Module Learning Objective

apply retention criteria without confusing closure with erasure

1. Regulatory Concept & Core Standards

This video focuses on how to apply retention criteria without confusing closure with erasure. Follow the sequence of decisions in the example rather than simply memorising a list. Notice who is involved, what information is needed and the expected result. These points help turn the content into a practice that another person can verify. A reporting case may contain data about the reporting person, people concerned and third parties. Data protection must accompany the whole lifecycle, from the form to archiving. This course addresses operational decisions. Legal bases and restrictions on rights require assessment of the specific processing.

A schedule distinguishes data category, applicable rule, trigger and permitted exceptions. The Slovak register is kept for three years from receipt. Closure and receipt differ. Litigation is not universal permission to retain everything indefinitely.

Apply the following rule: Section 11(1) requires the reporting register to be kept for three years from receipt. It records receipt date, subject, result and completion date, plus the prescribed identifying details for non-anonymous reports. Do not equate the register with every document from other proceedings. Those documents need their own lawful basis, purpose and restricted access. GDPR requires proportionality and minimisation.

2. Practical Implementation & Procedure

Define information classes, the reference event, duration, review owner and final disposition. Before a scheduled deletion, check the applicable rule, necessity and any pending proceedings. Preserve material only where legally permitted or required; do not invent an extension to a statutory maximum. Include exported copies and archival media, with restricted access. Clearly irrelevant data follow their own deletion rule. Before moving on, turn this procedure into a sequence you could explain to a colleague. Identify the first check, the action that depends on its outcome and the record that allows the decision to be reconstructed. Follow the sequence on screen and identify the point where an error would change the result.

3. Case Study & Compliance Action

A case reaches an internal retention review date while related litigation is pending. The reviewer first establishes whether the date is an internal target or a statutory maximum. Any continued retention needs an applicable legal basis and a defined purpose. If the national maximum prohibits keeping the channel file, the team cannot simply suspend deletion because litigation exists; any separate use as evidence requires its own legal assessment. Now read the case carefully. Separate established facts from information you would still need to confirm. Do not add motives or events that have not been described. This distinction matters when choosing a response proportionate to the information available.

The exercise is as follows: Does reaching the originally planned date permit automatic deletion of everything? Choose an answer and write one sentence explaining it. During the pause, compare your choice with the criteria we have just considered. Also think about the material you would retain to explain the decision later.

No. Identify the rule and starting event, distinguish internal dates from legal limits, and check any applicable duty to preserve or erase. A pending dispute is not a universal extension. Record a lawful decision for originals, copies, attachments and access, with a review date where continued retention is allowed.

One mistake to avoid is: configuring a single deletion period without legally relevant exceptions.

Now apply the national rule to a second decision. The system deletes all data five years after closure. Is that suitable?

No. The section 11 register is kept for three years from receipt of the report. Other documents and related proceedings require their own purpose and legal basis. One universal date may cause premature destruction or unnecessary retention. Record the rule, trigger and deletion owner.

National Legal Framework: Zákon č. 54/2019 Z. z., transposing Directive (EU) 2019/1937 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of persons who report breaches of Union law.