading the way in open government initiatives, including the City of Regina and the City of Saskatoon. These initiatives allow for citizens to gain access to information without submitting a formal access to information request. Check out the City of Regina’s website here and the City of Saskatoon’s website here.

I also note that many other cities and municipalities in Saskatchewan are proactively preparing and publishing information on their websites such as council agendas and meeting minutes. Such proactive disclosure of information facilitates transparency and accountability and enhances active participation of citizens in civic life.

Check out my office’s blog entry on what a municipality or city should consider when publishing agendas and meeting minutes on its website: https://oipc.sk.ca/council-agendas-and-meeting-minutes/.

Other helpful resources

A resource about LA FOIP for councillors: https://oipc.sk.ca/assets/what-councillors-should-know-about-lafoip.pdf

Mayors, reeves, and councilors may have a steep learning curve when they are elected, including how to handle personal information and personal health information. Here’s a resource on best practices on how to handle records that contain personal information and personal health information: https://oipc.sk.ca/assets/best-practices-for-mayors-reeves-councillors-and-school-boards.pdf

LA FOIP 101: The Basics for Cities, Towns, Municipalities Webinar: https://oipc.sk.ca/resources/webinars/la-foip-101-the-basics-for-cities-towns-municipalities-etc/

Resources by the Ministry of Justice, Access and Privacy Branch: http://www.publications.gov.sk.ca/deplist.cfm?d=9&c=3570

Was this page helpful?

Severing

When responding to access to information requests under The Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FOIP), The Local Authority Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (LA FOIP) and The Health Information Protection Act (HIPA), there may be circumstances where information is exempt from release under mandatory or discretionary exemptions.  However, each of these statutes requires public bodies to release as much information as possible when responding to requests and this is done through severing.

Section 8 of both FOIP (applies to government institutions) and LA FOIP (applies to local authorities) provide:

8 Where a record contains information to which an applicant is refused access, the head shall give access to as much on the record as can be reasonably be severed without disclosing the information to which the applicant is refused access.

Subsection 38(2) of HIPA, which applies to trustees, has similar language.

Severing is the exercise by which portions of a document are blacked out before the document is provided to an Applicant. It is also considered severing where a responsive record is withheld in full.  In order to be compliant with section 8 of FOIP/LA FOIP and subsection 38(2) of HIPA, public bodies and trustees need to conduct a line-by-line review of each page and apply severing where appropriate.  In addition, each severed item should have a notation indicating which exemption(s) applies in each instance.  It must be clear to the Applicant as to what exemption(s) is being relied upon for each item that is severed. The IPC discourages the use of white space redacting. White space redacting is where software removes the content of a record in such a way that it renders the redacted content indistinguishable from the blank background of the document. This type of redacting creates uncertainty as to what, if anything, has been redacted.

It is important that public bodies and trustees not apply a blanket exemption(s) to an entire page or record just because the majority of the information contained on that page is exempt from release. A great example is an email chain.  A communication may almost fully be exempt from release.  However, if a public body or trustee is contemplating also severing the header information (to, from, cc, date, and subject), opening and closing sentences, confidentiality notice, signature lines, etc. of an email, it needs to demonstrate how the exemption applies to that information also.

We encourage you to refer to the IPC Guide to FOIP or the IPC Guide to LA FOIP at the time you are processing an access to information request as these resources outline the tests you need to consider when determining if an exemption should be applied.

On a final note, if you are still severing using hard copies of documents and find this to be onerous, you may want to look into options that are available for electronic severing. Who knows, you may already have this capability with the software that is installed on your system.

To learn more about severing electronically, check out our webinar Modern Age Severing Made A Lot Easier.

Was this page helpful?

Council Agendas and Meeting Minutes

To be accountable to the public, meetings of council and council committees are public by virtue of section 119 and 120 of The Municipalities Act. Further, subsection 117(1)(d) of The Municipalities Act entitles any person to inspect and obtain copies of council meeting minutes after they have approved by council.

To support this accountability, municipalities can post the agendas of council and council committee meetings to their website. The benefits of municipalities making information available online are plain to see. First, it increases municipalities’ accountability to the citizenry. Second, it increases citizens’ active participation in civic life.

While making information available online, such as council agendas and meeting minutes, has its benefits, municipalities should take care to minimize or avoid the publication of personal information of citizens on their websites.

What are the risks of publishing personal information on a website?

Chilling Effect

Public participation in civic matters is important to a democratic society. If individuals know their personal information, including their name and concerns, will be published on a website, then they may be deterred from raising matters to council.

Misuse

Search engines index websites and make information published on websites easily searchable.

Furthermore, technology is enabling organizations to gather and analyze personal information from various sites to create profiles on individuals. Such profiling can have undesirable results such as identity fraud or theft, embarrassment, and physical or emotional harm.

Dissemination

Publishing information on the World Wide Web has a much broader audience than information published in other formats such as hard copy newsletters, magazines, and books. Further, information published online can easily be copied and disseminated. Information, especially if it is inaccurate or unflattering, can haunt or damage an individual’s reputation.

Can municipalities withhold personal information that is in meeting documents?

The short answer is yes.

The long answer is that while subsection 120(1) of The Municipalities Act requires that council and council committees conduct their meetings in public, subsection 120(2) of The Municipalities Act provides that meetings may be closed to the public if the matters being discussed are within the exemptions in PART III of The Local Authority Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (LA FOIP).

Part III of LA FOIP includes subsection 15(1). Subsection 15(1) of LA FOIP provides that a head may refuse to give access to a record that discloses agendas or the substance of deliberations of meetings where matters discussed at the meetings could be refused pursuant to Part III or Part IV of LA FOIP.

Part IV of LA FOIP includes subsection 28(1). Subsection 28(1) of LA FOIP provides that a local authority is not to disclose personal information in its possession or control without the individual’s consent except if the disclosure is authorized by LA FOIP.

Since Part IV of LA FOIP enables a local authority to refuse access to personal information, then council and council committees may close its meetings to the public if the matters being discussed include personal information.

What does this mean for municipalities posting agendas and meeting minutes to its website? Information in documents that falls within the exemption subsection 15(1) of LA FOIP and subsection 28(1) of LA FOIP, then, can be withheld (or redacted) prior to the document being posted online.

What privacy considerations should a municipality undertake when publishing council agendas and meeting minutes?

Notification

Before, or at the time of, collection of personal information, LA FOIP requires that municipalities inform individuals of the purpose for which personal information is collected. Therefore, municipalities should notify citizens about how personal information submitted to it could become a part of public council or committee agendas or meetings minutes, and could also be published to the RM’s website. The notice should include the contact information of someone who works for the municipality to answer questions or respond to concerns about the collection of personal information.

Municipalities should consider putting a notice on its website, in brochures, on posters, and on any other medium where citizens can easily see the notice.

Redaction

If documents such as agendas contain personal information, consider providing council members with a redacted version of the document for the council meeting.

Further, if council meeting minutes contain personal information, then municipalities should consider redacting the personal information prior to publishing the minutes on their website.

Data Minimization

When recording the minutes of a council meeting, the municipality should record the least amount of personal information. Better yet, it can attempt to de-identify the information by using terms such as “a Rate payer,” “a Tax payer”, or an initial to represent the person who is involved in a matter being discussed by council, or a council committee.

Review of Practices

Municipalities change and so does technology. Reviewing and revising practices to account for such change can be a good way to stay ahead of the curve. Asking citizens for feedback on the municipalities’ privacy practices may also help municipalities adjust their privacy policies accordingly!

 

Was this page helpful?

Google Translate Disclaimer

Translations on the IPC Website are performed by Google Translate. Please note that not all text may be translated accurately or be translated at all. The IPC is not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translations. The IPC will not be held responsible for any damage or issues that may result from using Google Translate.

For more information, read our full disclaimer.