REFLECTING THE RIGHT TO PRIVACY IN THE DECISIONS OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF ROMANIA
Journal Title: Challenges of the knowledge society ( Provocari ale societatii cunoasterii ) - Year 2019, Vol 11, Issue 13
Abstract
The need to protect has deep roots in the history of law. Paradoxically, the more humanity has endeavored to legislate, the abuse and the lack of real support from those responsible for ensuring security and peace have increased. That is how society felt that, besides the internal regulation of privacy, it had to appeal to international organisations whose purpose was to persuade states that they alone could be able to resist any abusive interference in the individual's privacy. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights established in 1948 that no man would be the object of arbitrary interference in his private life, as long as there is legal protection against these intrusions1. Article The Right to Privacy written by Samuel Warren and Louis Brandeis, appeared in the Harvard Law Review, volume IV, issue 5 of December 15, 1890, is considered to be one of the most influential essays in the history of American law2, and the right to private life is defined by the authors as the right to be left alone or the right to loneliness3. The social evolution and the transformations of law have gradually led to an increasing distance between the initial desideratum - that of loneliness - and the real need to ensure a safety and protection environment for each individual. Even if at the theoretical level any individual has the right to be left alone, in reality this right is not necessarily illusory, but rather impossible to be respected in the way we would probably want each one of us. Complex threats, from wars, civil movements, terrorism, to cyber attacks, and the need for strong nations to dominate, have transformed the right to private life into a promising slogan whenever interest calls for it, or, worse, have reduced to noticeable dimensions invoking the need for over-protection of the individual by the state. But what are governments doing in the name of protecting their own citizens? They violate private life, but they do it under the protection of the law, they do not respect fundamental rights, but their action appears justified, they restrict liberties and even suppress any intimacy in the name of the protection of the general good. What does ultimately mean private life and how much should the state be interested in protecting it? Of course, the notion itself is all-encompassing, with unspeakable valences and hidden ramifications throughout our existence. We have a private life from the moment we are born, but others are responsible for it, private is the home with all its dependencies, private information about the state of health, or personal data, at work we have the right to intimacy, even a detainee has the right to ensure and respect his private life in designated spaces and the list can continue. By making a parallel between private life in the American model and the way it is protected in European law, a fundamental difference emerges. If in American law individual autonomy is the expression of absolutism, being the core of the existence of social rights, Europeans did not think this notion as an independent, stand alone, supreme relation to the other rights recognized by the individual but as an important, but not exclusive component or outside any limitations or restrictions. In European law, the balance between the protection of the general interest and the need to guarantee, within reasonable limits, respect for the right to privacy was maintained. Although Romania signed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948, the constitutional right to privacy did not find a distinct regulation either in the 1848 constitution or in 1952 or in 1965. At present, the Romanian Constitution protects and regulates the right to private life and the authorities have the obligation to respect it.
Authors and Affiliations
Eliza Ene CORBEANU
Keywords
Related Articles
- EP ID EP581900
- DOI -
- Views 79
- Downloads 0
ISSUES REGARDING THE JURISDICTION IN CASE OF JOINING THE CRIMINAL CASES
The joinder of criminal cases determines a prorogation of material or territorial jurisdiction of the court or, as the case may be, of the prosecuting authority ensuring a proper performance of the legal activities. The...
THE MODIFICATIONS BROUGHT TO THE LAW OF THE CONTENTIOUS ADMINISTRATIVE: CRITICAL PERSPECTIVE
In 2018, the lawmaker decided to amend the Law of the contentious administrative, and some of these changes can be deemed essential. However, the changes of 2018 do not reflect a knowledge of the realities of the content...
PROCEDURES FOR THE PROCUREMENT OF PUBLIC PROPERTY RIGHTS. THE LEGAL NATURE OF PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACTS
Public property belongs to the state or to an administrative-territorial unit and is made up of goods for public use or public interest declared as such either by their nature or by law. The goods constituting the public...
CONSTITUTION AND CONSTITUTIONALISM CONTEMPORARY ISSUE
In a democratic society, the judicial legitimacy of the state and its power, of its institutions, but also the social and political grounds are generated and determined by the Constitution, defined as expressively as pos...
THE OBSERVANCE OF FUNDAMENTAL HUMAN RIGHTS. THE DEATH PENALTY AND CORPORAL PUNISHMENTS. THE PROHIBITION OF TORTURE AND INHUMAN OR DEGRADING PUNISHMENTS
Corporal punishments by and large and death penalty specifically raise serious problems as to respecting human dignity and the fundamental human rights. The supreme courts of the UN member states quasi-unanimously consid...