A right of privacy in Australi

Megan Richardson's article mainly focuses on the validity of a privacy right and whether an Australian right of privacy has emerged. However, there are three uncertainties that pertain to privacy:
O How will a privacy right be protected?
O Will the benefits of a privacy right be shared among commercial entities?
O Is there a relationship between privacy and freedom of speech?
The law of confidence can adequately protect privacy rights but there has been several cases that seem to reinforce the validity of such a right and this has haunt the courts continuously over many years. However, the protection of privacy interests has recently been explained and examined in greater detail due to the European Convention on Human Rights. In the case of "Douglas Vs Hello! Ltd", "the right to be let alone" was brought up as the core of a privacy right based on a general idea of personal autonomy. The case serves as a landmark case to open the floodgates for the development of a right to privacy in the Australian jurisprudence.
In the light of identifying personal autonomy as the basis of any privacy right, it is fundamental to determine why personal autonomy is important. There are two philosophical explanations brought up in the article, namely the Kantian idea and John Stuart Mill's idea.
The Kantian argument is clear and uncompromising. People are ends in themselves because they possess a rational will and this will manifest itself in decisions and actions and the respect due to the person requires autonomy. John Stuart Mill's idea is more utilitarian. He feels that once people achieve a certain level of welfare and education, they flourish in an environment where free choice is possible. The importance of a person to have his own desires will produce positive changes. Both of these arguments are completely different but equally important in the development

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *