scholarly journals Minors' Constitutional Right to Informational Privacy

2007 ◽  
Vol 74 (4) ◽  
pp. 1375 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helen L. Gilbert
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 160-179
Author(s):  
Ciara Staunton ◽  
Rachel Adams ◽  
Dominique Anderson ◽  
Talishiea Croxton ◽  
Dorcas Kamuya ◽  
...  

Abstract The Protection of Personal Information Act (POPIA) [No.4 of 2013] is the first comprehensive data protection regulation to be passed in South Africa and it gives effect to the right to informational privacy derived from the constitutional right to privacy It is due to come into force in 2020, and seeks to regulate the processing of personal information in South Africa, regulate the flow of personal information across South Africa’s borders, and ensure that any limitations on the right to privacy are justified and aimed at protecting other important rights and interests. Although it was not drafted with health research in mind, POPIA will have an impact on the sharing of health data for research, in particular biorepositories. It is now timely to consider the impact of POPIA on biorepositories, and the necessary changes to their access and sharing arrangements prior to POPIA coming into force.


Author(s):  
Vitalii Serohin

The paper attempts to expose the basic concepts of informational privacy reflected in Western jurisprudence, as well as to outline the author's vision of the content and scope of informational privacy, to distinguish the relevant powers from which this right consists, to reveal its place and role from the standpoint of system-structural approach. It is noted that in the modern scientific literature, dedicated to ensuring the privacy and respect for his / her privacy, clearly distinguishes two main approaches to understanding the informational advantage - broad and narrow. Proponents of the narrow approach consider the primes solely in the informational aspect, and other constituents (physical, visual, phonetic privacy, etc.) tend to relate to the content of other fundamental rights. However, one group of authors interprets information privacy as the right of the person to control their personal data, while the second group considers it more rational and efficient to consider information pricing as the right of ownership of personal data. Attempting to unite both camps of supporters of a narrow interpretation of the information front is the Restricted Access / Limited Control (RALC) theory. Proponents of the broad-based approach view information primacy as important, but only one of the many substantive elements of constitutional law in favor. At the same time, the authors' exit beyond the information sphere when considering the content of the precedence can be considered progressive and more consistent with the essence of this right and its purpose in ensuring personal freedom and autonomy. In view of the author, revealing the content of the right to privacy, it should be borne in mind that the object of this right includes several areas (aspects), in each of which a person may be in different states of privacy, and the privacy itself has certain measurements. On this basis, information is regarded by the author as an element of the constitutional right of privacy, distinguished by the aspects of privacy and the form (method) of its objectification. Unlike other aspects of privacy, the informational aspect is detached from the physical body of the individual and exists independently, and relevant information continues to exist even after the death of the individual. Therefore, even the death of a person does not make sense of the information associated with that person, and sometimes even enhances its value and significance. It is noted that unlike other aspects of the case, information privacy has no states (such as loneliness, intimacy, anonymity, etc.); it merely provides information protection for such states and does not allow them to be disclosed without the consent of the entity itself.


Author(s):  
Oleksandr Byrkovych

Purpose. The purpose of the article is to identify the fundamental values of the Ukrainian people, on the basis of which not only his mentality, but also all national-state institutions, including institutions of justice and justice, as well as to identify trends of influence of these values on the further development of legal foundations of the judiciary and justice of Ukraine. Method. The methodological basis of the study was the combination of principles and methods of scientific knowledge. For the objectivity of the research, a set of general scientific, special-legal, special-historical and philosophical methods of scientific knowledge was used. Results. At the current stage of reforming the institutions of the judiciary and the judiciary, the notion of fair justice, which is formed on the basis of popular national culture, plays an important role. Given the functioning of the modern Constitutional Court of Ukraine, whose representatives are formed by delegation to the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, the President of Ukraine, the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine and the judiciary, this institution needs radical reform as it has repeatedly made political rather than constitutional decisions. Scientific novelty. Based on the analysis of the national tradition of justice, it is established that the Constitutional Court should be formed by public organizations, which are formed by legal experts. There are several higher scientific institutions in Ukraine which have departments, constitutional law research institutes. Their representatives should delegate the best experts in the constitutional right to competitive selection to fill vacancies in the constitutional court. Practical importance. The results of the study can be used in further historical and legal studies, preparation of special courses.


2018 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Chuks Okpaluba

‘Accountability’ is one of the democratic values entrenched in the Constitution of South Africa, 1996. It is a value recognised throughout the Constitution and imposed upon the law-making organs of state, the Executive, the Judiciary and all public functionaries. This constitutional imperative is given pride of place among the other founding values: equality before the law, the rule of law and the supremacy of the Constitution. This study therefore sets out to investigate how the courts have grappled with the interpretation and application of the principle of accountability, the starting point being the relationship between accountability and judicial review. Therefore, in the exercise of its judicial review power, a court may enquire whether the failure of a public functionary to comply with a constitutional duty of accountability renders the decision made illegal, irrational or unreasonable. One of the many facets of the principle of accountability upon which this article dwells is to ascertain how the courts have deployed that expression in making the state and its agencies liable for the delictual wrongs committed against an individual in vindication of a breach of the individual’s constitutional right in the course of performing a public duty. Here, accountability and breach of public duty; the liability of the state for detaining illegal immigrants contrary to the prescripts of the law; the vicarious liability of the state for the criminal acts of the police and other law-enforcement officers (as in police rape cases and misuse of official firearms by police officers), and the liability of the state for delictual conduct in the context of public procurement are discussed. Having carefully analysed the available case law, this article concludes that no public functionary can brush aside the duty of accountability wherever it is imposed without being in breach of a vital constitutional mandate. Further, it is the constitutional duty of the courts, when called upon, to declare such act or conduct an infringement of the Constitution.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document