The Implementation of Full-time Schools: The Situation in the Federal State of Sao Paulo (Brazil)

During the past years, Brazil has been mentioned internationally as a one of the so-called BRICs (Brazil, Russia, India and China). These countries have been taking increasing space in the economical and political global scenarios in the XXI century. The facts that they possess a vast territory and stand among the highest populated countries increase their relevance within the United Nations. Besides, three of them constitute nuclear powers and two of them belong to the United Nations Security Council. Brazil has significantly participated in forums such as WTO and UNO, representing central political articulation and stability to Latin America and in the structuring and growth of MERCOSUL (Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, Paraguay and Venezuela). Once again among the ten greatest economies of the world, the country has launched ambitious poverty-fighting programs helping more than 20 million people in the last years, such as the “Bolsa Família” (Familienstipendium) Program or and its complements). Nevertheless, Latin American countries are far from generating structural funds as the “European Social Fund” to assist specific demands of big cities as Sao Paulo and Buenos Aires. The commitments are restricted to commercial areas and bring nothing but slow and scarce advances to education or infra-structure and to the integration of systems related to these areas.

Global Standards: Recent Developments betweend the Poles of Privacy and Cloud Computing

The development of the Internet has made it possible to transfer data ‘around the globe at the click of a mouse’. Especially fresh business models such as cloud computing, the newest driver to illustrate the speed and breadth of the online environment, allow this data to be processed across national borders on a routine basis. A number of factors cause the Internet to blur the lines between public and private space: Firstly, globalization and the outsourcing of economic actors entrain an ever-growing exchange of personal data. Secondly, the security pressure in the name of the legitimate fight against terrorism opens the access to a significant amount of data for an increasing number of public authorities.And finally,the tools of the digital society accompany everyone at each stage of life by leaving permanent individual and borderless traces in both space and time. Therefore, calls from both the public and private sectors for an international legal framework for privacy and data protection have become louder. Companies such as Google and Facebook have also come under continuous pressure from governments and citizens to reform the use of data. Thus, Google was not alone in calling for the creation of ‘global privacystandards’. Efforts are underway to review established privacy foundation documents. There are similar efforts to look at standards in global approaches to privacy and data protection. The last remarkable steps were the Montreux Declaration, in which the privacycommissioners appealed to the United Nations ‘to prepare a binding legal instrument which clearly sets out in detail the rights to data protection and privacy as enforceable human rights’. This appeal was repeated in 2008 at the 30thinternational conference held in Strasbourg, at the 31stconference 2009 in Madrid and in 2010 at the 32ndconference in Jerusalem. In a globalized world, free data flow has become an everyday need. Thus, the aim of global harmonization should be that it doesn’t make any difference for data users or data subjects whether data processing takes place in one or in several countries. Concern has been expressed that data users might seek to avoid privacy controls by moving their operations to countries which have lower standards in their privacy laws or no such laws at all. To control that risk, some countries have implemented special controls into their domestic law. Again, such controls may interfere with the need for free international data flow. A formula has to be found to make sure that privacy at the international level does not prejudice this principle.