Privacy as a Privilege ?

"Privacy is not something that I'm merely entitled to, it's an absolute prerequisite" - Marlon Brando

Pondering upon the above quote during our brainstorming session on an individuals Right to Privacy one was struck by the self-assured sense of entitlement that was expressed by Marlon Brando.

A sense of entitlement which should stand at odds with the understanding of Privacy as a Right which if exercised would also impose certain duty or obligation upon the wielder of the same.

Clearly, the sentiment in the quote above seems rather averse to this idea, expecting Privacy as a sort of minimum basic courtesy. If Privacy is to be treated in such a fashion, perhaps it would be better understood as a privilege rather than a right unto itself. 

Such an understanding though, coming from a celebrity, bad boy poster child like Marlon Brando seems odd. The rich and famous of course have their own special relationship with Privacy.

Today influencers and Public figures hardly treat Privacy as a minimum courtesy or right but rather as a marketing tool. A few moments in the spotlight and thus entry into public consciousness seems to have turned the idea of Privacy from a privilege/ right into a marketable commodity instead.

The internet age allowing for quick and easy sharing of knowledge has already created an easy network for Privacy to be exploited, the careers of the entire Kardashian clan seems testament to this fact.

Discussions of Privacy and Celebrity gossip culture always lead to the question of permissiveness. To what extent is sacrificing privacy considered okay? Are we truly a global community of openness?

The answer to this seems to be that as long as the means of dispensation of private information is in the hands of the people concerned, a controlled loss of privacy is permissible. The existence of confidentiality agreements points in support of the same.

But what of Celebrities and their flocks of circling vultures. How may the paparazzi be kept at bay from attacking one's privacy? The long arm of the of the Law may come to the rescue in such cases. To ensure that Marlon Brando need not keep turning in his grave, the Republic of France is known to have strong privacy protection laws. This evidenced by the fact that in 2017 Kate Middleton won her Topless photograph lawsuit regarding images captured at a private beach.

British Royalty has always had close ties to France and significant issues with Privacy as well (in order to protect their divine right to rule) Talk of Kate Middleton brought us to the next issue of significance. The death of Princess Diana in Paris while being chased by paparazzi.The significance of this event brought to light another underlying issue about privacy worth pondering about. 

The question of Privacy leading to a lack of accountability. Suppose the Paparazzi in following the Peoples Princess were not hunting for an inside scoop but looking instead for journalism of substance, reflecting a marker of modernity, the changing face of Great Britain. After all, she may have eventually headed the Royal family and thus the Nation State as well.

Reporting of issues concerning the functioning of the entire State would arguably trump the Privacy of a single individual. We now know for a fact that people of far lesser significance have their privacy violated for State safety and security.

It is at this point that it dawned on us that this was a Constitutional Law class after all and that it would be helpful to the issue of Privacy to the same. It is not easy to quit celebrity gossip though so naturally our conversation had to turn to yet another tragic public figure.

In this case M.K.Gandhi, a man who lost his life trying to increase his public accessibility rather than trying to escape the mob to protect his privacy. It is interesting to note that he was killed at a public prayer meeting, for which he had refused additional security so as to be able to reach out to a greater fraction of his people.

The Mahatma passed away on 30th January 1948, while to Indian Constituent Assembly was in full session crafting together the guiding principles of our nation. It is a question of great interest here to investigate the kind of impact the death of M.K.Gandhi may have had on the committee with respect to the Right to Privacy. Today the Right to Privacy is not a fundamental right inscribed into the constitution and an attempt to read it into the same is being made by the Judiciary. Perhaps a similar attitude to privacy at that time may have saved the life of the Mahatma. In any case, it is worth a look at the Constitutional Assembly Debates (CAD) around that timeline looking for hints about the same.

KEY TAKEAWAYS:

Is Privacy an entitlement/right/mere privilege?

In terms of dissemination of information, how is privacy to be understood?

Privacy of information and confidentiality  VS.  Public access to information and greater accountability.

What if a Right to Privacy had helped Gandhi survive 30th January 1948?

Invest time in more productive activities, not celebrity gossip.