Under article 12 of Universal Declaration of Human Rights, no shall be subjected to

arbitrary interference with his family, privacy, home and correspondence, nor to
attacks upon his honor and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of
the law against such interference or attacks.
Before discussing the right to privacy, lets first define the word privacy. Privacy, it
came from the latin word privatus, which means separated from the rest. According
to Wikipedia, it is the ability of an individual or group to seclude themselves or
information about themselves and thereby express themselves selectively.
The boundaries and content of what is considered private differ among cultures and
individuals, but share common themes. When something is private to a person, it
usually means there is something to them inherently special or sensitive.
The right not to be subjected to unsanctioned invasion of privacy by the
government, corporations or individuals is part of many countries' privacy laws, and
in some cases, constitutions.
Privacy is a fundamental human right that has become one of the most important
rights of the modern age.
There are 4 basic types of privacy. First, the Physical privacy. It could be defined as
preventing intrusions into ones physical space or solitude. This includes:
preventing intimate acts or hiding ones body from others for the purpose of
modesty; apart from being dressed this can be achieve by walls, fences, partitions
etc., video of intimate acts, behavior or body parts, preventing unwelcome
searching of ones personal possessions, preventing unauthorized access to ones
home or vehicle, medical privacy as a right to make fundamental medical decisions
without governmental coercion or third party review, most widely applied to
questions of contraception.
Next type is organizational such as government agencies, corporations,
group/societies and other organization which desire to keep their activities or
secrets from being revealed. (executive privilege, trade secrets)
Next is spiritual and intellectual. In very early times, the law gave a remedy only for
physical interference with life and property, for trespasses. Privacy rights gradually
expanded to include a recognition of mans spiritual nature, of his feelings and his
intellect. Like for example, the meaning of property would comprise every form of
possession, tangible and intangible. And also because because by the late 19 th
century, interest in a right to privacy grew as a response to the growth of print
media, especially newspapers.
Lastly, informational or data privacy. This refers to the evolving relationship
between technology and the legal right to privacy in the collection and sharing of
data about ones self. For various reasons, individual may object to personal

information such as their religion, sexual orientation, political affiliations, or

personal activities being revealed, perhaps to avoid discrimination, personal
embarrassment, or damage to their personal reputations.

The remedies are as follows: damages for torts and Writ of Habeas which is a
remedy available to any person whose right to privacy in life, liberty, or security is
violated or threatened by an unlawful act or omission of a public official or
employee, or of a private individual or entity engaged in the gathering, collecting,
or storing of data or information regarding the person, family, home, and
correspondence of the aggrieved party.
The petition may be filed with the Regional Trial Court where the petitioner or
respondent lives, or that which has jurisdiction over the place where the data or
information is gathered, collected, or stored, at the option of the petitioner. It may
also be filed with the Supreme Court or Court of Appeals or the Sandigan bayan,
when the action concerns public data files of government offices.

ThereisnoexplicitrighttoprivacyintheU.S.Constitution.TheSupremeCourthasruledthat
thereisalimitedconstitutionalrightofprivacybasedonanumberofprovisionsintheBillof
Rightsandsubsequentamendments.Thisincludesarighttoprivacyfromgovernment
surveillanceintoanareawhereapersonhasa"reasonableexpectationofprivacy"[fn268]and
alsoinmattersrelatingtomarriage,procreation,contraception,familyrelationships,child
rearingandeducation.[fn269]However,recordsheldbythirdpartiessuchasfinancialrecords
ortelephonecallingrecordsaregenerallynotprotectedunlessaspecificfederallawapplies.The
courthasalsorecognizedarightofanonymity[fn270]andtherightofgroupstonothaveto
disclosetheirmembers'namestogovernmentagencies.[fn271]
TheU.S.hasnogeneralprivacyprotectionlaw.ThePrivacyActof1974protectsrecordsheld
byU.S.Governmentagenciesandrequiresthemtoapplybasicfairinformationpractices.[fn
272]Itseffectivenessissignificantlyweakenedbyadministrativeinterpretationsofaprovision
allowingfordisclosureofpersonalinformationfora"routineuse"compatiblewiththepurpose
forwhichitwasoriginallycollected.LimitsontheuseoftheSocialSecurityNumberhavealso
beenundercutinrecentyearsforanumberofpurposes.
ThereisnoprivacyoversightagencyintheU.S.TheOfficeofManagementandBudgetplaysa
limitedroleinsettingpolicyforfederalagenciesandhasnotbeenparticularlyactiveoreffective.
TheFederalTradeCommissionhasoversightandenforcementpowersforthelawsprotecting
consumercreditinformationandfairtradingpractices.[fn273]Recently,theFTCbegan
requiringthatcompaniesfollowtheprivacynoticesontheirInternetsites.[fn274]TheFTCsaid
inSeptember1998thatitwouldseeklegislationtocoverInternetprivacy.[fn275]AnFTC

judgealsorecentlyfoundthatTransUnion,amajorcreditbureau,hadviolatedthelawbyusing
informationfromcreditreportsfordirectmarketingpurposes.[fn276]
Surveillanceoftelephone,oralandelectroniccommunicationsforcriminalinvestigationsis
governedbytheOmnibusSafeStreetsandCrimeControlActof1967andtheElectronic
CommunicationsPrivacyActof1986.[fn277]Policearerequiredtoobtainacourtorderbased
onanumberoflegalrequirements.Surveillancefornationalsecuritypurposesisgovernedbythe
ForeignIntelligenceSurveillanceActwhichhaslesslegalrequirements.[fn278]Thelawswere
amendedbyacontroversialbillin1994toforcetelephonecompaniestoredesigntheir
equipmenttofacilitatesurveillance.[fn279]Therewere1186ordersforinterceptionsfor
criminalpurposesand749fornationalsecuritypurposesin1997.[fn280]
Apatchworkoflawscoverssomespecificareasofinformation.[fn281]Theseincludefinancial
records,[fn282]creditreports,[fn283]videorentals,[fn284]cabletelevision,[fn285]
educationalrecords,[fn286]motorvehicleregistrations,[fn287]andtelephonerecords.[fn
288]TheFreedomofInformationActwasenactedin1966.[fn289]Thereisalsoavarietyof
sectorallegislationonthestatelevelthatmaygiveadditionalprotectionstocitizensofindividual
states.[fn290]Thetortofprivacywasfirstadoptedin1892andallbuttwoofthe50states
recognizeacivilrightofactionforinvasionofprivacyintheirlaws.
TherehasbeensignificantdebateintheUnitedStatesoverrecentyearsaboutthedevelopment
ofprivacylawscoveringtheprivatesector.Thereareover100billspendinginCongresson
privacyprotection,includinglawsongeneticandmedicalrecords,Internetprivacy,children's
privacyandotherissues.[fn291]However,thecurrentpositionoftheWhiteHouseandthe
privatesectoristhatselfregulationissufficientandthatnonewlawsshouldbeenactedexcept
forlimitedmeasuresonchildren'sprivacyandmedicalinformation.
TheU.S.isamemberoftheOrganizationforEconomicCooperationandDevelopmentbuthas
notadoptedtheOECDGuidelinesontheProtectionofPrivacyandTransborderFlowsof
PersonalDatainanysubstantivewayineitherthepublicorprivatesector.

Philippines

ArticleIIIofthe1987Constitutionprotectstherightofprivacy.Section2states"Therightof
thepeopletobesecureintheirpersons,houses,papers,andeffectsagainstunreasonable

searchesandseizuresofwhatevernatureandforanypurposeshallbeinviolable,andnosearch
warrantorwarrantofarrestshallissueexceptuponprobablecausetobedeterminedpersonally
bythejudgeafterexaminationunderoathoraffirmationofthecomplainantandthewitnesseshe
mayproduce,andparticularlydescribingtheplacetobesearchedandthepersonsorthingstobe
seized."Section3states:"(1)Theprivacyofcommunicationandcorrespondenceshallbe
inviolableexceptuponlawfulorderofthecourt,orwhenpublicsafetyororderrequires
otherwiseasprescribedbylaw.(2)Anyevidenceobtainedinviolationofthisorthepreceding
sectionshallbeinadmissibleforanypurposeinanyproceeding."Section7states:"Therightof
thepeopletoinformationonmattersofpublicconcernshallberecognized.Accesstoofficial
records,andtodocumentsandpaperspertainingtoofficialacts,transactions,ordecisions,as
wellastogovernmentresearchdatausedasbasisforpolicydevelopment,shallbeaffordedthe
citizen,subjecttosuchlimitationsasmaybeprovidedbylaw."[fn94]
Thereisnogeneraldataprotectionlawbutthereisarecognizedrightofprivacyincivillaw.[fn
95]BankrecordsareprotectedbytheBankSecrecyAct.
TheAntiWiretappingLawrequiresacourtordertoobtainatelephonetap.[fn96]InMay1998,
DirectorGen.SantiagoAlino,chiefofthePhilippineNationalPolice,orderedaninvestigationof
theallegedelectioneeringandillegalwiretappingactivitiesbymembersoftheNationalPolice's
SpecialProjectAlpha(SPA).Matillanosaidthathisofficereceivedinformationthattheformer
SPAmenhadbeenusingtheofficeastheir"monitoringcenter"againstVicePresidentEstrada's
politicalopponents.Fiverecordersusedtomonitorwiretapswerefoundattheoffices.[fn97]
TheHouseandtheSenateheldinvestigationsinAugust1997afterofficialsofthetelephone
companyadmittedthattheiremployeeswerebeingpaidtoconductillegalwiretaps.[fn98]
TheSupremeCourtruledinJuly1998thatAdministrativeOrderNo.308introducedbyformer
PresidentRamosin1996,theAdoptionofaNationalComputerizedIdentificationReference
System,wasunconstitutional.TheCourtsaidthattheorder,"willputourpeople'srightto
privacyinclearandpresentdanger..NoonewillrefusetogetthisIDfornoonecanavoid
dealingwithgovernment.ItisthusclearasdaylightthatwithouttheID,acitizenwillhave
difficultyexercisinghisrightsandenjoyinghisprivileges."Governmentlawyersaskedthecourt
toreconsideritsdecisioninAugust,[fn99]andPresidentJosephEstradareiteratedhissupport
fortheuseofanationalidentificationsysteminAugust1998statingthatonlycriminalsare
againstanationalID.[fn100]JusticeSecretarySerafinCuevasauthorizedtheNationalStatistics
Office(NSO)toproceedtousethepopulationreferencenumber(PRN)fortheCivilRegistry
SystemInformationTechnologyProject(CRSITP)onAugust14,claimingthatitisnotcovered
bythedecision.[fn101]