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
(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.
Walang komento:
Mag-post ng isang Komento