MY PRIVACY, MY RIGHT
Article 21 of The Constitution of India states that, ‘Protection of life and personal liberty- No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law.’ Article 21 is the heart of the Fundamental Rights. Article 21 has proved to be multi-dimensional. Right to privacy is an essential component of right to life and personal liberty under Article 21.
The Supreme Court in the case of R. Rajagopal v. State of Tamil Nadu, 1994 SCC (6) 632, for the first time directly linked right to privacy to Article 21. It laid down that “The right to privacy is implicit in the right to life and liberty guaranteed to the citizens of this country by Article 21. It is a “right to be let alone”.” In the 2011 case of Ram Jethmalani v. Union of India, (2011) 8 SCC 1, the Supreme Court held that “Right to privacy is an integral part of life. This is a cherished constitutional value, and is important that human beings be allowed domains of freedom that are free of public scrutiny unless they act in an unlawful manner”.
The article has been interpreted in a way that the term ‘life’ includes all those aspects of life which make a man’s life meaningful, worth-living and complete. Agreed that right to privacy is not an absolute right. It is subjected to reasonable
…show more content…
The Delhi High Court judge, S Muralidhar J. quashed the case by stating that “It is inconceivable how, even if one were to take what is stated in the FIR to be true, an expression of love by a young married couple would attract offence of obscenity and trigger the coercive process of law.” Why cannot this interpretation be adopted nationally? What else is an expression of love if not a hug or a kiss? We still have the intolerant reactions to such expressions by police as exemplified by ‘Operation
The issue of privacy has been one dating back to the beginning of society. In order to protect it we have erected walls around us and called them homes, fences and called them territories, borders and called them countries. As the modern day arrived, society innovated to the point that ownership and privacy are no longer clear. Science has developed at a rate where morals and laws cannot keep up, more specifically, in the medical department. Such a problem is detailed in Rebecca Skloot’s book The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks.
The issue of privacy has been one dating back to the beginning of society. In order to protect it we have erected walls around us and called them homes, fences and called them territories, borders and called them countries. As the modern day arrived, society innovated to the point that ownership and privacy are no longer clear. Science has developed at a rate where morals and laws cannot keep up, more specifically, in the medical department. Such a problem is detailed in Rebecca Skloot’s book The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks.
In making its Smith ruling, the Court considered whether the person invoking the protection of the Fourth Amendment could claim a “legitimate expectation of privacy” that has been invaded by government action, and stated that such an inquiry normally addresses two questions: (1) whether the individual has exhibited an actual (subjective) expectation of privacy; and (2) whether the individual 's expectation is one that society is prepared to recognize as “reasonable.”
The right to privacy was not explicitly stated in the Constitution. Up until 1850, the courts did not support the right to privacy. During Prohibition, information was routinely hacked into using telephones and used as a legal bias for prosecution. In Olmstead v. United States in 1928, the Supreme Court supported the invasion of privacy. In the 1960’s, the highest courts began to alter this support.
To any uneducated individual, that individual’s right to privacy is as important as his/her right
Nowadays, “privacy” is becoming a popular conversation topic. Many people believe that if they do not do anything wrong in the face of technology and security, then they have nothing to hide. Professor Daniel J. Solove of George Washington University Law School, an internationally known expert in privacy law, wrote the article Why Privacy Matters Even if You Have ‘Nothing to Hide’, published in The Chronicle of Higher Education in May of 2011. Solove explains what privacy is and the value of privacy, and he insists that the ‘nothing to hide’ argument is wrong in this article. In the article, “Why Privacy Matters Even if You Have ‘Nothing to Hide’”, Daniel J. Solove uses ethos, pathos, and logos effectively by using strong sources, using
[The government] will be enabled to expose a jury to the most intimate occurrences of the home .” Justice Brandeis later went on to write an article called “The Right to Privacy” in which he asserted that “the right to be let alone” was integral to the American citizen’s quality of life . The argument that Brandeis makes against technological surveillance of citizens follows a certain line of logic: “property” encompasses both physical and intangible possessions, in the same way that other protections are not physical but real all the same, such as protection from assault or nuisance6. It is unlikely that Justice Brandeis could envision a world entirely reliant on an intangible network of information such as the Internet, but his ideas can still be used today to protect Americans’ privacy in the digital
The right to privacy is not mentioned word for word in the constitution. The Supreme Court has ruled that privacy is interpreted in the First, Third, Fourth, Fifth, and Ninth Amendments. The choice for American citizens to use contraceptives, have abortions, and have same sex relations are considered to be the right of privacy. The First Amendment designed these zones of privacy to all people to make their own personal choices without interference of the government. The First Amendment zone of privacy is considered a grey area.
Technology plays a pivotal role in the lives of Canadian teenagers today. More teens have access to Internet connected cell phones and computers than ever before. The ability to “like” a friend’s Facebook post, or share an article with friends is a simple mouse click away. Being more efficiently connected with friends and family is making the lives of teenagers better, but at the cost of more meaningful intimate relationships. Social media arguably has the greatest affect on the lives of Canadian teenagers.
”If the use of technology goes heightens the body 's natural ability it will require citizens to take severe measures to protect privacy, and will crumble the promise of privacy in the home insured by the fourth amendment. One should not have to take irregular precautions to protect what can’t be felt, heard, tasted, or smelled due to new technologies. Moreover the fourth amendment does not require
A book by Priscilla M. Regan: “Legislating Privacy”, explains how deep the concept of privacy can create beyond the vacancy of public pressure between individuals and society. “When viewed as a fundamental right, privacy can be interpreted as being involved in a range of constitutional and moral issues — freedom from surveillance and searches, reproductive freedom, freedom to associate, confidentiality of communications, and family values.” (Regan 48). According to Reagan's statement, privacy is a sensitive topic when approached from many different angles. The constitution and moral issues as Reagan discuss is directly cohesive to the case of the Minnesota school district.
A major ethical consideration put forth by opponents of drug testing is that the process amounts to an unwarranted invasion of privacy. WDT impacts on privacy in relation to the right to personal i.e. bodily integrity. National legislation on this matter is often the same as that for searches, which requires the consent of the person concerned to be lawful. The question of consent is, however, a thorny one. Most guidelines for WDT (such as the ILO Guiding Principles on Drug and Alcohol Testing, 1996) require that informed consent be obtained before testing.
People have the right to make personal decisions regarding intimate matters and relationships. They have the right to control their own lives in a fashion that is secluded from the public's critical observations. This right to privacy protects the liberty of people to make particular consequential decisions regarding their own well-being without the involvement or interference of the government. Such decisions may involve procreation, the termination of treatment and assisted death, and private sexual affairs. Although the Constitution does not have explicit written Amendments regarding the right to privacy, it can be interpreted that the amendments were built on the aspect of privacy.
With the advancement of surveillance technology, many citizens feel that their privacy rights have been violated due to homeland security and the threat of terrorism. Throughout history our government has implemented domestic and international surveillance as a way to safeguard our society from other countries. Now the question that seems to arise within our society is if the government is infringing on our civil liberties? Or is this indeed protecting our nation from imminent danger?
Introduction The interests protected by the law of torts are different in character, from an injury to the person to protection against any wrongful harm to one’s reputation. But these concepts keep on growing with advances in society and technology, more and more intrusions into one’s personal life, ways through which harm may be perpetrated against an individual’s well-being continue to evolve. This paper will focus on the extent to which tort law protects privacy interests.