Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Privacy in Context: The Right to Privacy, and Freedom and Independence of the Media under the Constitution of Ghana

Privacy in Context: The Right to Privacy, and Freedom and Independence of the Media under the... DOMINIC N. DAGBANJA [E]ven modern societies have differing concepts of privacy. For instance, while Germans demand closed office doors, fenced yards, separate rooms and strict person to person distancing, the Americans are content with open office doors, unfenced properties and informal rules of personal and social distance. The English on the other hand are accustomed to shared offices and bedrooms, and use `reserve' rather than doors and walls to preserve their privacy. The French and the Arabs have been described as `sensually involved' with individual members of their society in a manner which would be offensive to Germans, Englishmen and Americans. It has been suggested that because the Japanese and the Arabs enjoy crowding together they have no word for `privacy' [. . .] but one cannot say that the concept of privacy does not exist [. . .] only that it is very different from the Western conception.1 I. INTRODUCTION The preceding quotation demonstrates the extent to which privacy, a universal natural right, is culturally defined and shaped. While privacy is a natural right ­ and a cultural universal in the sense that it is recognised in all cultures ­ the scope and content of privacy is http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png African Journal of International and Comparative Law Edinburgh University Press

Privacy in Context: The Right to Privacy, and Freedom and Independence of the Media under the Constitution of Ghana

Loading next page...
 
/lp/edinburgh-university-press/privacy-in-context-the-right-to-privacy-and-freedom-and-independence-AFYoiT6PR0
Publisher
Edinburgh University Press
Copyright
© Edinburgh University Press 2014
Subject
Articles; African Studies
ISSN
0954-8890
eISSN
1755-1609
DOI
10.3366/ajicl.2014.0079
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

DOMINIC N. DAGBANJA [E]ven modern societies have differing concepts of privacy. For instance, while Germans demand closed office doors, fenced yards, separate rooms and strict person to person distancing, the Americans are content with open office doors, unfenced properties and informal rules of personal and social distance. The English on the other hand are accustomed to shared offices and bedrooms, and use `reserve' rather than doors and walls to preserve their privacy. The French and the Arabs have been described as `sensually involved' with individual members of their society in a manner which would be offensive to Germans, Englishmen and Americans. It has been suggested that because the Japanese and the Arabs enjoy crowding together they have no word for `privacy' [. . .] but one cannot say that the concept of privacy does not exist [. . .] only that it is very different from the Western conception.1 I. INTRODUCTION The preceding quotation demonstrates the extent to which privacy, a universal natural right, is culturally defined and shaped. While privacy is a natural right ­ and a cultural universal in the sense that it is recognised in all cultures ­ the scope and content of privacy is

Journal

African Journal of International and Comparative LawEdinburgh University Press

Published: Feb 1, 2014

There are no references for this article.