2 Matching Annotations
  1. Sep 2017
    1. While it intervenes to protect legitimate state interests, the state must nevertheless put into place a robust regime that ensures the fulfilment of a three-fold requirement. These three requirements apply to all restraints on privacy (not just informational privacy). They emanate from the procedural and content-based mandate of Article 21. The first requirement that there must be a law in existence to justify an encroachmenton privacy is an express requirement of Article 21. For, no person can be deprived of his life or personal liberty except in accordance with the procedure established by law. The existence of law is an essential requirement. Second, the requirement of aneed, in terms of a legitimate state aim, ensures that the nature and content of the law which imposes the restriction falls within the zone of reasonableness mandated by Article 14, which is a guarantee against arbitrary state action. The pursuit of a legitimate state aim ensures that the law does not suffer from

      21 obligates the state to take steps to protect privacy (even in horizontal relationships?)

    2. reasonable expectation that it will be utilised

      Does the constitutional right to privacy envisage the purpose limitation principle? Does it only apply to state/private parties acting on behalf of state or for purely horizontal relationships as well?