GDPR Article 22 and Data Subject Rights as Applied in Estonia
Regulation (EU) 2016/679, Arts. 15-22; Isikuandmete kaitse seadus
A citation is an address, not a summary. The first part names the law; what follows narrows it to the exact section, article or paragraph.
What follows is LexLint's own research summary of this law, not legal advice.
In force since 15 January 2019.
A data subject rights rule binding public and private bodies.
As of 24 August 2026.
What it requires
- Honor a person's request to access, rectify, erase, restrict, port, or object to processing of their personal data in Estonia within one month of receipt.
- Provide a meaningful human review before finalizing any decision based solely on automated processing that produces legal or similarly significant effects for a person in Estonia, under General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Article 22.
What this law does
Drafted with AI from the cited sources under the direction of UnGovr staff. UnGovr holds editorial responsibility for this page.
General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Articles 15 to 21 apply directly: access, rectification, erasure, restriction, portability, and objection, exercisable against the controller. Article 22 gives a qualified right against a decision based solely on automated processing with legal or similarly significant effect, applied in Estonia through the Personal Data Protection Act.
The public sector's access right is distinctively implemented as unified infrastructure through RIA's Data Tracker service, letting a citizen see which public-sector systems have processed their data in one place rather than requesting this separately from each controller. No Estonia-specific derogation narrowing these rights is independently confirmed.
When LexLint raises it
crawls_webtrains_modelsdeploys_chatbotautomated_outreachhigh_risk_decisions
Read the law
Official Journal text, EUR-Lex, Regulation (EU) 2016/679
RIA Data Tracker service page
Every line above is drawn from the primary source linked here, read on the date shown. This is a research summary, not legal advice.