scholarly journals Privacy Types

Author(s):  
Majeed Mohamed Fareed Majeed

The right to privacy is one of the most problematic rights. In the absence of any consensus on a clear theoretical basis for the concept of privacy; there is hardly a link, reliable, between the various issues and topics, which are included under this right. Privacy claims are used to defend rights that seem quite divergent, such as the right not to be monitored by phone calls, and the right to know what a telecom company keeps of personal data for its customers. The absence of a clear theoretical basis for the right to privacy is exacerbated by the fact that it is exposed to multiple dangers in the era of the massive expansion of the use of the Internet and the development of its applications. The actuality of material, described in the article, conditioned the urgent necessities of society simply to settle a question about privacy types and their appliance in the society. Theoretical and legal conversations about the relationship between taws and privacy were investigated in the article. This paper makes a contribution to a forward-looking privacy framework by examining the privacy impacts of six new and emerging technologies. It examines the privacy issues that each of these technologies present and contends that there are seven distinct sorts of privacy. This contextual investigation data propose that a loose conceptualization of privacy might be important to keep up a smoothness that empowers new measurements of privacy to be identified, that will be understood and addressed so as to adequately react to quick technological evolution.

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 73-85
Author(s):  
Yohanes Firmansyah ◽  
Imam Haryanto

The Covid-19 case has had a huge influence on all aspects of human life, starting from health, economy, sosial, law, and many more. The COVID-19 pandemic has caused various frictions between various interests, one of which is a clash between individual interests and community interests. One of the obvious things about this problem is regarding the impact of COVID-19 in the field of sociology, especially the relationship between individuals, especially the issue of community stigmatization regarding infectious diseases, the dilemma between the privacy rights of the identity of COVID-19 patients and the disclosure of publik data on COVID-19 patients with various risks will injure and cause multiple material and immaterial losses. On the other hand, Covid-19 also raises various sosial-psychological problems and legal problems that still do not regulate all aspects of human life. This paper describes the sociological elements of COVID-19, the right to privacy, publik information disclosure, and the sosial-psychological impact of COVID-19, along with a juridical review of the right to privacy and publik disclosure of information regarding the transparency of COVID-19.


2019 ◽  
Vol 31 (5) ◽  
pp. 1509-1514
Author(s):  
Biljana Karovska-Andonovska ◽  
Zoran Jovanovski

The reforms in the communications monitoring system as part of the wider reform of the security services in the Republic of Macedonia, resulted with creation of a package of several laws whose adoption was supposed to provide the legislative basis for a system that would really work in accordance with the goals for which it was established. The communications monitoring system should provide a balanced protection of the right to security, on the one hand, and the right to privacy, on the other. Only on that way a priori primacy of the right to security over the right to privacy will it be disabled. Hence, the reforms in communications monitoring system are a precondition for the effective protection, primarily for the right to privacy and the secrecy of communications, but also for the right to personal data protection, the inviolability of the home as well as for the right to presumption of innocence. It is a complex and delicate matter where opening of a real debate through which the present deficiencies will be perceived in order to create an appropriate legal solutions was very important. However, the new Law on Interception of Communications as the most important in this area, retained a certain part of the provisions that were debatable in the previous legal solutions. The provisions regarding the model for interception of communications, which stipulates the establishment of a separate agency that mediates between the operators and the authorized bodies for interception of communications, were questionable as well. Also, new measures for monitoring communications in the interest of security and defense, as well as the provisions which regulate the disposition and delivery of metadata for security and defense, are also debatable. On the other side, the reform laws made an evident progress in a positive sense through the provisions for oversight and control over the interception of communications. With these changes, certain debatable elements have been overcome, especially those that have hindered it so far, and in some cases completely paralyzed the oversight and control over the monitoring of communications. In this paper we analyzed the debatable elements in the reform package of laws on interception of communications as well as some positive aspects contained in the provisions of the reform laws.


Author(s):  
Agnese Reine-Vītiņa

Mūsdienās tiesības uz privāto dzīvi nepieciešamas ikvienā demokrātiskā sabiedrībā, un šo tiesību iekļaušana konstitūcijā juridiski garantē fiziskas personas rīcības brīvību un vienlaikus arī citu – valsts pamatlikumā noteikto – cilvēka tiesību īstenošanu [5]. Personas datu aizsardzības institūts tika izveidots, izpratnes par tiesību uz personas privātās dzīves neaizskaramību saturu paplašinot 20. gadsimta 70. gados, kad vairāku Eiropas valstu valdības uzsāka informācijas apstrādes projektus, piemēram, tautas skaitīšanu u. c. Informācijas tehnoloģiju attīstība ļāva arvien vairāk informācijas par personām glabāt un apstrādāt elektroniski. Viena no tiesību problēmām bija informācijas vākšana par fizisku personu un tiesību uz privātās dzīves neaizskaramību ievērošana. Lai nodrošinātu privātās dzīves aizsardzību, atsevišķas Eiropas valstis pēc savas iniciatīvas pieņēma likumus par datu aizsardzību. Pirmie likumi par personas datu aizsardzību Eiropā tika pieņemti Vācijas Federatīvajā Republikā, tad Zviedrijā (1973), Norvēģijā (1978) un citur [8, 10]. Ne visas valstis pieņēma likumus par datu aizsardzību vienlaikus, tāpēc Eiropas Padome nolēma izstrādāt konvenciju, lai unificētu datu aizsardzības noteikumus un principus. Nowadays, the right to privacy is indispensable in every democratic society and inclusion of such rights in the constitution, guarantees legally freedom of action of a natural person and, simultaneously, implementation of other human rights established in the fundamental law of the state. The institute of personal data protection was established by expanding the understanding of the content of the right to privacy in the 70’s of the 19th century, when the government of several European countries initiated information processing projects, such as population census etc. For the development of information technology, more and more information on persons was kept and processed in electronic form. One of the legal problems was gathering of information on natural persons and the right to privacy. In order to ensure the protection of privacy, separate European countries, on their own initiative, established a law on data protection. The first laws on the protection of personal data in Europe were established in the Federal Republic of Germany, then in Sweden (1973), Norway (1978) and elsewhere. Not all countries adopted laws on data protection at the same time, so the Council of Europe decided to elaborate a convention to unify data protection rules and principles.


2021 ◽  
pp. 125
Author(s):  
GULNAZ AYDIN RZAYEVA ◽  
AYTAKIN NAZIM IBRAHIMOVA

The development of new technologies also has an impact on human rights. In the previous “epochs” of global information society, it was stated that that traditional rights can be exercised online. For instance, in 2012 (and again in 2014 and 2016), the UN Human Rights Council emphasized that ‘the same rights granted to people, so to speak, in an “offline” manner, must be protected online as well’. This, in its turn, implicitly brought to the reality that the new technetronic society did not create new rights. Though, we should take into consideration that in the digital world national legislative norms that guarantee the confidentiality of personal data often do not catch up with the technological development and, thus, can’t ensure confidentiality online. Therefore, the impact of digitalization on human rights within the frames of international and national laws should be broadly analysed and studied. The article’s objective is to analyze the impact of new technologies on human rights in the context of the right to be forgotten and right to privacy. Because the development of new technologies is more closely linked to the security of personal data. With the formation of the right to be forgotten, it is the issue of ensuring the confidentiality of certain contents of personal data as a result of the influence of the time factor. The authors conclude that, the right to be forgotten was previously defended more in the context of the right to privacy. However, they cannot be considered equal rights. The right to be forgotten stems from a person’s desire to develop and continue his or her life independently without being the object of criticism for any negative actions he or she has committed in the past. If the right to privacy contains generally confidential information, the right to be forgotten is understood as the deletion of known information at a certain time and the denial of access to third parties. Thus, the right to be forgotten is not included in the right to privacy, and can be considered an independent right. The point is that the norms of the international and national documents, which establish fundamental human rights and freedoms, do not regulate issues related to the right to be forgotten. The right to be forgotten should be limited to the deletion of information from the media and Internet information resources. This is not about the complete destruction of information available in state information systems. Another conclusion of authors is that the media and Internet information resources sometimes spread false information. In this case, there will be no content of the right to be forgotten. Because the main thing is that the information that constitutes the content of the right to be forgotten must be legal, but after some time it has lost its significance. The scope of information included in the content of the right to be forgotten should not only be related to the conviction, but also to other special personal data (for example, the fact of divorce).


Author(s):  
William Bülow ◽  
Misse Wester

As information technology is becoming an integral part of modern society, there is a growing concern that too much data containing personal information is stored by different actors in society and that this could potentially be harmful for the individual. The aim of this contribution is to show how the extended use of ICT can affect the individual’s right to privacy and how the public perceives risks to privacy. Three points are raised in this chapter: first, if privacy is important from a philosophical perspective, how is this demonstrated by empirical evidence? Do individuals trust the different actors that control their personal information, and is there a consensus that privacy can and should be compromised in order to reach another value? Second, if compromises in privacy are warranted by increased safety, is this increased security supported by empirical evidence? Third, the authors will argue that privacy can indeed be a means to increase the safety of citizens and that the moral burden of ensuring and protecting privacy is a matter for policy makers, not individuals. In conclusion, the authors suggest that more nuanced discussion on the concepts of privacy and safety should be acknowledged and the importance of privacy must be seen as an important objective in the development and structure of ICT uses.


2017 ◽  
Vol 15 (3/4) ◽  
pp. 573-581 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gareth Norris

The resurgence in interest in authoritarianism has been linked to a rise in the acceptance of right-wing ideology and also restrictions on civil liberties, particularly in relation to surveillance and the right to privacy. Whilst we can observe simple correlations between these variables, the dynamics of threat are more complex to understand. The analysis reported here demonstrates how the relationship between authoritarianism and the curtailment of civil liberties is moderated by the threat of terrorism. Using 2005 British Social Attitudes survey data, collected either side of the 7/7 bombings, comparisons between the pre-post samples indicate that the threat of terrorism activates authoritarian tendencies and reduces the protection of rights to privacy from government. Interestingly and importantly, reactions to terrorism in the form of a change in opinion regarding civil liberties for those scoring higher in authoritarianism remained almost constant between the two periods. The results provide support for understanding how minority opinions (removal of rights to privacy) can become majority views during times of threat.


2012 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-26
Author(s):  
Mindaugas Bilius

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


Author(s):  
Araz Poladov

Purpose of research: define the general characteristics of the protection of personal data; analysis of legislation and case law.Methods of research: analysis and study of regulatory documents containing provisions on protection of personal data.Results: normative and practical importance of personal data protection provisions in various legal acts has been underscored.The right to privacy strengthened its position in the United States in the late 19th century and is now recognized by most States.Although the right to privacy in the United States was originally a British political legacy, judicial decisions in England were more conservativeand cautious than those of U.S. courts. One of the important features of this law in the Anglo-Saxon legal system is that itwas previously formed by judicial precedents and legal doctrine. Also, the right to privacy was not among the rights provided for in theBill of Rights. In general, there is an industry-wide approach to data privacy in the United States. There is no specific federal law thatwould guarantee the confidentiality and protection of personal data. Instead, legislation at the federal level is dispersed and aims to protectdata in certain sectors. Judicial practice and court decisions taken at different times play an important role in regulating personaldata protection in the United States. It is also worth mentioning that until the 1970s, decisions of the U.S. courts did not provide thenecessary privacy protection safeguards.Discussion: offering a comprehensive and detailed study and use of this practice in other states.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document