The Supreme Court has determined the legal consequences of disrespect for private life.
This was reported to Elchi.az from the Supreme Court.
It was reported that the Supreme Court adopted a new Plenum decision “On the Protection of Personal Rights” on December 24 and introduced a number of innovations to court practice: “Previously, if a person spread false information about another person, he/she would make claims by using the institution of protection of honor and dignity, and if the information turned out to be true, the claims would not be satisfied. However, the dissemination of true information about a person without his/her consent is also a violation of the law.
This is an interference with the right to personal inviolability protected at the constitutional level, and anyone whose right is violated can get acquainted with the information collected about him/her, correct information that is untrue, incomplete, and obtained in violation of the requirements of the law, request the removal (cancellation) of such information, compensation for moral damage, etc.”
What is the right to respect for private and family life?
The court stated that the right to respect for private and family life is the right to keep the privacy of private and family life, to be protected from illegal interference in private and family life, that is, from the collection, storage, use and dissemination of information about private life without one’s consent. Even after a person’s death, this right can be protected by his/her heirs:
If the dissemination is done through audio-video recording, the media entity, along with the person who disseminates it, will unequivocally be liable for violating the right to respect for private and family life
“Information about a person’s medical information, financial and property status, personal correspondence, information about his/her past and other information constituting a personal secret, address, family status, height, age, gender, personal relations between spouses (emotional, sexual, etc.), intra-family behavior, reasons for divorce, children’s origin and health status, information about adoption, as well as other information of a confidential and sensitive nature for the family, is prohibited and entails civil liability to collect, store, use and disseminate without the person’s own consent or any legal basis, to inform the person himself/herself with malicious intent. It is forbidden to collect information about someone purposefully and with active actions, without any legal basis.
It is forbidden to disseminate personal and family secret information without the consent of the persons to whom it belongs. In particular, reporting it by mass methods on television or radio programs, social networks, etc. may result in greater moral damage due to the mass nature of the dissemination. If the dissemination is done through audio-video recording, the media entity, along with the person who disseminates it, will unequivocally be liable for violating the right to respect for private and family life.
If the content of the program carries the risk of illegal interference with personal rights, media entities in regularly live programs and various series of broadcasts must warn people who will appear live in an agreed manner in advance that they will be liable for violating people’s right to respect for private and family life due to the information and behavior they voice, otherwise the media body itself will be liable for the violations that occurred.”
In addition, with the new decision, the Supreme Court assessed entering a person’s apartment, a service room allocated to an employee, shelves, desk, computer, person’s bag, pocket without his/her consent, as well as without a relevant legal basis, as a violation of the right to personal inviolability. Regardless of whether the violation of these rights entails criminal liability, it will entail civil liability:
“Along with persons who have disseminated information constituting personal and family secrets, persons, institutions, agencies and enterprises responsible for storing this information, persons responsible for managing information and human resources about employees (persons providing services on other grounds) in the personnel system of workplaces, employers, clinics, mobile operator networks, banks and other enterprises providing services to citizens, state bodies, social network platforms, legal entities and individuals will also be liable as persons who ensure illegal access of information to third parties.”
In what cases is the dissemination of information constituting personal and family secrets legal?
The Supreme Court has also clarified these cases: “If the person himself/herself consents to the dissemination of such information, civil liability does not arise. Consent must be expressed explicitly and must not be contrary to law or morality. A person may give his/her consent both in writing and orally, or show it by his/her behavior or by remaining silent. For example, if a person likes a post made about him/her on a social network without his/her consent and writes a positive comment under it, he/she is considered to have given his/her consent.
At this time, the dissemination should not exceed public interest. For example, a journalist informs the public that the head of a local self-government body owns luxury apartments and cars that do not match his/her official income, as well as that his/her child has congenital defects. Although the circumstances regarding the person’s property status are personal information, they are within the legitimate interest of the society, and the dissemination of this information cannot be considered a violation. However, information about the child’s physical defects will be considered an illegal interference with private and family life, because it does not have any public interest in terms of the performance of that person’s public duties.”