Privacy and Laws that are Put in Place to Govern - Case Study Example

Issue of Privacy Whenever the word ‘privacy’ is mentioned, all that rings in mind is anything to do with personal affairs of life. Privacy can be defined in so many ways. Firstly, privacy can be defined as right to be independent within one’s zone of solitude. It is always perceived to be something that others should not know especially anything that happens in one’s life. Questions might arise as to why people do not want others to know about their issues. It may be due to the fact that they fear other people doing the same thing or may face rejection once whatever they are doing is discovered. So to help the situation, laws are put in place to ensure that personal privacy is highly protected. This paper will be on issues to do with privacy and laws that are put in place to govern the same. As much as there are some situations that one might be forced to talk about own privacy, there is an extent to which the same secrets should be let out. The right to privacy is very essential more especially in a more civilized generation. Everybody wants to have peace of the mind in whatever one does. The right to privacy may mean controlling personal information and the authority to deny or allow others to access that particular information. Privacy is regarded as a fundamental right according to the Supreme Court justice, Brandeis D. The constitution makers took a lot of keen interest in ensuring that citizens’ rights are protected in their beliefs, their emotions, their sensation and their thoughts. This might be steered by the fact that the constitution makers themselves were citizens hence they could not set up laws that could have infringed their rights. The right to privacy is a newly recognized right in the history records of humankind. Formerly privacy was not all that mentioned in both Christian and Muslim religion. Most laws were majorly put in place to deal with issues to do with commerce regulation acts, murder charges, theft, fornication, sorcery and any other issues that people felt hurt or intimidated when others did towards them. During this time, these laws were necessary due to the fact that male individuals dominated most of life scope hence the need for identifying true heirs was appropriate. In the past, most law codes did not support the “tooth for a tooth or eye for an eye” of Hammurabi’s code. In its place, the oppressor was by law bound to pay fees to the oppressed. Most of those people who had means, mostly men since women were limited to own property , were not all that above the law and were always compelled to pay the price for any offence committed that overstepped the rights of a single human being. In those days, the life of a free person was twice that of a slave hence most people who were capable saw it wise to quench their anger on slaves since paying for their price was affordable. To curb the usual nature of human revenge threading a continuous blood feud, many laws gave provision of some amount to be paid to the King or ruler of that particular area that the offence has been committed. For instance a murderer could pay a fee called “Fredum” to his king to buy protection. The amount varied depending on the territory over which the victim would need protection. Montesquieu believed that this was the origin of the word freedom. The replacement of tribal law by common law followed the adoption of primogeniture which later grew to ensure continued rule of a given family in an attempt to stabilize societies and avoid bloodshed upon the death of a particular ruler. While integration replaced nomadic invasion into feudal societies, a common law began to sprout in old England as well as other parts of Europe. Historicaly England is the primary historical source of American Law. Origins of current American rights to privacy and other inalienable rights may be traced to Magna Carta; this is said to be 13th century England which perhaps is the first time recorded history. This guaranteed certain personal rights to free men. In 17th century, Britain’s Bill of rights ensued to be an additional forerunner to the Declaration of independence, United States Constitution, and the American bill of rights a century later. Several philosophers have written articles about the “natural law” and right that are supposed to be in place as a result of man’s ability. John Locke’s article encouraged a belief in man’s aptitudes to distinguish and define what was best for each individual. John convincingly elaborated on God Given right of Kings in his first article- “Treatise of Government” applying both logical and biblical scriptures to clearly prove or define that each man has a right to self-determination and government of his or her choice. Several writes as well concurred with John Locke such as Jean Jacques and John Stuart Mill. For instance Jean Jacques argues that besides the public person, private person who compose it should as well be considered. Jean’s main point is to distinguish between respective rights of the citizens and the Sovereign authority as well as natural rights which private persons ought to enjoy in quality of men. John Stuart adds that protection against tyranny of the magistrate is not all that enough. Stuart argues that prevailing opinion and feelings as well needs protection against society’s tendency to impose through other means than civil penalties. According to Magna Carta and the British Bill of rights, America’s founding fathers had a way to declare their freedom from a tyrannical mode of government as well as the opinions of the Loyalists in United States and the popular public opinion in Great Britain. The constitution provided a way in which a government would be formed and how it is supposed to operate through a system of checks and balances and be responsive and controlled by common people or electorate of the Nation. To tame the level over which the government should act on any of its citizen, a Bill of rights and several amendments were written. As much as these amendments were made, there’s no single amendment that was named “rights to privacy” though most writings make reference to rights that are guarantors of privacy. Several Supreme Court rulings have defended the rights of an individual in accordance with the constitution. As much as every individual would prefer having right to privacy in his or her own life, it’s wise to note past and present attempts as well as their results to curtail or encroach upon private life. At some point, an individual may feel safe regarding given information that he or she gave somewhere not knowing how that particular information might be used behind him or her to gain other benefits (Moore 11). It is only through the benefit of other individuals that one might be informed how his or information is being misused. For instance, in medical field, one might give out information regarding his or her personal health; in turn the medical practitioners may use the same information to research at the expense of their benefit minus the information giver not knowing. This is as well rife in internet and technology where one might give logging information and in return the application administrators use the same login information to access other personal data in the account. Invasive actions by private citizens towards one another have also been on the rise mostly with the issue of video tapping of non-celebrities in both private and public places. More cases are where renters are being video tapped by landlords in bedrooms and even bathrooms. This action extends even in commercial places where clerks are secretly video tapped while attending to clients without the knowledge of the client. The rights of privacy can be maintained as long as the citizens and their Supreme Court judges are willing to stand up for the same. Attempts to protect individual rights are ongoing and have a major boost from organizations which are specifically dedicated to ensure that individual rights are protected. One of the best ways to ensure the right to privacy is adhered to is to ensure that strong ethical conducted is maintained for professionals that deal with personal information. Privacy protection still remains a question that needs more than one answer. However, the public wants a constitution that fills the gaps of privacy and deny overstepping congress the opportunity to tell people who to marry, how many kids one must have or even when to go to bed. The best bit of this matter is that the court will continue to appreciate the protection for a general right of privacy. A balance between privacy and safety is also needed. Works Cited Moore, Adam D. Privacy Rights: Moral and Legal Foundations. S.l.: Pennsylvania State Univ, 2011. Print. Read More