Can a party litigant who lost in a case request the removal of courts decision published in its website and other repository of laws and jurisprudence claiming that such publication impugns his right to privacy?

PRIVACY as defined In general , the right to be free from secret surveillance and to determine whether, when, how, and to whom, one's personal or organizational information is to be revealed. In specific, privacy may be divided into four categories

(1) Physical: restriction on others to experience a person or situation through one or more of the human senses;

(2) Informational: restriction on searching for or revealing facts that are unknown or unknowable to others;
(3)restriction on interfering in decisions that are exclusive to an entity
(4) restriction on attempts to know an individuals state of mind.- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privacy

Privacy and confidentiality are terms sometimes used interchangeably. Although related to each other, these are not identical concepts. Fundamentally, privacy is about persons; confidentiality is about information. Privacy includes both the idea of respect for personal autonomy and an interest in freedom from uninvited and unwarranted intrusions.It also efers to our right to control access to ourselves and to our personal information.

We individuals are the most numerous members of the "Private Sector." In a democratic societies, the most basic human right right to privacy which in our jurisdiction is rooted under the 1987 Philippine Constitution expressly provided in Article II, Section 2

[t]he right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures of whatever nature and for any purpose shall be inviolable…

This includes all the physical and mental aspects of private person and citizenship in the private sector. The individual citizen is also the smallest possible minority in a democratic society, the cell of the body politic as it were. The individual gets an entire Article of the Constitution guaranteeing such protection -- the Bill of Rights. It has been said that it is THE MOTHER OF ALL RIGHTS. Every person's Right to Privacy is thus the most precious of democratic rights. It is the Mother of all our core democratic rights.

The issue arose from this is that can a party litigant who lost in a case request the removal of courts decision published in its website and other repository of laws and jurisprudence claiming that such publication impugns his right to privacy?

My position is in the negative.We have to take into account that judicial decisions forms part of the legal system of the Philippines (Article 8 of the New Civil Code). This are public records vested with public interest. Under Section 7 of Article III of the Constitution provides that

“the right of the people to information on matters of public concern shall be recognized. Access to official records, and to documents, and papers pertaining to official acts, transactions, or decisions, as well as to government research data used as basis for policy development, shall be afforded the citizen, subject to such limitations as may be provided by law”

This inquires the signifance as regards the rights vested in our 1987 Philippine constitution the “Right to Information” or “Right to Privacy” which of this will be given more weight the right to privacy prevails or the right to information.

Every guaranteed right is subject to certain limitations under the law. The 1987 Constitution enshrined the right to privacy in our bill of rights.It has been decided in numerous cases by the court that the right to privacy prevails over the right to information. Every law has its exemption and henceforth the right to privacy is not limitless. The decision of the Court form part of the law of the land as provided for in our Civil Code and therefore if laws need to published, applying the principle that the agent follows the principal, since court decision that we call jurisprudence is the manifestation of the law, Courts Decision must also be published whether in print or online (internet). The paramount consideration in publishing laws is that it serves as an affirmative evidence in part of the government that the law is known to all and therefore ignorance of such may not be established as a defence, underlying the time honoured principle of “dura lex sed lex”. Now, if such decision forming the Philippine Jurisprudence is allowed to be removed then it will violate the people’s right to information, knowing how the law is interpreted or manifested is as important as knowing the law itself.

And finally this lawful purpose, I strongly adhere to believe that no privacy rights are violated.The request by a losing litigant of the removal of courts decision published in its website and other repository of laws and jurisprudence claiming it impugns a person’s right to privacy will not be a proper remedy. It will only be a hindrance to the efficient and effective dissemination of the laws and jurisprudence to the public.