Page 3, our favorite part of each newspaper! Its like we are so attracted and inquisitive to know more about the celebrities as to what are they up to, what do they eat, who are they having a love life with, where are they travelling. We in fact go to the extent of looking up their children too. Taimur, Kareena Kapoor’s son bought this celeb kids trend and every other person started adoring him and waited for his one glimpse on social media.
But what about their privacy? After all they are humans like us and deserve as much rights if not more.
Right to privacy is a fundamental right and is inviolable. The degree of privacy also varies. The public person who works under the public eye as a public official cannot assume the same degree to be given, as provided to a private individual. His acts and behavior as they are of public interest can be brought to public attention via the media. However, the press has a reciprocal obligation to ensure that knowledge regarding these activities and the public person’s actions of public interest is collected by reasonable means, is duly checked and then correctly published.[1]
The public figure family is not a legitimate journalistic subject, more so if the children are included in its coverage. The Press shall not intrude or violate an individual’s privacy unless it is outweighed by legitimate public interest. Also, the principle of PRIVACY includes subjects pertaining to a person’s residence, family, identity, religion, health, orientation, personal life and private affairs.[2]
The right to privacy is based on the principle of individuality. Celebrities try to keep their personal life as a secret. Indian constitution acknowledges the right to privacy as a constitutional right under Article 21. The said right is not expressly mentioned anywhere in the Constitution. The four separate freedoms protected by the right to privacy rubric are[3]:
1. The right to avoid public disclosure of private rights.
2. The right to intrude upon a person’s isolation and to prevent some sort of prying in a person’s private affairs.
3. Avoid fake light publicity, and
4. Curb misappropriation of the name and likeness of an individual.
Perhaps the Court accepted the Right to privacy of celebrity for the first time under in
R. RajaGopal v. State of Tamil Nadu[8], the court held that no one could publish anything regarding families, marriage, procreation, motherhood, childbearing, and schooling among others without the individual’s permission. If he did so, he will breach the individual concerned right to privacy, and will be liable for compensation in an action (Para 28). This is the first case in which the court ruled that the right to privacy will be infringed whether, for example, the identity or appearance of an individual were used without his permission, for advertisement or non-advertising purposes or for some other matter. (Para 9)
The right of celebrities to make choices about the exposure levels they wish to accept and to take advantage of exposure if they choose to is a well-recognized concept in the West. However, in India, the right to privacy resulting from declarations of judicial pronouncements is not equipped to protect the rights of celebrity.[4]
One of the most popular judicial opinions has been given in the case of Barber vs. Times Inc wherein a photographer took pictures of Dorthy Barber giving a pregnancy delivery to a baby boy. Ms. Barber had filed a suit of “Invasion of Privacy” against Time inc. for unauthorized and forceful entry in to her hospital room and for photographing her despite her protests. Ms. Barber was successful in her suit and the court while awarding damages of 3000$ opined: –
“In publishing details of private matters, the media may report accurately and yet – at least on some occasions – may be found liable for damages. Lawsuits for defamation will not stand where the media have accurately reported the truth, but the media nevertheless could lose an action for invasion of privacy based on similar facts situations. In such instances the truth sometimes hurts.”
Therefore, in this case also we see that there has been a remedy available to the celebrities either in the form of an action of “invasion of privacy” or in the form of assertion of the fundamental right of “Right to Privacy” as a part of Article 21 of the constitution.
[1] Lipika Sharma, Privacy, Celebrities and the Media,
[2] Ibid
[3] T Vidya Kumari, Celebrity Rights as a Form of Merchandise- Protection under the Intellectual Property Regime, 9 JIPR 120, 122 (2004).
[4] Souvanik Mullick and Swati Narnaulia, Protecting Celebrity Rights Through Intellectual Property Conceptions, NUJS Law Review, 1(4) NUJS Law Rev 615 (2008), http://www.commonlii.org/in/journals/NUJSLawRw/2008/36.html.
Aishwarya Says:
I have always been against Glorifying Over Work and therefore, in the year 2021, I have decided to launch this campaign “Balancing Life”and talk about this wrong practice, that we have been following since last few years. I will be talking to and interviewing around 1 lakh people in the coming 2021 and publish their interview regarding their opinion on glamourising Over Work.
If you are interested in participating in the same, do let me know.
Do follow me on Facebook, Twitter Youtube and Instagram.
The copyright of this Article belongs exclusively to Ms. Aishwarya Sandeep. Reproduction of the same, without permission will amount to Copyright Infringement. Appropriate Legal Action under the Indian Laws will be taken.
If you would also like to contribute to my website, then do share your articles or poems at adv.aishwaryasandeep@gmail.com
We also have a Facebook Group Restarter Moms for Mothers or Women who would like to rejoin their careers post a career break or women who are enterpreneurs.
We are also running a series Inspirational Women from January 2021 to March 31,2021, featuring around 1000 stories about Indian Women, who changed the world. #choosetochallenge