Surveillance and harassment under the auspices of the law: This is how CBS surveyors work

M., a 70-year-old woman dealing with medical problems, received a phone call from a representative of Central Bureau of Statistics During the conversation, M. claims, the reviewer urged her to participate in filling out a personal questionnaire and even threatened her that if she did not do so, the refusal would be considered a criminal offense. “I replied angrily that I had not had a criminal offense for 70 years, so maybe I will have it now, “M. said this week.

M not alone. Ynet received complaints from other citizens claiming that under the auspices of the law, the CBS surveyors acted aggressively against them, including particularly disturbing attempts to gather personal details about their lives. The documentation shows a CBS reviewer repeatedly pressing M.’s intercom – From him to leave the place and leave her alone.

M.’s children (due diligence – one of them works for Ynet) explained to the reviewer that during the corona it is not possible to visit an older woman who is in a risk group. The reviewer said in response that he could enter the house, and even held in his hands a letter addressed to M. “If you talk to me like that, I will come to you every day,” the surveyor threatened M.’s daughter, who repeatedly asked him to leave the place. “The apartment you live in came up in the CBS survey.” After the exchange, which reached a jarring tone on the part of the reviewer, M.’s children asked for his name – and in response he replied “under”.

“He kept ringing down, I was scared, I didn’t know who it was,” M. said. “I called my son and luckily he and my daughter had just returned from shopping they had done for us.” M.’s daughter added: “I was shocked, I do not want to think what would have happened if we were not there and my mother would have been left alone. I do not know how she would have dealt with him. Scary to think they send such an aggressive bully to older people and more during the corona period. Shlomo, they did not let anyone into the house, not even professionals. “

The phone call from the CBS representative came a few days earlier. M., said she was not interested in sharing her personal life matters. “I told her I was not in the polls section and never answered them, but she said I must attend because I came up with a sample. I asked her if it was personal questions and she said ‘yes’, so I told her I didn’t want any more. “The reviewer gave me an example of questions such as where I work and whether I have been in the hospital recently, and I answered her that I am 70 years old at all, at retirement age.”

According to M., the reviewer continued to insist and even took the aforementioned threat regarding a criminal offense. “I explained to her that I’m busy these days with my health issues which are more than enough and that’s what I have in mind right now, not the sample. The reviewer said she must pass it on, and that’s it over. At the end of the call she said she would call ‘in the next few days’ to try to convince me. “.

M. notes that the conversation was very stressful for her and she has not been calm since. “It feels like an invasion of privacy and it’s very annoying. If I say I do not want to participate, they will accept it. Why am I obliged if I do not want to? “I’m busy with health issues and not available to participate in samples. From here to a criminal offense it’s as far as East and West. What criminal offense is there? Since the conversation I’m under stress and terrible anxieties about what might happen, it’s unhealthy for a woman my age.

Naomi (63) also describes an oppressive experience. According to her, after coming up with a sample of the CBS – she was required to answer intrusive questions about her and her family members. “I avoided the questionnaire for a long time and postponed filling out the questionnaire, but after receiving an email that required me to answer the survey, I had no choice. There were questions that I felt were really intrusive and angular about my daily conduct, about my life, like how many people we are at home in the evenings and how much usually, what happens on the weekends, how I get to work, what time I go to work and what time I get back.

“It annoyed me the most and it felt like someone was following me and recording my daily conduct. The very fact that I was obligated to give these details, it felt like I was under Big Brother supervision. Why should I give personal details about myself? I felt very uncomfortable. Feeling Of exposure and who knows what is being done with this information and where it is coming from. “

Naomi claims that she does not feel that the questions are about statistics. She had to come up with answers for fear of being exposed to a criminal record. “I invented a lot of answers to pass the questionnaire and did not give real things at all,” Naomi said.

She added: “I felt I had to find answers because it kept ringing in my head that it was a law and I was afraid to get involved with the authorities. One like me who came from a communist country, when I hear the word ‘law’ I am immediately defensive because I do not know what will happen if I do not obey the law .Is it just comes down to a fine or listing in a database that I refuse to provide information.

“It is really delusional that refusal is considered a criminal offense. There are enough people who are willing to provide information and it certainly should not be under law and fines and certainly not a state of threat. They need to convince the citizen to cooperate. The fine is for Russia and North Korea, not Israel. It is very strange for me to hear this in Israel. ”

The original Statistics Ordinance was enacted by the British Mandate in 1947. Subsequently, the ordinance underwent several changes and adjustments to suit the needs of the state. Since 1972, the Bureau has been operating under the new wording of the Statistics Ordinance – and its purpose is to collect, process, analyze and publish statistical information about the country’s population.

The law does require citizens to cooperate with the CBS, and gives it the authority to oblige the public to provide it with the information necessary to carry out the statistical operations it conducts. A private person who refuses to provide the required information commits a criminal offense punishable by a fine of NIS 500. 2017, the penalty for refusing to provide information was imprisonment for three months.

Hila (41), a resident of the center, came up twice in a few years with a sample of the CBS, and had to deal with visits by the surveyors several times, including in the late evening, without prior notice. Hila says that the surveyors forced her to fill out questionnaires. From her rest hours.

“We went out in their lottery twice and it was an indescribable nightmare,” says Hila. “It takes a lot of time to fill out the survey. There are questionnaires that take a few good hours to fill. Because of the kids we thought it would be good to tell them we could only vacate after nine in the evening. But it did not help, they arrived after nine and asked questions like how much coffee do you drink “A thousand questions go into the soul and it was stressful.”

Hila added: “I think every person has the right to keep their financial data and habits to themselves. I also do not think I have to contribute my time and it is wrong that they require me to sit for five hours with a reviewer. It does not suit everyone. I would not. “With three small children at home and I was pregnant and pushing it all the load of life is just a nightmare. There are other solutions, either they will volunteer or they will pay the people they are reviewing.”

Shai (40) from Jerusalem was a busy student with a one-and-a-half-year-old toddler at home when a reviewer knocked on his door and asked him to fill out the questionnaire. “It was a busy and challenging time and suddenly a person comes, knocks on your door and asks me to answer questions,” Shai recalled. “It was in the evening and I was in the market. They came three times. I said it was nice that they chose me but I did not choose them. They did not let go and came again and the manager of the reviewer came and asked me to answer the questions and said it was important but I was not interested and I told them ‘what are you? “Do you want my life? ‘, I felt it was oppressive that they came to me at the door and did not ask me before. The minimum was to pick up the phone to ask when I could answer the survey.”

According to him, this is the use of a tool without justification. “Is that how people behave? Nowhere else would this happen. People are not required by law to do things. The state is a tool that should be responsible for a minimum of things. In the vast majority of things there should be complete freedom and if you want something from me, it has to happen willingly. “Serious things need to be done in a logical and moral way. After all, some people like me do not close the door to the surveyor and are forced to answer. People also do not always answer the truth because to finish it quickly and get rid of this burden.”

Advocate Limor Schmerling Magznik, director of the Israel Institute of Technology Policy, explains that the example of the Central Bureau of Statistics’ research using people selected for the sample from the public illustrates the encounter between individual rights and social rights, she said. And that he should not be taken from us without our consent. At the same time, there are important social needs for which the state collects and uses people’s personal information, in accordance with the law. ”

However, she claims that “abusing people or harassing them is not normal and does not meet the rules of proper management and should not occur. I do not know the details of the selection process of the samplers and contacting and managing them. As long as there are failures or faults they should be corrected and avoided. The time has come, after many years in which CBS research is being conducted in a certain way, to consider collecting the information in another way that will reduce the unpleasant experience for people and reduce the difficulty in the process, and still preserve the privacy of those people. And it is possible that the CBS is thinking about things. “

According to Advocate Shmerling Magznik, there are other ways to gather the information that could reduce the invasion of privacy. “Today much of our information is in the computer databases of government or commercial organizations. After selecting the people in the sample, it is possible to request a considerable part of the information from these bodies. There are methods of security and mitigation of privacy risks when transferring and using information while protecting people’s privacy.

“This change may even increase the accuracy of the data. As needed it will be possible to complete information from the people themselves, but save a considerable part of the process experienced as very intrusive. One could also consider providing some compensation to participants for their cooperation. Such a rethinking process would be an opportunity for public discourse. Participates in the practices of gathering information about citizens and seeking the right balances for our time between the need of the general and the state and the interest of the individual. ”

“In this complex period, in which decisions are made on a daily basis that directly affect the lives of each and every one of us, it is clear to all the immense importance of reliable and up-to-date data, collected on a regular basis, to serve as a basis for these decisions.

“The information that the CBS publishes is based on data from various administrative information sources available to it, such as the population registry, income tax files, data from the National Insurance Institute and more. At the same time, since the CBS does not have the ability to collect all the information required to create national statistics from these sources, and certainly not on a regular basis – the CBS conducts over 60 surveys a year and every decade, including censuses.

“Although there is an obligation to return in surveys by law, the CBS acts with the public in ways of explaining the importance of using data in decision-making processes, and these prove themselves and lead to cooperation and high percentages of return. “It is important to note that the CBS is committed to maintaining the confidentiality of the data submits. These details are not relevant to the publication of the statistics, are not passed on to any party, and are collected solely for the purposes of statistical links.”

With regard to M.’s case, the CBS stated that “An examination we conducted shows that the case described relates to an apartment that is included in the manpower survey, which is one of the most important in the CBS surveys. Because it is very important to represent all strata of the population in the survey, every apartment sampled for the survey is important, since it represents a segment of the population with similar characteristics.

On weekdays, the first interview in the survey was conducted in the face-to-face sampled apartment, however due to the Corona crisis the interviews are conducted by telephone. After the CBS surveyor contacted the sampled family, and encountered a complete refusal to cooperate – he was allowed to go out to locate the apartment and find out who lives in it. In this case, the surveyor does not intend to enter the apartment or interview its occupants, but only find out who the tenants are. Himself using a certified employee certificate, leave in their hands an explanatory letter, collect a phone number and continue the interview by phone.

“When the surveyor arrived at the address and accidentally met the children of the sampled people in the parking lot, he tried to introduce himself and explain to them the purpose of his arrival, but was refused to listen. After being accused of trespassing, he was insulted, refused permission to enter the building, and photographed. Against his request – he left the place. The incident caused the reviewer a storm of emotions, during which he used an inappropriate word when asked for his name.

“We are sorry that a Ynet editor took advantage of his journalistic status to promote an article against the CBS, after the names of his family members were chosen to participate in the survey, and we take a very serious attempt to attribute to the CBS, which performs its work according to law and the public, words like” Invasion of privacy “, ‘harassment’ and ‘threats'”.