scholarly journals Criminal-law protection of the right to privacy and private life secret, the privacy of correspondence, post and telecommunication privacy in additional German criminal law

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Valeryevna Serebrennikova ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Private Life ◽  
Right To Privacy ◽  
The Right To Privacy ◽  
The Right

La protección constitucional de los derechos a la intimidad y a la propia imagen en las relaciones laborales: una visión desde la jurisprudencia constitucional

2014 ◽  
pp. 2121-2143
Author(s):  
Luis Javier MIERES MIERES
Keyword(s):  
Protected Area ◽  
Private Life ◽  
Right To Privacy ◽  
Work Relations ◽  
The Right To Privacy ◽  
Free Development ◽  
Principle Of Proportionality ◽  
The Right ◽  
And Control ◽  
Constitutional Jurisprudence

LABURPENA: Lan-harremanen arloan funtsezkoa den intimitatearen eskubidea babesteak jurisprudentzia konstituzional zabala eta aberatsa eragin du. Intimitate-eskubideak babesten duen eremuaren baitan, intimitatearen zentzu sendoa (edo gizarteak onartzen duena) eta zentzu ahula dago (intimitate subjektiboa). Biak ala biak proiektatzen dira lan-prestazioan, enpresen zaintza-eta kontrol-ahalmenak mugatuz, eta proportzionaltasunaren printzipioa betearaziz. EKaren 18.1 artikuluak ez du babesten bizitza pribatuaren askatasuna esan ahal zaiona, baina jurisprudentzia konstituzionalak hainbat teknikaren bidez babesten ditu langileen nortasunaren garapen librearen zenbait alderdi, zuzenean bizitza pribatuarekin lotuak. RESUMEN: La protección del derecho fundamental a la intimidad en el ámbito de las relaciones laborales ha dado lugar a una amplia y rica jurisprudencia constitucional. Dentro del ámbito protegido por el derecho a la intimidad cabe distinguir entre intimidad en sentido fuerte (o intimidad socialmente reconocida) y en sentido débil (intimidad subjetivamente reservada). Ambas manifestaciones del derecho se proyectan sobre el desarrollo de la prestación laboral imponiendo límites a los poderes empresariales de vigilancia y control, cuyo ejercicio debe ajustarse al principio de proporcional. Aunque el artículo 18.1 CE no protege lo que puede denominarse la libertad de la vida privada, la jurisprudencia constitucional ha articulado distintas técnicas a fin de amparar ciertas manifestaciones del libre desarrollo de la personalidad de los trabajadores directamente vinculadas con la vida privada. ABSTRACT: The protection of the fundamental right to privacy in the area of the work relations has caused a rich and wide-ranging constitutional jurisprudence. In the protected area for the right to privacy, it can be distinguished among a hard privacy (or socially recognized privacy) and a weak privacy (privacy subjectively reserved). Both manifestations of the right to privacy are projected on the workplace and they limit the entrepreneurial powers of surveillance and control, the exercise of which it has to fit the principle of proportionality. Although article 18.1 CE does not protect what can be denominated the freedom of the private life, the constitutional jurisprudence has articulated different techniques in order to protect certain manifestations of the free development of the personality of theworkers directly linked to the private life.

scholarly journals The Right to Privacy and Private Detective Activities in Lithuania

2012 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-26
Author(s):  
Mindaugas Bilius
Keyword(s):  
Personal Data ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Private Life ◽  
Right To Privacy ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
The Right To Privacy ◽  
Private Detective ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Right

ABSTRACT Private detectives have been providing their services in Lithuania for about a decade; however, only now has the Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania started to discuss whether it is expedient and necessary to regulate the activities of private detectives by means of a separate law. One of the goals of a separate legal regulation of private detective activities is the protection of human rights, particularly the right to privacy. This article examines the provisions of national and international legislative acts related to the private life of a person, and assesses the opportunities of a private detective to provide private detective services without prejudice to the provisions of applicable legislative acts. The article concludes that a private detective is not an authorized (public) authority and there is no possibility to assess in each case whether the interests of a person using the services of private detectives are more important than those of other persons, which would allow for violating their rights to private life. The limits of an individual’s right to privacy can only be narrowed by a particular person, giving consent to making public the details of his/her private life. It is the only opportunity for a private detective to gather information related to the private life of a citizen. Currently applicable legislative acts in Lithuania do not provide for opportunities for private subjects to collect personal data without that person’s consent. This right is granted only to public authorities and with the court’s permission

scholarly journals Employee's right to privacy: Where is the bound of the employer's right to monitor employees' communications

2020 ◽  
pp. 85-99
Author(s):  
Milica Kovač-Orlandić
Keyword(s):  
High Sensitivity ◽  
Private Life ◽  
Employment Relationship ◽  
Right To Privacy ◽  
Labour Law ◽  
The Right To Privacy ◽  
Legitimate Interests ◽  
Conflicting Interests ◽  
The Right ◽  
Consistent Application

Starting from the assumption that employees enjoy the protection of private life in relation to their employers, this paper seeks to answer the question how the right to privacy as a civil right can be incorporated into labour law without, concurrently, undermining the nature of the employment relationship, and considering the subordination as its primary feature. Accordingly, the nature of this right is analysed and the conditions under which it can be restricted in the workplace. Taking into account that the breaches of privacy and even more subtle ways of breach have increased in frequency in the workplace, the author deals with the issue of monitoring the employee's communication, pointing to the high sensitivity of this topic, since at the same time numerous legitimate interests of the worker should be fulfilled, as well as of the employer. The aim of the paper is to point out that in this case, the consistent application of the principles of legitimacy, proportionality and transparency is crucial for balancing the conflicting interests of workers and employers.

The Right to Respect for Private Life

2020 ◽  
pp. 46-67
Author(s):  
Claire Fenton-Glynn
Keyword(s):  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Private Life ◽  
Right To Privacy ◽  
The Right To Privacy ◽  
Right To Information ◽  
The Right ◽  
To Receive

This chapter considers the right of the child to respect for private life from the perspective of three interrelated, but distinct, aspects. First, it considers the Court’s case law concerning the right to privacy, and the protection of one’s image. Second, it examines the development of the Court’s approach to the right to receive information—this ranges from rather conservative and paternalistic beginnings to a more robust protection of freedom of expression. Finally, the chapter analyses the Court’s jurisprudence concerning the right to identity, including the right to information on origins and rights concerning the naming of children and their citizenship.

scholarly journals The Right to Privacy and Data Protection in the Information Age

2020 ◽  
pp. 1576-1589
Author(s):  
Tigran D. Oganesian
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Data Protection ◽  
Personal Data ◽  
Private Life ◽  
Right To Privacy ◽  
Personal Data Protection ◽  
The Right To Privacy ◽  
User Data ◽  
The Right ◽  
Mass Surveillance

The article considers the legality of mass surveillance and protection of personal data in the context of the international human rights law and the right to respect for private life. Special attention is paid to the protection of data on the Internet, where the personal data of billions of people are stored. The author emphasizes that mass surveillance and technology that allows the storage and processing of the data of millions of people pose a serious threat to the right to privacy guaranteed by Article 8 of the ECHR of 1950. Few companies comply with the human rights principles in their operations by providing user data in response to requests from public services. In this regard, States must prove that any interference with the personal integrity of an individual is necessary and proportionate to address a particular security threat. Mandatory data storage, where telephone companies and Internet service providers are required to store metadata about their users’ communications for subsequent access by the law enforcement and intelligence agencies, is neither necessary nor proportionate. The author analyses the legislation of some countries in the field of personal data protection, as well as examples from practice. Practice in many States is evidence of the lack of adequate national legislation and enforcement, weak procedural safeguards and ineffective oversight, which contributes to widespread impunity for arbitrary or unlawful interference with the right to privacy. In conclusion, we propose a number of measures aimed at improving the level of personal data protection in accordance with the international standards. In order to provide guarantees and a minimum level of adequate data protection in the face of new challenges to human rights in an ever-changing digital environment, the author proposes to solve a number of pressing issues. Firstly, States should not have the right to ask companies for and have absolute access to user data without a court order. Secondly, the process of sending a request and receiving data from a telecommunications company should be regulated in detail and transparent. The availability of specialized judges with technical expertise shall be valuable

scholarly journals Permissible Limits of Interference with the Right to Privacy in the Context of the COVID-19 Pandemic

2020 ◽  
pp. 57-65
Author(s):  
Mariya MENDZHUL
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Family Life ◽  
Social Identification ◽  
Private Life ◽  
Personal Life ◽  
Sociological Research ◽  
Right To Privacy ◽  
Permissible Limits ◽  
The Right To Privacy ◽  
The Right

Over the past year, the COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated a number of social problems and in the context of incomplete medical reform and the economic crisis, the situation in Ukraine is not the best. That is why, within the framework of this study, attention has been paid to the analysis of the concept of ‘private life’ and its relationship with the concepts of ‘personal life’ and ‘family life’, as well as it has been clarified the permissible limits of interference in private life based on analysis of ECtHR practice and the COVID-19 pandemic. The analysis of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights outlines that there is a rather extended interpretation and the absence of a comprehensive definition of the term ‘private life’. According to the ECtHR, the boundaries of private life are not limited exclusively to the ‘internal sphere’ and it is impossible to exclude the outside world completely; private life can intersect even with professional activities. The Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms covers the following areas of private life: both physical and psychological integrity of a person, his legal and social identification, gender identity, as well as sexual orientation, photographs, relationships with other people, decision-making bodies, etc. When examining the permissible limits of interference in the sphere of private life, we took into account the positions of scholars, national legislation, ECtHR practice, the results of sociological research, as well as statistics on the spread of SARS-CoV-2 and mortality in Ukraine, the neighbouring European countries,the UK , USA, Spain, Italy, Germany, France, South Korea, Sweden and Belarus as well. In the course of the research it is substantiated that the terms ‘personal life’ and ‘private life’ are synonyms and also cover family life. The ECHR may consider violating the right to privacy during the COVID-19 pandemic in the future. At the same time, the COVID-19 pandemic and the threat it poses to human health can be considered a legitimate purpose of invasion of privacy. If restrictive measures are taken on the basis of the law and their further legal application, such interventions may be recognized as legal. At the same time, whether such interventions are necessary in a democratic society, as well as whether the principle of proportionality is observed, should be analyzed when considering individual cases.

scholarly journals The right to privacy under Article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights and legality of epidemiological monitoring measures to combat the Covid-19 virus pandemic

2020 ◽  
Vol 59 (89) ◽  
pp. 303-320
Author(s):  
Jelena Milenković
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Far East ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Private Life ◽  
European Countries ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Right To Privacy ◽  
The Right To Privacy ◽  
Epidemiological Monitoring ◽  
The Right

In this paper, the author analyzes the protection of the right to privacy under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) at the time of the Covid-19 virus pandemic. At the beginning of the pandemic, European countries had a large number of infected people and some countries encountered a collapse of their health systems. As the situation was beyond control, it raises the question whether such a situation was caused by the non-implementation of epidemiological monitoring measures, which is comparable to the extent and manner of implementing these measures in the Far East; namely, the question is whether the democratic system remained unprotected due to the EU countries' observance of democratic human rights standards, specifically the right to privacy. Given that epidemiological monitoring measures are currently the most important instrument for combating the Covid-19 virus pandemic, European countries have to fulfill the condition of legality in implementing these measures, which interfere with the citizens' right to privacy. In that context, the author explores the case law of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), which ensures judicial protection of the rights guaranteed by the Convention (including the right to private life), focuses on the definition of the concept of the right to privacy, and examines whether epidemiological monitoring measures fall into the corpus of privacy rights. Relying on a detailed analysis of the ECtHR case law, the author points to the specific requirements that must be met in order for the epidemiological monitoring measures to be considered legal.

scholarly journals The constitutional right to the confidentiality of listening, telephone conversation, telegraph and other correspondence of separate categories of persons

2020 ◽  
pp. 102-106
Author(s):  
Liudmyla Mikhnevych
Keyword(s):  
Family Life ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Private Life ◽  
Right To Privacy ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Human Right ◽  
Telephone Conversation ◽  
The Right To Privacy ◽  
Constitutional Right ◽  
The Right

The right to the confidentiality of listening, telephone conversation, telegraph and other correspondence of separate categories ofpersons is researched in the article. It is establishes that despite all legal guarantees, the right to the confidentiality of correspondenceis provided differently for separate categories of persons. The least secure of this right are those sentenced to imprisonment, and peop -le’s deputies, lawyers and other persons in respect of which a special procedure of criminal proceedings is carried out have the highestimmunity from illegal or arbitrary interference with the right to confidentiality of correspondence. Two scientific concepts of understandingthe right to the confidentiality of correspondence are characterized. The so-called “personal” concept, which considers thisright as a component of the right to privacy and family life, and the second concept justifies the independence of this right, the contentand purpose of which is broader than the protection of privacy. The perception of the right to confidentiality of correspondence in thecontext of the right to private and family life is common. It is substantiated that the “personal” concept is characterized by the connectionbetween the right to confidentiality of correspondence and the right to private and family life, as well as the consideration of theright to confidentiality of correspondence as a separate element of the right to privacy. Instead, the second concept considers the rightto confidentiality of correspondence as an independent right that has a relative connection with the sphere of private life and is a separatepersonal human right. It is noted that the Constitutional of Ukraine derives the right to confidentiality of correspondence in a separatearticle from the inviolability of private and family life, which leads to the conclusion that it is inexpediency to narrow the right toconfidentiality of listening, telephone conversation, telegraph and other correspondence only in privacy or family life.An analysis of the latest normative changes in the legal regulation of ensuring the right to confidentiality of correspondence inUkraine of separate categories of persons, in particular on the restriction of the right to convicted and higher guarantees of the right toconfidentiality of correspondence of deputies of Ukraine, are committed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document