Semantic search

Article 11, Clause 1 of Malaysia’s 1957 Constitution contains the first assertion of freedom of religion in the country’s independent history: "Every person has the right to profess and practice his religion and, subject to Clause (4), to propagate it." The article’s 4th clause, to which clause 1 referred, stipulates that “State law and in respect of the Federal Territories of Kuala Lumpur, Labuan and Putrajaya, federal law may control or restrict the propagation of any religious doctrine or belief among persons professing the religion of Islam.” Furthermore, Article 11, Clause 5 offers a further condition: "This Article does not authorize any act contrary to any general law relating to public order, public health or morality." Article 11, Clause 2 asserted that citizens would not be required to pay taxes in support of any religion that was not their own, and Article 11, Clause 3 specified the rights of religious groups: "Every religious group has the right - (a) to manage its own religious affairs; (b) to establish and maintain institutions for religious or charitable purposes; and (c) to acquire and own property and hold and administer it in accordance with law." Finally, Article 3, Clause 1 offers a general guarantee of freedom of religious practice: "Islam is the religion of the Federation; but other religions may be practised in peace and harmony in any part of the Federation."

References:

1957 Malaysia Constitution: http://www.commonlii.org/my/legis/const/1957/2.html

Article 4 of Mali’s Fundamental Law No. 1 (1991) contains the first assertion of freedom of religion in Mali’s independent history. This was followed up by a 1992 Constitution which also protected the right.

“Acte Fondamental No. 1/C.T.S.P.” World Constitutions Illustrated. Accessed July 26, 2023. https://heinonline.org/HOL/P?h=hein.cow/zzml0008&i=3 “Mali 1992.” Constitute. Accessed July 26, 2023. https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Mali_1992

The Marshall Islands’ Constitution of 1979 contains the first assertion of freedom of religion in the country’s independent history. Section 1 specifically outlines this right.

“The Constitution of the Republic of the Marshall Islands.” Republic of the Marshall Islands Parliament. Accessed July 27, 2023. https://rmiparliament.org/cms/constitution.html

The Constitution of the Republic of Mauritius was ratified on 12 March 1968. Articles 11 and 14.1 grant religious freedom, equality, and prohibit religious discrimination.

Mauritius National Assembly. Mauritius National Assembly. Mauritius Government, May 2018. Last modified May 2018. Accessed June 21, 2022. https://mauritiusassembly.govmu.org/.

“Mauritius 1968 (rev. 2016).” Constitute. Accessed July 27, 2023. https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Mauritius_2016

Constitution of the Republic of Moldova was ratified on 27 July 1994. Articles 10.2, 31, 32.3, and 35.8 grant religious freedom, equality, and prohibit religious discrimination. The preamble declares secular aspirations for the state of Moldova.

Parliament of the Republic of Moldova. “Constitution of the Republic of Moldova .” Constitutional Court of the Republic of Moldova . Constitutional Court of the Republic of Moldova , 2022. Last modified 2022. Accessed June 21, 2022. https://www.constcourt.md/public/files/file/Actele%20Curtii/acte_en/MDA_Constitution_EN.pdf.

According to Chapter 1, Article 3(f) of the 1924 Constitution of the Mongolian People's Republic, "In order to secure for the toilers real freedom of conscience, the Church is separated from the State, and it is declared that religion is the private concern of each citizen."

Freedom of religion was later guaranteed in Article 81 of the 1940 Constitution of the Mongol People's Republic: "In the Mongol People's Republic religion is separated from the state and the school. Citizens of the Mongol People's Republic have freedom of religion and of antireligious propaganda."

The Fundamental Law of Mongolia was ratified on 13 January 1992. Articles 14, 16.15, and 19.2 grant religious freedom, equality, and prohibit religious discrimination. Article 9 declares that the state may not engage in religious activities.

References:

1924 Constitution of the Mongolian People's Republic: British and Foreign State Papers (1931) https://heinonline-org.proxygw.wrlc.org/HOL/Page?collection=cow&handle=hein.cow/bfsprs0134&id=1244&men_tab=srchresults

“Constitution of the Mongol People’s Republic.” World Constitutions Illustrated, Heinonline. Accessed July 27, 2023. https://heinonline.org/HOL/P?h=hein.cow/cososnat0002&i=735

The People's Great Khural. “The Constitution of Mongolia.” Constitutional Court of Mongolia . Constitutional Court of Mongolia , 2022. Last modified 2022. Accessed June 21, 2022. https://www.conscourt.gov.mn/?page_id=842&lang=en.

“Mongolia 1992 (rev. 2001).” Constitute. Accessed July 27, 2023. https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Mongolia_2001

Freedom of religion is protected in Morocco in tandem with the establishment of a state religion. Article 6 of the first Moroccan constitution of 1962 determines that Islam is the religion of the state while also protecting “the free exercise of beliefs [cultes]” for all (Hein Online). This right is still protected today under Article 3 of the current constitution (constituteproject.org).

"Fundamental Principles." Constitution of Morocco, pp. 562-563. HeinOnline, https://heinonline-org.uc.idm.oclc.org/HOL/P?h=hein.cow/zzma0011&i=1.

“Morocco 2011 Constitution.” Constitute. Accessed July 26, 2023. https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Morocco_2011.

Freedom of religion was first conditionally protected under Article 21(b) of the 1947 Constitution of the Socialist Republic of the Union of Burma which states that Burmese citizens “shall enjoy the right to profess their religion… provided the enjoyment of any such freedom does not offend the laws or the public interest” (Hein Online).

The current Constitution of the Republic of the Union of Myanmar was ratified on 29 May 2008. Articles 34, 348, 352, 354(d), 363, and 368 grant religious freedom, equality, and prohibit religious discrimination. Article 362 recognizes Christianity, Islam, Hinduism and Animism as religions in the country. Article 34 of Myanmar’s current constitution protects freedom of religion for its citizens. It states: “Every citizen is equally entitled to freedom of conscience and the right to freely profess and practise religion subject to public order, morality or health and to the other provisions of this Constitution” (constituteproject.org).

"Chapter II: Basic Principles." The Constitution of the Socialist Republic of the Union of Burma, 1974, pp. 4-7. HeinOnline, https://heinonline-org.uc.idm.oclc.org/HOL/P?h=hein.cow/zzmm0005&i=8.

“Myanmar 2008 (Rev. 2015) Constitution.” Constitute. Accessed July 26, 2023. https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Myanmar_2015.

Article 11 Section 1 of Nauru’s 1968 constitution protects freedom of religion for its citizens. It states: “A person has the right to freedom of conscience, thought and religion, including freedom to change his religion or beliefs and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest and propagate his religion or beliefs in worship, teaching, practice and observance” (constituteproject.org).

“Nauru 1968 (Rev. 2015) Constitution.” Constitute. Accessed July 26, 2023. https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Nauru_2015.

The New Zealand Bill of Rights Act (NZBORA) of 1990 was ratified on 28 August 1990; the Human Rights Act of 1993 was ratified 10 August 1993. Articles 13, 15, and 20 of the NZBORA and Articles 21.1(c), 21.1(d), 25.1(ai), 26, 27.2, 28, 39.1, 55, and 58.1 of the HRA grant religious freedom, equality, and prohibit religious discrimination. Article 13 of the 1990 New Zealand Bill of Rights Act states that “[e]veryone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience, religion, and belief, including the right to adopt and to hold opinions without interference” (constituteproject.org).

Parliament of New Zealand. “Human Rights Act 1993.” New Zealand Legislation. The Parliamentary Counsel Office, 2021. Last modified 2021. Accessed June 23, 2022. https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1993/0082/latest/whole.html#DLM304490.

Parliament of New Zealand. “New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.” New Zealand Legislation. Parliamentary Counsel Office, 2011. Last modified 2011. Accessed June 23, 2022. https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1990/0109/latest/whole.html#DLM224792.

“New Zealand 1852 (Rev. 2014) Constitution.” Constitute. Accessed July 26, 2023. https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/New_Zealand_2014.

The Constitution of Niger was ratified on 31 October 2010. Articles 8, 17, and 30 grant religious freedom, equality, and prohibit religious discrimination. Article 3 declares a separation of church and state. Article 30 of the 2010 Niger constitution ostates: “Any person has the right to freedom of thought, of opinion, of expression, of conscience, of religion and of worship [culte]” (constituteproject.org).

“Niger 2010 (Rev. 2017) Constitution.” Constitute. Accessed July 26, 2023. https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Niger_2017.

Freedom of religion was first established in North Korea under Part II Article 14 of the 1948 constitution which stated that “[e]very citizen shall have freedom of religion…” (Hein Online). Freedom of religion is now conditionally protected under Article 68 of the 1972 constitution. It states that “[c]itizens have freedom of religious belief. This right is granted through the approval of the construction of religious buildings and the holding of religious ceremonies. Religion must not be used as a pretext for drawing in foreign forces or for harming the State or social order” (constituteproject.org).

“Korea (Democratic People’s Republic of) 1972 (Rev. 2016) Constitution.” Constitute. Accessed July 26, 2023. https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Peoples_Republic_of_Korea_2016.

"Part II: General Provisions." Constitution of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, pp. 2-4. HeinOnline, https://heinonline-org.uc.idm.oclc.org/HOL/P?h=hein.cow/zzkp0005&i=2.

In 2012, Norway officially and explicitly guaranteed the freedom of religion through a constitutional amendment securing a secular Norwegian state.

Sources: “Northwestern SSO.” n.d. Prd-Nusso.it.northwestern.edu. Accessed June 20, 2024. https://heinonline-org.turing.library.northwestern.edu/HOL/Page?collection=cow&handle=hein.cow/zzno0083&id=3&men_tab=srchresults.

Part II Article 18(a) of the first Pakistani constitution of 1956 states that while Islam is the state religion, freedom of religion is conditionally protected: “Subject to law, public order and morality… every citizen shall have the right to profess, practice and propagate any religion…” (Hein Online). This continues to be protected in Part I Section 2 of the current constitution which was ratified in 1973 (constituteproject.org).

“Pakistan 1973 (Reinst. 2002, Rev. 2018) Constitution.” Constitute. Accessed July 26, 2023. https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Pakistan_2018.

"Part II: Fundamental Rights." Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, pp. [27]-[37]. HeinOnline, https://heinonline-org.uc.idm.oclc.org/HOL/P?h=hein.cow/zzpk0008&i=34.

Freedom of religion in Panama was first protected in the constitution of 1904. Article 26 established that while Catholicism was recognized as the majority religion, “[t]he profession of all religions is free…” (Hein Online).

The current Constitution of Panama was ratified on October 11, 1972. Articles 19, 35, 36, 45, 67, 94, 181 and 300 grant religious freedom, equality, and prohibit religious discrimination. Article 35 recognizes that the majority of Panamanians are Catholic and article 107 declares that Catholicism is to be taught in schools. Article 35 of the 1972 constitution states that “[a]ll religions may be professed and all forms of worship practiced freely, without any other limitation than respect for Christian morality and public order. It is recognized that the Catholic religion is practiced by the majority of Panamanians" (constituteproject.org).

“Panama 1972 (Rev. 2004) Constitution.” Constitute. Accessed July 26, 2023. https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Panama_2004.

Freedom of religion was first protected in Paraguay under the constitution of 1870. Part I Chapter I Article 3 states that while Roman Catholicism is the state religion, “Congress… shall not have power to forbid the free exercise of any other religion…” (Hein Online). The current Constitution of the Republic of Paraguay was ratified on June 20, 1992. Articles 24, 37, 63, 74 and 88 grant religious freedom, equality, and prohibit religious discrimination. Article 24 declares the relationship between the state and the Catholic church to be independent, cooperative, and autonomy. Article 24 states that “[t]he freedom of religion, of worship, and ideological [freedom] are recognized without any restrictions other than those established in this Constitution and in the law” (constituteproject.org).

"Chapter I: General Declarations." Constitution of the Republic of Paraguay, pp. 1-3. HeinOnline, https://heinonline-org.uc.idm.oclc.org/HOL/P?h=hein.cow/zzpy0009&i=2.

“Paraguay 1992 (Rev. 2011) Constitution.” Constitute. Accessed July 26, 2023. https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Paraguay_2011.

The earliest assertion to the right of religion in the Philippines was presented in the 1899 Malolos Constitution. Title III, Article 5 states, “The State recognizes the freedom and equality of all beliefs, as well as the separation of Church and State.”

The constitution of the Republic of the Philippines was ratified on February 2, 1987. Articles 3 section 5, 6 Section 28(3), 14 Section 3(3) grant religious freedom, equality, and prohibit discrimination. Article 3 section 5 forbids the Philippines from the establishment of a state religion.

References: Official Gazette. 1899. “The 1899 Malolos Constitution GOVPH.” Official Gazette of the Republic of the Philippines. 1899. https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/constitutions/the-1899-malolos-constitution/.

Constitutional Commission of 1986. “The Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines: Govph.” Official Gazette of the Republic of the Philippines. Last modified 2022. Accessed June 24, 2022. https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/constitutions/1987-constitution/.

Portugal’s first constitution was enacted in 1822. Title II, Article XXV assigns the Catholic religion, Apostolic and Roman, as the nations official religion while allowing others to practice and identify with their own faiths and religions. It is important to note that this is the Political Constitution of the Portuguese Monarchy which established a constitutional monarchy.

The Constitution of the Portuguese Republic was ratified on 2 April 1976. Articles 13.2, 19.6, 35.3, 41, and 59.1 grant religious freedom, equality, and prohibit religious discrimination. Article 41.4 creates a separation of Church and State.

References:

“Northwestern SSO.” n.d. Prd-Nusso.it.northwestern.edu. Accessed June 21, 2024. https://heinonline-org.turing.library.northwestern.edu/HOL/Page?collection=cow&handle=hein.cow/bfsprs00 09&id=941&men_tab=srchresults.

Parliament of Portugal. “Constitution of the Portuguese Republic Seventh Revision.” Assembly of the Republic. Last modified 2005. Accessed June 24, 2022. https://www.parlamento.pt/sites/EN/Parliament/Documents/Constitution7th.pdf.

Ireland’s first constitution resulted from a bilateral agreement in 1922 with the British Empire that granted Ireland independent sovereignty. Article 8 of the Constitution of the Irish Free State Act states, “Freedom of conscience and the free profession and practice of religion are, subject to public order and morality, guaranteed to every citizen, and no law may be made either directly or indirectly to endow any religion, or prohibit or restrict the free exercise thereof or give any preference, or impose any disability on account of religious belief or religious status, or affect prejudicially the right of any child to attend a school receiving public money without attending the religious instruction at the school, or make any discrimination as respects State aid between schools under the management of different religious denominations, or divert from any religious denomination or any educational institution any of its property except for the purpose of roads, railways, lighting, water or drainage works or other works of public utility, and on payment of compensation.”

References:

Book (eISB), electronic Irish Statute. n.d. “Electronic Irish Statute Book (EISB).” Www.irishstatutebook.ie. Accessed June 21, 2024. https://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1922/act/1/enacted/en/print#:~:text=AN%20ACT%20TO%20ENACT%20

Romania enacted its first constitution in 1866 which held until it was rewritten in 1923. Title II, Article XXI of the 1866 Constitution of Romania states guarantees the freedom of conscience so long as the celebration of those religions and faiths do not pose a threat to public order. It also acknowledges the Oriental Orthodox religion as the dominant religion while also asserting government oversight of the Romanian Orthodox Church, which was considered the national religion of the state at the time.

Sources:

“1866 CONSTITUTION.” n.d. THE ROYAL HOUSE of HOHENZOLLERN-SIGMARINGEN ROMANIA. Accessed August 3, 2024. https://www.royalhouseofromaniahohenzollern-sigmaringen.com/constitution-1866.

Rwanda’s first constitution was drafted and enacted in 1961. Within the Constitution of the Rwandan Republic, Chapter III, Article 12 asserts that the “fundamental liberties as stipulated in the Declaration of the Rights of Man shall be guaranteed to all citizens save the exceptions to be regulated by law.” The Declaration of the Rights of Man (and the Citizen) was a document drafted by France’s National Constituent Assembly in 1789 during the French Revolution.

The 2003 Constitution of Rwanda was ratified on May 26, 2003. Articles 16, 37, 57, and 136 grant religious freedom, equality, and prohibit religious discrimination. Article 4 declares Rwanda a secular state.

Source:

J. Webster [1964] - French and English https://heinonline-org.turing.library.northwestern.edu/HOL/cowdocs?state=&tfile=cowresd0576-3.pdf

Constitution Project. “Rwanda 2003 (Rev. 2015) Constitution.” Constitute. POGO, April 27, 2022. Last modified April 27, 2022. Accessed June 27, 2022. https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Rwanda_2015?lang=en.

Constitution Of The Slovak Republic The articles 12.2, 24, and 25.2 grant religious freedom, equality, and prohibit religious discrimination. Article 1 states that Slovakia is not bound by any religion. National Council of the Slovak Republic. “Constitution of the Slovak Republic.” President of the Slovak Republic. Last modified 2017. Accessed June 30, 2022. https://www.prezident.sk/upload-files/46422.pdf.

The first assertion of the freedom of religion of the Slovak Republic is in the 1992 Constitution after the split of Czechoslovakia. The article 24 highlights the guarantees to the freedom of religion and indicates that the freedom may only be limited under lawful conditions of impeding on others religion. Assertions of the freedom of religion have existed in the domain of Slovakia including the 1920 Czechoslovakian constitution, the earliest instance would be the 1782 Edict of Tolerance as part of the Kingdom of Austria which included limited religious freedoms for certain religions and sects of Christianity. “Slovakia 1992 (Rev. 2017) Constitution - Constitute.” n.d. Www.constituteproject.org. Accessed August 4, 2023. https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Slovakia_2017.

Following its conversion to a republic within the British Commonwealth, Sri Lanka’s 1972 constitution was enacted. Chapter IV, Section 18 outlines the rights and freedoms guaranteed by the government and states, “every citizen shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. This right shall include the freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice, and the freedom, either individually or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and teaching.”

Sources:

“Northwestern SSO.” n.d. Prd-Nusso.it.northwestern.edu. Accessed June 21, 2024. https://heinonline-org.turing.library.northwestern.edu/HOL/Page?handle=hein.cow/zzlk0078&id=22&collection=cow&index=.

The first assertion of the freedom of religion in Tanzania is the 1977 constitution after the unification of the states of Tanganyika and Zanzibar after their independence from the United Kingdom. Article 9, 13, 19, and 39.2 grants religious freedom, equality, and prohibit religious discrimination. The preamble and article 3 declare Tanzania to be secular.

https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Tanzania_2005

THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA Office of The Attorney General. “The Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania of 1977.” Last modified 2005. Accessed July 5, 2022. https://oagmis.agctz.go.tz/portal/constitutions/eyJpdiI6IkFmY0NLQ1wvQWJsUmliZWUxbWh1MVpnPT0iLCJ2YWx1ZSI6IlIwdWx4VnQ3a3plWnFqb0pjcnlvQlE9PSIsIm1hYyI6ImEwNTQxYzdhNTIxMThlYWJlNzU3Mzc5NzZkMmRiYWJkODc4Nzc1ZjVjYjY0NTQ5OTQxYzg3NmYwMDZlN2Y5ZjkifQ==

The Constitution of The Commonwealth of The Bahamas was ratified on July 10th 1973. Article 22 protects freedom of religion. The preamble does specifically mention Christian values and the supremacy of God. Constitution Project. “Bahamas (the) 1973 Constitution.” Constitute, POGO, 27 Apr. 2022, https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Bahamas_1973?lang=en.

The Bahamas’ 1973 Constitution contains the first assertion of freedom of religion in the country’s independent history. Article 22 of the document outlines this right.

“Constitution of the Commonwealth of the Bahamas.” The Government of the Bahamas. Accessed July 20, 2023. https://www.bahamas.gov.bs/wps/wcm/connect/04fb4632-1bd7-414f-b66e-9c499b382480/Chap+3+Protection+rights+and+freedoms.pdf?MOD=AJPERES

The first assertion of the freedom of religion in Togo would be the Constitution de la République Togolaise, 5 mai 1963 (5th of May, 1963).

https://www.loc.gov/resource/amedscd.2008700247/?sp=7&r=-1.395,-0.017,3.789,1.703,0

The first assertion of Religious Freedom is in the 1976 Constitution of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago in Chapter 1, Part 1, Article 4, Point H. This article asserts multiple human rights and guarantees equality regardless of religion, as well as the protection of freedom of conscience and religious belief and observance.

The Verification Research, Training and Information Centre. Laws of Trinidad and Tobago. Constitution of 1976. https://www.vertic.org/media/National%20Legislation/Trinidad_and_Tobago/TT_Constitution.pdf

In the 1961 Constitution of The Turkish Republic, Freedom of religion is asserted as Freedom of thought and faith, under Section II, Part IV, Article 19. This Article protects citizens from being compelled to worship, and also guarantees them the choice of faith and practices of worship. It also mentions “no person shall be reproached for his religion or faith; and no person shall be allowed to exploit and abuse religion for the purpose of political or personal benefit.”

1961 Constitution of the Turkish Republic. https://www.anayasa.gen.tr/1961constitution-text.pdf

The assertion of religious freedom is covered within the first constitution of Tuvalu, Under Part II, Division 3, Article 23, upon gaining independence from the United Kingdom in 1978. This article guarantees freedom of belief, including religion, and articulates the responsibilities and rights of religious groups and education, protection from conformity, as well as circumstantial provisions of this freedom.

International Labour Organization. Constitution of Tuvalu 1978. 2008 rev. https://www.ilo.org/dyn/natlex/docs/ELECTRONIC/3899/95791/F656430737/TUV3899.pdf

Under Title II, Article 35, Freedom of religion is first asserted in the 1996 Constitution of Ukraine. This Article addresses guaranteed protection of choice and practice of worship, separation of church and state, and asserts alternatives in the case of conscientious objection to military service.

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Constitution of Ukraine. 1996. https://faolex.fao.org/docs/pdf/ukr127467E.pdf

The Constitution of the Eastern Republic of Uruguay was ratified in 1830. Article 5 grants freedom of religion. Article 5 declares the state supports no religion.

Constitution Project. “Uruguay 1966 (Reinst. 1985, Rev. 2004) Constitution.” Constitute. POGO, April 27, 2022. Last modified April 27, 2022. Accessed July 5, 2022. https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Uruguay_2004?lang=en.

Freedom of Religion is asserted in the 1980 Constitution of Vanuatu under Chapter 2, Part I, Article 5, Subject 1.F. This article covers multiple fundamental rights and freedoms, and guarantees equality regardless of religion. Subject 1.F specifies freedom of conscience and worship.

Constitute Project. 1980 Constitution of Vanuatu. https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Vanuatu_2013

Freedom of religion is covered in the 1946 Constitution of Vietnam. Equality regardless of religion is guaranteed in the preamble, and in Chapter I, Article 1. Chapter 2, Article 10 grants (iv) the freedom of belief to all Vietnamese citizens.

Bloomsbury Professional Media. Vietnam Constitution 1946. https://media.bloomsburyprofessional.com/rep/files/vietnam-constitution-1946x.pdf

Freedom of Religion is asserted in the 1964 Constitution of Zambia under Chapter III, Section 13, Article 21. This article asserts freedom to choose a religion, worship in a group or private setting, and manifest or propagate his religion and its practices. It also prevents forced religious instruction in schools and prohibits prevention of practice.

The current Constitution of Zambia was ratified on January 5, 2016. The preamble asserts the protection of freedom of religion, while also declaring Zambia a Christian Republic. Articles 8(d), 118.2(a), and 173.3(a) prohibit discrimination and article 266 defines discrimination to include religious discrimination.

World Statesman. Constitution of Zambia 1964. https://www.worldstatesmen.org/Constitution-Zambia1964.pdf

Parliament of Zambia . “Government of Zambia Act -.” Last modified January 5, 2016. Accessed July 6, 2022. https://www.parliament.gov.zm/sites/default/files/documents/amendment_act/Constitution%20of%20Zambia%20%20(Amendment),%202016-Act%20No.%202_0.pdf.

Religious freedom, while commonplace in modern liberal democracies, was not always identified as a natural right with which people were born. Historical narratives describe the “Dark Ages” between the fall of the Roman Empire and the advent of early modernity as a period in which the world was divided between various civilizations according to the religions which they professed. The Reformation was one of the most influential movements in the course of western history. As leaders like Martin Luther, and John Calvin led Christian communities to break from traditional Catholicism, the rate of religious pluralism rose within Europe and led to a series of religious wars that defined the sixteenth century. In an early attempt to mediate these conflicts, German rulers negotiated the 1555 Peace of Augsburg. Alexandra Walsham writes that this document “established the principle of cuius regio, eius religio, by which individual rulers were permitted to choose whether Catholicism or Protestantism should be professed in their states” (Walsham, “Reformation Legacies,” 297.) Thus, in addition to legalizing the practice of multiple religions within the German states, the adoption of cuius regio, eius religio also meant that religion would no longer be forced upon a principality by outside forces. The idea that Christian rulers could have the right to choose their own religion, and that this choice would be respected, represents an early step toward the principles of religious pluralism and toleration. The Peace of Augsburg did not lend religious agency to the subjects living within these principalities, but it did show European leaders that cooperation was possible between rulers who belonged to differing faiths. The seventeenth century was an especially bloody one which included such conflicts as the English Civil War, the French Wars of Religion, and the vicious Thirty Years’ War. Religious plurality invariably led to violence in the seventeenth century, but these conflicts were often followed by important agreements that fostered some level of religious toleration. In 1598, following the religious battles between Catholics and Protestants in France, the French King Henry (IV) of Navarre signed the Edict of Nantes, which “gave Protestants permission to practice their faith openly, albeit within strict limits and as second-class citizens” (Walsham, “Reformation Legacies,” 299). The Thirty Years’ War famously concluded with the Peace of Westphalia, which decreed (among other things) that while each state should have the right to establish an official religion, they were also obligated to allow their subjects the opportunity to practice different Christian denominations without fear of persecution (Christenson, “Liberty of the Exercise of Religion in the Peace of Westphalia,” 740). By favoring religious toleration, Westphalia’s signatories recognized that only religious toleration would reduce the potential for future conflict between the various sects of Christianity. Documents like the Edict of Nantes and the Peace of Westphalia ultimately failed to end religious persecution and conflict within Europe, but they still reveal a heightened awareness of the need for leaders to tolerate religious plurality within their borders. As the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries wore on, European intelligentsia began exploring the concept of religious freedom more directly. Enlightenment thinkers such as Voltaire and Baruch Spinoza led the intellectual charge in support of freedom of conscience and thought, while political leaders such as Roger Williams and Thomas Jefferson incorporated principles of religious freedom and the separation of church and state into their state building efforts in North America. While legal guarantees of the right to religious freedom would not be made until the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, the modern right to freedom of religion is rooted in Reformation-era efforts to mediate religious conflict and incorporate religious toleration into budding European nation-states.

REFERENCES

Gordon A. Christenson, “Liberty of the Exercise of Religion in the Peace of Westphalia,” Transnational Law & Contemporary Problems, Vol. 21, 2012).

Alexandra Walsham, “Reformation Legacies,” from The Oxford History of the Reformation, ed. Peter Marshall, Oxford University Press: Oxford, 2022

The Edict of Milan came two years after the Edict of Toleration by Galerius and granted religious toleration within the Roman Empire.

References:

Reference needed here

In 1789, notably before the Bill of Rights was adopted, Massachusetts Chief Justice William Cushing wrote, “The propagating literature and knowledge by printing or otherwise tends to illuminate men's minds and to establish them in principles of freedom. But it cannot be denied also, that a free scanning of the conduct of the administration and shewing the tendency of it, and where truth will warrant, making it manifest that it is subversive of all law, liberty, and the Constitution; it can't be denied.” Cushing seemed to be concerned with sedition and libel, which had been the subject of prosecutions, such as the Zenger case in 1735, throughout the pre-revolutionary American colonies. A decade later, the Federalist Party in the 5th Congress with John Adams as president, passed the Alien and Sedition acts which clamped down on free speech and press before later being rolled back under Thomas Jefferson’s administration. (Charles & O'Neill 2012)

The role of adversarial press in both the American and French revolutions should not be neglected as foundational events that contributed to the identification of the right to a free press; pamphleteering, self-publishing, and revolutionary periodicals were important uses of media that furthered public discord, and were largely viewed as instrumental to the success of the revolutions—something Chief Justice Cushing later referred to in his 1789 letter to John Adams. The institution of an adversarial press was thought to provoke a responsive government, and ultimately be a way of avoiding violent revolution by creating public pressure.

Following the French Revolution, the full-scale liberation of the press was established—upending much of the established models of publishing and paving the way for later reforms that ultimately shaped modern copyright and piracy protections. This, depending on how broad a conception of free press we consider, may have been a certain sort of backsliding. (Wresch 2003)

A few years removed from Cushing’s letter to John Adams, the United States Constitution was amended with the Bill of Rights, which protected the freedom of expression and press as a foundational aspect of human liberty. (That is to say, for example, the American third amendment right to be free from quartering soldiers was created in response to the living memory of the abuse under colonial rule.) In the case of the freedom of the press, the abuses to publication in both France and the United Stated in their pre-revolutionary periods set the stage for the protection of the freedom of the press in these given case studies.

In 1804 Jefferson said “While we deny that Congress have a right to control the freedom of the press, we have ever asserted the right of the states, and their exclusive right, to do so. They have accordingly, all of them, made provisions for punishing slander, which those who have time and inclination resort to for the vindication of their characters." (Scherr 2016)

In the American context, the protections for the freedom of the press gradually expanded to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment, with the landmark Supreme Court case Near v. Minnesota in 1931. Prior restraint was deemed unconstitutional even on the state level, and the protections for a free press were expanded accordingly.

Internationally, the recognition of the freedom of the press, and human rights more generally, came much more recently in history. Following the Second World War, the United Nations convened in 1948 to draft the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). As the human rights theorist Henry Shue suggests in his book Basic Rights, human rights are often created in response to reliable and predictable threats of abuse, most often those that are in living memory. In response to the violations of human rights that took place during World War II, the assertion of certain universal human rights were take up so as to set a standard for the international community, and be regarded as the net beneath which no one should be allowed to fall.

Article 19 in the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights states, “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.” The flexibility of the wording of this right in the UDHR serves as a method for ensuring that there need not be constant revisions as technology and culture advance around the world, and also to avoid creating an implicitly hierarchical list or pyramid of forms of expression that must be protected above all else.

The sedimentation of the right into International human rights law has continued long after being drafted into the UDHR. “Since its inclusion in Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the right to freedom of opinion and expression has been protected in all of the relevant international human rights treaties. In international law, freedom to express opinions and ideas is considered essential at both an individual level, insofar as it contributes to the full development of a person, and being a foundation stone of democratic society.” (Howie 2018)

References:

Patrick J. Charles & Kevin Francis O'Neill, Saving the Press Clause from Ruin: The Customary Origins of a Free Press as Interface to the Present and Future, 2012 UTAH L. REV. 1691 (2012)

Emily Howie (2018) Protecting the human right to freedom of expression in international law, International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 20:1, 12-15, DOI: 10.1080/17549507.2018.1392612

Near v. Minnesota 283 U.S. 697 (https://www.oyez.org/cases/1900-1940/283us697)

Scherr, A. (2016). Thomas Jefferson, the “Libertarian” Jeffersonians of 1799, and Leonard W. Levy’s Freedom of the Press. Journalism History, 42(2), 58-69.)

Shue, Henry. Basic Rights : Subsistence, Affluence, and U.S. Foreign Policy. 40th anniversary edition. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2020.

Universal Declaration of Human Rights: https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights

Wresch, William. "Perspectives on the Right to Publish: Global Inequalities, Digital Publications, and the Legacy of Revolutionary France." Ethics and Information Technology, vol. 5, no. 2, 2003, pp. 117-127.

Within the thirteen colonies before the American Revolution, the government did not allow free press. Rather, any form of print had to have a government granted license. The government's initial opposition to free press stemmed from the printing of the first American newspaper in Boston in 1690 called, Publick Occurrences, Both Foreign and Domestick. The British government wanted to censor American media for fear of the spread of unfavorable information. Following the disallowance of Publick Occurrences, it was 14 years until another American newspaper was published. The governor of Virginia at the time, Sir William Berkeley, wrote, “I thank God, we have not free schools nor printing; and I hope we shall not have these hundred years. For learning has brought disobedience and heresy and sects into the world; and printing has divulged them and libels the government” (Kahane 1976, 203). Likewise, English law strongly opposed freedom of the press.

A major contribution to the shift to a widespread belief in the importance of freedom of the press in the United States was Cato’s Letters, a series of essays written by John Trenchard and Thomas Gordon between 1720 and 1723 (Trenchard & Gordon 1724) . The essays consisted of revolutionary political ideas that largely criticized the British government. Cato viewed human nature as rooted in selfishness, suggesting that political decisions were too often made in the deciders best interest, not necessarily that of the public. For this reason, Cato emphasized the need for human rights and liberty as a check against the power of officials in order to avoid the oppression of some. He emphasized the need to fight against tyranny and corruption. While acknowledging the risks of libel, he endorsed citizen rights to free speech and free press. He believed that all citizens should have the ability to criticize the government accurately. The alternative- restricting freedom of the press, he suggested, would be beneficial only for the corrupt (McDaniel). Cato wrote, “There are some truths not fit to be told...But this doctrine only holds true as to private and personal failings; and it is quite otherwise when the crimes of men come to affect the publick” (Trenchard & Gordon 1724) . Cato’s Letters were one of the most familiar essays of time, with people commonly referring to them as a justification and a defense of the rights they deserved, allowing the idea of freedom of the press to gain momentum. The essays were crucial to understanding the importance of and the meaning of the First Amendment, which stemmed from the Virginia Declaration of Rights (Bogen 1983, 446).

Another contributing event was the trial of John Peter Zenger, a printer in New York. In 1733, Zenger printed the New York Weekly Journal. The journal criticized the British royal governor of New York, William S. Cosby, accusing him of rigging elections and other corruption. While Zenger did not write the journal, he was sent to jail and accused of libel, which at the time meant publishing information in opposition to the government. At trial, Zenger was represented by Andrew Hamilton. While Hamilton admitted that Zenger did print the journal, he invoked a new principle, that libel was not punishable if true. Hamilton was able to convince the jury of Zenger’s innocence on the grounds that they could not prove that the content of his publication was false (Kahane 1976, 205). The verdict of the case did not have any serious impact on legal precedent because according to the specifics of the case, the jury ruled that Zenger had not printed the journal, even though Hamilton confessed that much. However, the trial did have the immediate effect of an increase in the amount of political satires printed, specifically those opposed to or critiquing some aspect of the government. This put pressure on less popular officials and increased the relative power of journalists (Olson, 2000) .

More broadly, as for the world’s first law guaranteeing freedom of the press in Sweden, Sweden’s intellectual climate and institutional structure allowed for the adoption of ideas that were more radical at the time. Within Sweden, as in Western parts of the world, there was a spread of liberal theory. Liberal theory values the individual as necessary within society and politics. Likewise, liberal theory recognizes the need for change over time in order to advance and improve society. In combination with Sweden’s institutional structure, Sweden could more easily advance new laws (Nordin 2017, 139). At the time, the Diet: four estates including the nobility, the clergy, the burghers, and the peasantry, along with opposing political parties: the Hats and the Caps, ran political discussions and had political power. Around sixty percent of adult males would participate in political decisions. The executive, the Council of the Realm, would act according to the Diet. Sweden saw the greatest citizen participation in politics of any country in Europe. Therefore, unlike in other areas of Europe or the world at the time, citizens were more able to advance their own interests, which resulted in greater liberties pertaining to freedom of the press and free speech (Nordin 2017, 140).

According to Article 197 of the 1928 Fundamental Statute of the Kingdom of Albania: "Freedom of speech and of the press is guaranteed, and a censorship may not be instituted, except in case of war mobilisation or other extraordinary event defined by the law. The regulation of the press, the confiscation of press matter and the prosecution of the press are determined by law."

Article 53 of the 1976 Albanian Constitution states that “citizens enjoy the freedom of speech, the press, organization, association, assembly and public manifestation. The state guarantees the realization of these freedoms, it creates the conditions for them, and makes available the necessary material means” (“The Albanian Constitution of 1976) .

Today, Part 2, Article 22 of the 1998 Albanian Constitution recognizes freedom of the press, radio, and television as part of its list of “Fundamental Human Rights and Freedoms”. Article 22 also states that “Prior censorship of means of communication is prohibited” (Constitute Project, Albania's Constitution of 1998 with Amendments through 2012” ).

References:

1928 Fundamental Statute of the Kingdom of Albania: https://www.hoelseth.com/royalty/albania/albconst19281201.html

Albania Constitution (1976): https://data.globalcit.eu/NationalDB/docs/ALB%20The%20Constitution%20of%20the%20Peoples%20Socialist%20Republic%20of%20Albania%201976.pdf

Albania Constitution (1998): https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Albania_2016?lang=en.

Article 12 of the 1993 Andorran Constitution states that Freedoms of expression, of communication and of information are guaranteed. The law shall regulate the right of reply, the right of correction and professional secrecy” (Constitute Project, “Andorra’s 1993 Constitution”).

https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Andorra_1993?lang=en.

Schedule 1, Chapter II of Antigua and Barbuda’s Constitution titled “Protection of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms of the Individual” explicitly protects freedom of the press (Political Database of the Americas, “The Antigua and Barbuda Constitutional Order 1981” ).

References:

“Republic of Antigua and Barbuda / República Del Antigua y Barbuda Constitution of 1981 Constituciones De 1981.” Antigua and Barbuda: Constitution, 1981: https://pdba.georgetown.edu/Constitutions/Antigua/antigua-barbuda.html.

The 1990 Declaration of Independence of Armenia guaranteed freedom of the press. Article 24 of the 1995 Constitution of Armenia asserted freedoms relevant to freedom of the press: "Everyone is entitled to assert his or her opinion. No one shall be forced to retract or change his or her opinion. Everyone is entitled to freedom of speech, including the freedom to seek, receive and disseminate information and ideas through any medium of information, regardless of state borders." After amendment in 2005, additional language relevant to freedom of the press was added to the Constitution of Armenia: "Freedom of mass media and other means of mass information shall be guaranteed. The state shall guarantee the existence and activities of an independent and public radio and television service offering a variety of informational, cultural and entertaining programs." Article 42 of the Constitution of Armenia after amendment in 2015 state the right explicitly: "The freedom of the press, radio, television and other means of information shall be guaranteed. The State shall guarantee the activities of independent public television and radio offering diversity of informational, educational, cultural and entertainment programmes."

References:

Armenian Declaration of Independence: https://www.gov.am/en/independence/

"Constitution of the Republic of Armenia" (1995): http://www.parliament.am/legislation.php?sel=show&ID=2425&lang=eng

"Constitution of the Republic of Armenia (with the Amendments of 27 November 2005)": http://www.parliament.am/legislation.php?sel=show&ID=1&lang=eng

"Amendments to the Constitution of the Republic of Armenia" (2015): http://www.parliament.am/legislation.php?sel=show&ID=5805&lang=eng

Article 13 of Austria’s 1867 “Basic Law on the General Rights of Nationals in the Kingdoms and Länder represented in the Council of the Realm” states that “Everyone has the right within the limits of the law freely to express his opinion by word of mouth and in writing, print, or pictorial representation. The Press may be neither subjected to censorship nor restricted by the licensing System. Administrative postal distribution vetoes do not apply to inland publication” (Basic Law of 21 December 1867) .

References:

1867 Basic Law: https://www.servat.unibe.ch/icl/au03000_.html

Article 24 of the 1973 Bahrain Constitution states that “Freedom of the press, printing and publication shall be guaranteed in accordance with the conditions and procedure specified by the law.”

References:

“Bahrain Old Constitution (1973).” International Constitutional Law Project: https://www.servat.unibe.ch/icl/ba01000_.html

Barbados’s 1966 Constitution does not explicitly protect freedom of the press, but includes freedom to “receive” and “communicate ideas and information without interference” in its protection of freedom of expression (Political Database of the Americas, “Constitution of 1966” ).

References:

https://pdba.georgetown.edu/Constitutions/Barbados/barbados66.html

Article 23 of the 27 October 1830 Draft Constitution of Belgium states that “The press is free. Censorship [la censure] should never be established, and cautioning of writers, editors or printers may not be demanded.” Article 18 of the 1831 Belgium Constitution guaranteed freedom of the press using similar language.

References:

English translation of the French text of the draft of the constitution of 27 October 1830 35 (2009): https://heinonline-org.proxygw.wrlc.org/HOL/Page?collection=cow&handle=hein.cow/zzbe0096&id=5&men_tab=srchresults

1831 Constitution of Belgium: https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Belgium_1831

Article 7 of the 1964 Constitution of the Republic of Dahomey guaranteed freedom of the press.

Benin protects freedom of the press under Article 24 of its 1990 Constitution: “Freedom of the press shall be recognised and guaranteed by the state. It shall be protected by the High Authority of Audio-Visuals and Communications under the conditions fixed by an organic law.”

References:

1964 Constitution of the Republic of Dahomey: English translation of the French original text fo the Constitution of 1964 152 (2011) Title II: The Rights and Duties of the Citizen: https://heinonline-org.proxygw.wrlc.org/HOL/Page?collection=cow&handle=hein.cow/zzbj0002&id=2&men_tab=srchresults

1990 Constitution of the Republic of Benin:

https://constitutionnet.org/sites/default/files/Benin%20Constitution%20-%20English%20Summary.pdf

Article 145 of the 1826 Draft Constitution for the Republic of Bolivia states: "Every Person may communicate his thoughts, verbally or in writing, or publish them through the medium of the Press, 'without previous censorship; but under the responsibility which the Law may determine." Furthermore, Article 59 of the 1826 Draft Constitution described as among the duties of the Chamber of Censors, "To protect the Liberty of the Press, and to appoint the Judges who are to decide in the last instance, upon the Judgments respecting it."

Protection of press freedom is detailed in Article 106, Section III of the 2009 Bolivian Constitution: “The State guarantees freedom of expression and the right to communication and information to workers of the press” (Constitute Project, “Bolivia (Plurinational State of)'s Constitution of 2009” ).

References:

1826 Draft Constitution for the Republic of Bolivia: English text of the draft Constitution of 1826. 892 (2010) Title XI: Of Guarantees https://heinonline-org.proxygw.wrlc.org/HOL/Page?collection=cow&handle=hein.cow/zzbo0002&id=18&men_tab=srchresults

“Bolivia (Plurinational Republic of) 2009.” Constitute. https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Bolivia_2009

While press freedom was not explicitly protected in the 1966 Constitution of Botswana, it is reasonable to infer that the broadly drawn protections of freedom of expression encompass freedom of the press as well. The guarantee refers to the protection of communication generally, "whether the communication be to the public generally or to any person or class of persons." The exceptions that it offers are also suggestive of application to the press, in its reference to the potential for the coexistence of freedom of expression with law "that is reasonably required for the purpose of protecting the reputations, rights and freedoms of other persons or the private lives of persons concerned in legal proceedings, preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, maintaining the authority and independence of the courts, regulating educational institutions in the interests of persons receiving instruction therein, or regulating the technical administration or the technical operation of telephony, telegraphy, posts, wireless, broadcasting or television: "

References:

1966 Constitution of Botswana: https://botswanalaws.com/consolidated-statutes/constitution-of-botswana

The Brunei Constitution contains no protections for freedom of the press and grants the government powers for “censorship, the control and suppression of publications, writings, maps, plans, photographs, communications and means of communication” in states of emergency” (Constitute Project, “Brunei Darussalam's Constitution of 1959 with Amendments through 2006” ).

References:

1959 Constitution of Brunei Darussalam, with Revisions to 2006: https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Brunei_2006

Article 13 of the 1970 Constitution of Upper Volta stated: "Citizens shall enjoy freedom of speech, press, assembly, association, procession and demonstration in the conditions laid down by law. The exercise of these rights shall be limited only by the freedom of others, security and public order"

Article 8 of Burkina Faso’s 1991 Constitution protects freedom of the press: “The freedoms of opinion, of the press and the right to information are guaranteed” (Constitute Project, “Burkina Faso's Constitution of 1991 with Amendments through 2012” ).

References:

1970 Constitution of Upper Volta: "Title II: Fundamental Rights and Duties of Man and the Citizen," Constitution of Upper Volta (1970): 1006-1008 https://heinonline-org.proxygw.wrlc.org/HOL/Page?collection=cow&handle=hein.cow/zzbf0015&id=3&men_tab=srchresults

“Burkina Faso 1991 (Rev. 2012) Constitution.” https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Burkina_Faso_2012

Cambodia originally protected freedom of the press under Section 2, Article 9 of its 1947 Constitution: “Every Cambodian is free to speak, write, print and publish. He may, either by way of the press or any other means express, spread, defend every opinion so long as he makes no unauthorized use of that right or does not tend to disturb the public order.”

According to Chapter III, Article 41 of the 1993 Cambodian Constitution: "Khmer citizens shall have freedom of expression, press, publication and assembly. No one shall exercise this right to infringe upon the rights of others, to affect the good traditions of the society, to violate public law and order and national security. The regime of the media shall be determined by law."

References:

1947 Cambodia Constitution: Advocatetanmoy Law Library. https://advocatetanmoy.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/cambodia-constitution-1947.pdf

1993 Cambodia Constitution as revised up to 1999: https://pressocm.gov.kh/en/archives/9539

Freedom of the press is protected under section 2(b) of Canadian Charter on Rights and Freedoms as part of the Constitution Act of 1982: “Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: • (a) freedom of conscience and religion; • (b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication; • (c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and • (d) freedom of association.”

References:

Constitution Act of 1982: https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/pdf/const_e.pdf

Article 13 of the 1994 Constitution stated "Freedom of the press is recognised and guaranteed. It is exercised within the conditions fixed by law. The exercise of this liberty and equal access for all to the medias of the state are assured by an independent organ, the status of which is fixed by law."

Article 15 of the current 2016 Constitution states that “the freedom of the press is recognized and guaranteed. It is exercised within the conditions established by the law” (Constitute Project, “Central African Republic's Constitution of 2016” ).

References:

Constitution of the Central African Republic, Adopted on 28 December 1994, promulgated on 14 January 1995: https://g7plus.fd.uc.pt/pdfs/CentralAfricanRepublic.pdf

“Central African Republic 2016 Constitution.” Constitute. Last modified 2016. https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Central_African_Republic_2016

Chile originally protected freedom of the press under Article XXIII of its 1812 Provisional Constitutional Regulations: “The press will enjoy a legal liberty; and so that it does not generate a damaging [nociva] license concerning religion, customs and [the] honor of the citizens and of the country, regulations [reglas] will be prescribed by the Government and Senate.”

Today, Chapter III, Article 19 of Chile’s 1980 Constitution protects press freedom: “Freedom to express opinions and to inform, without prior censorship, in any form and by any means, notwithstanding the liability for crimes and abuses committed in the exercise of these freedoms, in accordance with the law, which shall be of qualified quorum. In no case may the law establish a state monopoly over the mass media.” (Constitute Project, “Chile's Constitution of 1980 with Amendments through 2021” ).

References:

"Provisional Constitutional Regulation, 26/27 October 1812," Provisional Constitutional Regulation, 26/27 October 1812 (1812): 1-10: https://heinonline-org.proxygw.wrlc.org/HOL/Page?collection=cow&handle=hein.cow/zzcl0108&id=9&men_tab=srchresults

1980 Chile Constitution with revisions up to 2021: https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Chile_2021

The first legal reference to press freedom in Colombia arose in Title 1, Article 16 of Cundinamarca’s Departmental Constitution in 1811 (Biblioteca Virtual Miguel de Cervantes).

Article 156 of the 1821 Constitution of the Republic of Colombia protected freedom of the press: "All Colombians have the right of freely recording, printing, and publishing their thoughts and opinions, without the necessity of any examination, revision, or censorship, previous to publication. Those, however, who commit any abuse of this inestimable privilege, shall incur the punishments which they have deserved, conformably to the Laws."

Today, Title II, Article 20 of Colombia’s 1991 Constitution protects press freedom: “Every individual is guaranteed the freedom to express and diffuse his/her thoughts and opinions, to transmit and receive information that is true and impartial, and to establish mass communications media (Constitute Project, “Colombia's Constitution of 1991 with Amendments through 2005” ).

References:

1811 Cundinamarca Departmental Constitution: Biblioteca Virtual Miguel de Cervantes https://www.cervantesvirtual.com/obra-visor/constitucion-de-cundinamarca-30-de-marzo-de-1811-y-promulgada-el-4-de-abril-de-1811--0/html/

1821 Constitution of the Republic of Colombia: English translation of the Spanish original text of the Constitution of 1821 718 (2009) Title VIII: General Regulations: https://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.cow/zzco0007&id=21&collection=cow&index=#

1991 Colombia Constitution (rev. 2015): https://constituteproject.org/constitution/Colombia_2015

Costa Rica originally operated under the Spanish Constitution of 1812, which protected freedom of the press under Article 131: The powers and duties of the Courts are…to protect the political liberty of the press” (Biblioteca Virtual Miguel de Cervantes, “The Political Constitution of the Spanish Monarchy: Promulgated in Cádiz, the nineteenth day of March”).

Today, Title IV, Article 29 of the 1949 Costa Rican Constitution protects freedom of the press: “Every one may communicate their thoughts by words or in writing and publish them without prior censorship; but they will be responsible for the abuses committed in the exercise of this right, in the cases and the mode that the law establishes” (Constitute Project, “Costa Rica's Constitution of 1949 with Amendments through 2011” ).

Cuba’s 1901 Constitution, its first as an independent nation, protected press freedom under Article 25: “Every person may freely, without censorship, express his thought either by word of mouth or in writing, through the press, or in any other manner whatsoever, subject to the responsibilities specified by law, whenever thereby attacks are made upon the honor of individuals, upon social order, and upon public peace” (George A. Smathers Libraries, “Translation of the proposed constitution for Cuba”).

Today, Article 55 of the 2019 Cuban Constitution protects press freedom: “People's freedom of press is recognized. This right is exercised according to the law and for the good of society. The fundamental means of social communication, in any of their forms, are the socialist property of all people or of political, social, and mass organizations, and may not be categorized as any other type of property. The State establishes the principles of organization and operation for all means of social communication” (Constitute Project, “Cuba's Constitution of 2019” ).

As a part of Czechoslovakia, freedom of the press was protected by Article 113 of the 1920 Czechoslovakian Constitution: “Freedom of the Press as well as the right to assemble peaceably and without arms and to form associations is guaranteed” (Masarykova Univerzita, “The Constitutional charter of the Czechoslovak Republic”).

Today, Article 17 of the 1992 Czech Constitution protects freedom of the press: “Everyone has the right to express his views in speech, in writing, in the press, in pictures, or in any other form, as well as freely to seek, receive, and disseminate ideas and information irrespective of the frontiers of the state” (Constitute Project, “Czech Republic's Constitution of 1993 with Amendments through 2002” ).

Article 10 of the 1978 Constitution of Dominica protects the “freedom to receive ideas and information without interference, freedom to communicate ideas and information without interferences.” This is subject to several limitations, notably including those "reasonably required for the purpose of protecting the reputations, rights and freedoms of other persons or the private lives of persons concerned in legal proceedings, preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, maintaining the authority and independence of the courts or regulating the technical administration or the technical operation of telephony, telegraphy, posts, wireless broadcasting or television."

References:

1978 Constitution of Dominica: "Chapter I: Protection of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms," Commonwealth of Dominica Constitution Order, 1978 (1978): 2919-2934 https://heinonline-org.mutex.gmu.edu/HOL/Page?handle=hein.cow/zzdm0004&id=7&collection=cow&index=

Section 41 of Timor-Leste’s 2002 Constitution protects press freedom: "1. Freedom of the press and other mass media is guaranteed. 2. Freedom of the press shall comprise, namely, the freedom of speech and creativity for journalists, the access to information sources, editorial freedom, protection of independence and professional confidentiality, and the right to create newspapers, publications and other means of broadcasting. 3. The monopoly on the mass media shall be prohibited. 4. The State shall guarantee the freedom and independence of the public mass media from political and economic powers. 5. The State shall guarantee the existence of a public radio and television service that is impartial in order to, inter-alia, protect and disseminate the culture and the traditional values of the Democratic Republic of East Timor and guarantee opportunities for the expression of different lines of opinion. 6. Radio and television stations shall operate only under a licence, in accordance with the law."

References:

2002. Constitution of the Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste. http://timor-leste.gov.tl/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/Constitution_RDTL_ENG.pdf.

Article 15 of Egypt’s 1923 Constitution initially protected freedom of the press: “The press shall be free within the limits of the law. Censorship of newspapers shall be prohibited. Warning, suspension or cancellation of papers via administrative means shall also be prohibited unless necessary for protecting social order” (Constitutionnet, “Royal Decree No. 42 of 1923” ).

Today, Article 70 of the 2014 Egyptian Constitution protects press freedom: “Freedom of press and printing, along with paper, visual, audio and digital distribution is guaranteed. Egyptians -- whether natural or legal persons, public or private -- have the right to own and issue newspapers and establish visual, audio and digital media outlets” (Constitute Project, “Egypt's Constitution of 2014” ).

References:

“Royal Decree No. 42 of 1923” 1923: https://constitutionnet.org/sites/default/files/1923_-_egyptian_constitution_english_1.pdf

https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Egypt_2019?lang=en

Paragraph 13 of Estonia’s 1920 Constitution first outlined protections on press freedom: “In Estonia there is freedom for the expression of personal ideas in words, print, letters, pictures, and sculpture. This freedom can be restricted only in the defense of the State and morals” (Wikisource, “Constitution of the Esthonian Republic ( 1920) ”).

Today, Article 45 of Estonia’s 1992 Constitution protects press freedom: “Everyone has the right to freely disseminate ideas, opinions, beliefs and other information by word, print, picture or other means” (Constitute Project, “Estonia's Constitution of 1992 with Amendments through 2015” ).

Freedom of the press was first protected under Article 41 of Ethiopia’s 1955 Constitution: “Freedom of speech and of the press is guaranteed throughout the Empire in accordance with the law.”

Today, Article 29 of Ethiopia’s 1994 Constitution protects press freedom: “Freedom of the press and other mass media and freedom of artistic creativity is guaranteed. Freedom of the press shall specifically include the following elements: a. Prohibition of any form of censorship. b. Access to information of public interest.” (Constitute Project, “Ethiopia's Constitution of 1994” ).

Although it did not explicitly protect press freedom, Fiji’s 1970 Constitution did protect, in the course of its guarantee of freedom of expression, “freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart ideas and information without interference, and freedom from interference with…correspondence” (PacLII, “Fiji Independence Order 1970 and Constitution of Fiji”). Furthermore, the list of potential qualifications or exceptions to this right suggests that freedom of expression was conceived in the 1970 Fiji Constitution as including freedom of the press:

"Nothing contained in or done under the authority of any law shall be held to be inconsistent with or in contravention of this section to the extent that the law in question makes provision - (a) in the interests of defence, public safety, public order, public morality or public health; (b) for the purpose of protecting the reputations, rights or freedoms of other persons or the private lives of persons concerned in legal proceedings, preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, maintaining the authority and independence of the courts, or regulating the technical administration or the technical operation of telephony, telegraphy, posts, wireless broadcasting or television...."

Today, Article 17 of Fiji’s 2013 Constitution explicitly protects press freedom: “Every person has the right to freedom of speech, expression, thought, opinion and publication, which includes… freedom of the press, including print, electronic and other media” (Constitute Project, “Fiji's Constitution of 2013” ).

References:

1970 Constitution of Fiji: https://constitutionnet.org/sites/default/files/1970_constitution.pdf

2013 Constitution of Fiji: https://www.laws.gov.fj/Home/information/constitutionoftherepublicoffiji#:~:text=The%20Constitution%20of%20the%20Republic,the%20procedures%20in%20the%20Constitution.

The importance of press freedom was originally emphasized in Article XI of the 1789 Declaration of Rights of Man and of the Citizen: “The free communication of ideas and opinions is one of the most precious of the rights of man. Every citizen may, accordingly, speak, write, and print with freedom, but shall be responsible for such abuses of this freedom as shall be defined by law” (Yale Law School, “Declaration of the Rights of Man – 1789” ).

This clause is now contained in Article 11 of the France’s 1958 Constitution (Constitute Project, “France's Constitution of 1958 with Amendments through 2008” ).

Ghana’s 1979 Constitution protected the right “to receive and impart ideas and information. without interference, and freedom from interference with his correspondence” (Constitutionnet, “Constitution of the Third Republic of Ghana (Promulgated) Decree, 1979” ).

Today, Article 21 of Ghana’s 1992 Constitution protects press freedom: “freedom of speech and expression, which shall include freedom of the press and other media” (Constitute Project, “Ghana's Constitution of 1992 with Amendments through 1996” ).

Article 40 of the 1958 Constitution of Guinea guaranteed freedom of the press.

Article 7 of the 1990 Guinean Constitution protected freedom to “express, manifest, disseminate…ideas and opinions through speech, writing and image. He is free to learn and obtain information from sources accessible to all” (WIPO, “Constitution du 23 décembre 1990” ) [Translated from French]

Today, Article 7 of Guinea’s 2010 Constitution protects press freedom: “The freedom of the Press is guaranteed and protected. The creation of an organ of [the] press or of [the] media for political, economical, social, cultural, sports, recreational or scientific information is free” (Constitute Project, “Guinea's Constitution of 2010” ).

References:

1958 Guinea Constitution: République de Guinée, Constitution Du 10 Novembre 1958, Digithèque MJP. November 10. https://mjp.univ-perp.fr/constit/gn1958.htm.

1990 Guinea Constitution:English Translation of the French Original Text of the Fundamental Law of 1990, 4 (2021) https://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.cow/zzgn0016&id=4&collection=cow&index=

2010 Guinea Constitution: https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Guinea_2010.

Article 12 of the 1966 Constitution of Guyana offers a broad definition of freedom of expression, one which includes main elements of freedom of the press, including the “freedom to receive ideas and information without interference," and the "freedom to communicate ideas and information without interference”.

References:

1966. National Assembly of the Parliament of Guyana. May 16. https://parliament.gov.gy/new2/documents/bills/21123/statutory_instrument_guyana_independence_order_1966_no_575.pdf.

Article 117 of the 1839 Honduran Constitution first protected press freedom: “It will not be possible to restrict in any case or by any pretext, the freedom of thought, of the word, that of writing, or that of the press” (Bufeterosa, “Constitucion de 1839” ). [Translated from Spanish]

Article 72 of the 1982 Honduran Constitution states that “expression of thought shall be free, and be expressed through any means of dissemination, without prior censorship” (Constitute Project, “Honduras's Constitution of 1982 with Amendments through 2013” ).

Iceland’s first press freedom protections came while it was a part of Denmark under Section 77 of the 1849 Danish Constitutional Act (see above).

Today, Freedom of the press is not explicitly protected in Iceland’s 1944 Constitution. However, Article 73’s protections for freedom of expression extend to the press: “Everyone shall be free to express his thoughts, but shall also be liable to answer for them in court. The law may never provide for censorship or other similar limitations to freedom of expression” (Constitute Project, “Iceland's Constitution of 1944 with Amendments through 2013” ).

Article 12 of Iraq’s 1925 Constitution first protected press freedom: “Freedom of expression of opinion, liberty of publication, of meeting together, and of forming and joining associations is guaranteed to all Iraqis within such limits as may be prescribed by law”.

Article 38 of Iraq’s 2005 Constitution protects press freedom: “The State shall guarantee in a way that does not violate public order and morality… Freedom of press, printing, advertisement, media and publication” (Constitute Project, “Iraq's Constitution of 2005” ).

References:

Iraq 1925 Constitution: https://constitution.org/1-Constitution/cons/iraq/iraqiconst19250321.html

“Iraq 2005 Constitution.” Constitute. Accessed July 19, 2023. https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Iraq_2005.

In the 1963 Constitution freedom of the press can be inferred from Article 23(1): "Except with his own consent, no. person shall be hindered in the enjoyment of his freedom of expression, that is to say, freedom to hold opinions without interference, freedom to receive ideas and information without interference, freedom to communicate ideas and information without interference (whether the communication be to the public generally or to any person or class of persons) and freedom from interference with his correspondence."

Article 34 of the 2010 Kenyan Constitution explicitly guarantees freedom of the media: “Freedom and independence of electronic, print and all other types of media is guaranteed…” (Constitute Project, “Kenya's Constitution of 2010” ).

References:

1963 Constitution of Kenya: http://kenyalaw.org/kl/fileadmin/pdfdownloads/1963_Constitution.pdf

2010 Constitution of Kenya: https://constituteproject.org/constitution/Kenya_2010

Article 16.2 of the 1993 Constitution of the Kyrgyz Republic as amended in February 1996 asserts that all persons in the country shall enjoy "freedom of the press, transmission and dissemination of information".

References:

1993 Constitution of the Kyrgyz Republic as amended in February 1996: http://hrlibrary.umn.edu/research/kyrgyzrepublic-constitution.html

The 1966 Constitution of Lesotho offers a general freedom of expression. Article 14 of Lesotho’s 1993 Constitution states: “Every person shall be entitled to, and (except with his own consent) shall not be hindered in his enjoyment of, freedom of expression, including freedom to hold opinions without interference, freedom to receive ideas and information without interference, freedom to communicate ideas and information without interference (whether the communication be to the public generally or to any person or class of persons) and freedom from interference with his correspondence." (Constitute Project, “Lesotho’ Constitution of 1993 with Amendments through 2018” ).

References:

1966 Lesotho Constitution: O’LEARY, B. L. “THE CONSTITUTION OF LESOTHO: AN OUTLINE.” The Comparative and International Law Journal of Southern Africa 1, no. 2 (1968): 266–70. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23240737.

1993 Lesotho Constitution:https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Lesotho_2018.

Article 23 of Libya’s 1951 Constitution originally protected press freedom: “Freedom of press and of printing shall be guaranteed within the limits of the law" (Constitutionnet, “Libya’s Constitution”).

Today, Article 14 of Libya’s 2011 Constitution protects press freedom: “The State shall guarantee freedom of opinion, individual and collective expression, research, communication, press, media, printing and editing, movement, assembly, demonstration and peaceful sit-in in accordance with the statute" (Constitute Project, Libya’s Constitution of 2011 with Amendments through 2012” ).

Lithuania’s 1918 Constitution “guaranteed freedom of speech and the press, religion and conscience” (Vardys 1979, p. 321).

Today, Article 44 of the 1992 Lithuanian Constitution protects press freedom: “Censorship of mass information shall be prohibited. The State, political parties, political and public organization, and other institutions or persons may not monopolise the mass media" (Constitute Project, “Lithuania’s Constitution of 1992 with Amendments through 2019” ).

According to Reporters Without Borders, "Press freedom is theoretically guaranteed by article 10 of the constitution, which provides for the freedom of expression." However, Malaysia’s Constitution contains no explicit protections on press freedom.

References:

1957 Malaysia Constitution: http://www.commonlii.org/my/legis/const/1957/2.html Malaysia's Constitution of 1957 with Amendments through 2007: https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Malaysia_2007.pdf

Article 16 of Mongolia’s 1992 Constitution protects press freedom: “Freedom of thought, opinion and expression, speech, press, and peaceful assembly. The rules of procedures for conduct of demonstrations and public meetings shall be determined by law" (Constitute Project, “Mongolia’s Constitution of 1992 with Amendments through 2001” ).

Earlier iterations of the Mongolian Constitution, with the earliest ratified in 1924, included protections on freedom of expression that included freedom of the press.

References:

1924 Constitution of the Mongolian People's Republic: British and Foreign State Papers (1931) https://heinonline-org.proxygw.wrlc.org/HOL/Page?collection=cow&handle=hein.cow/bfsprs0134&id=1244&men_tab=srchresults

“Mongolia 1992 (rev. 2001).” Constitute. https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Mongolia_2001

The 1947 Constitution of Burma originally protected press freedom as a part of freedom of expression in Chapter I, Section 17: “There shall liberty for the exercise of the following rights subject to law, public order and morality…The right of the citizens to express freely their convictions and opinions” (Burma Library, “The Constitution of the Union of Burma, 24 September 1947, Effective 4 January 1948” ).

Today, Chapter VIII, Article 354 of Myanmar’s 2008 Constitution protects press freedom: “Every citizen shall be at liberty in the exercise of the following rights…to express and publish freely their convictions and opinions" (Constitute Project, “Myanmar’s Constitution of 2008 with Amendments through 2015” ).

Article 13 of the 1948 North Korean Constitution originally protected press freedom: “Citizens of the D.P.R.K. have freedom of speech, the press, association, assembly, mass meetings and demonstration” (The Committee for Human Rights in North Korea, “Constitution of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea”).

Today, Article 67 of North Korea’s 1972 Constitution protects press freedom: “Citizens are guaranteed freedom of speech, of the press, of assembly, demonstration and association" (Constitute Project, “ North Korea’s Constitution of 1972 with Amendments through 1998” ).

Article 72 of Paraguay’s 1967 Constitution first established protections on press freedom: “Freedom of expression and of information without prior Censorship are inviolable, and no law shall be enacted that limits such freedom or prevents it except in matters connected with the prohibitions contained in the preceding article” (International Foundation for Electoral Systems, “Constitution of the Republic of Paraguay”).

Today, Article 27 of Paraguay’s 1992 Constitution protects press freedom: “The use of the mass communication media is of public interest; in consequence, their functioning may not be closed or suspended… Any discriminatory practice in the provision of supplies to the press, as well as interfering the radio-electrical frequencies and the obstruction, in any way, of the free circulation, distribution, and sale of periodicals, books, magazines, or other publications with a responsible direction or authors are prohibited" (Constitute Project, “ Paraguay’s Constitution of 1992 with Amendments through 2011” ).

The Philippines first protected press freedom under Article 20 of the 1899 Malolos Constitution: Neither shall any Filipino be deprived… Of the right to freely express his ideas or opinions, orally or in writing, through the use of the press or other similar means" (Arellano Law Foundation, " 1889 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines").

Today, Article III, Section 4 of the Philippines’ 1987 Constitution protects press freedom: “No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech, of expression, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition the government for redress of grievances" Constitute Project, “ Philippines’s Constitution of 1987” ).

Articles 7 and 8 of the 1822 Portuguese Constitution originally protected press freedom: “The free communication of thoughts is one of man's most precious rights. All Portuguese may therefore, without prior censorship, express their opinions in any matter, as long as they are responsible for the abuse of this freedom in the cases, and in the form that the law determines… The Courts will appoint a Special Court, to protect the freedom of the press, and to curb the offenses resulting from its abuse, as provided for in art. 177 and 189” (O Portal da História, “CONSTITUIÇÃO PORTUGUESA DE 1822” ). [Translated from Portuguese]

Today, Article 37 of Portugal’s 1976 Constitution protects press freedom: “Everyone shall possess the right to freely express and publicise his thoughts in words, images or by any other means, as well as the right to inform others, inform himself and be informed without hindrance or discrimination"(Constitute Project, “Portugal’s Constitution of 1976 with Amendments through 2005” ).

Article 21 of Rwanda’s 1962 Constitution originally protected press freedom: “The secrecy of correspondence, postal and telegraphic communications is inviolable” (World Digital Library, “Constitution de la République Rwandaise”). [Translated from French]

Today, Article 38 of Rwanda’s 2003 Constitution protects press freedom: “Freedom of press, of expression and of access to information are recognised and guaranteed by the State" (Constitute Project, “ Rwanda’s Constitution of 2003 with Amendments through 2015” ).

The 1935 Serbian Constitution protected freedom of the press, and King Milan IV of Serbia discussed freedom of the press as early as 1875: “Although nominated but a few days ago, the Ministers whom I have assembled around me in these grave circumstances, will submit to you nevertheless some projects of laws tending to improve our national institutions, to wit, a law destined to increase the securities for personal safety, a law for the extension of the liberty of the press, and a law for the extension of communal self-government” (Hertslet 1875, p. 34).

Today, Article 46 of Serbia’s 2006 Constitution protects press freedom: “The freedom of thought and expression shall be guaranteed, as well as the freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through speech, writing, art or in some other manner” (International Labour Organization, “Constitution of The Republic of Serbia”).

As a part of Czechoslovakia, freedom of the press was protected by Article 113 of the 1920 Czechoslovakian Constitution: “Freedom of the Press as well as the right to assemble peaceably and without arms and to form associations is guaranteed” (Masarykova Univerzita, “The Constitutional charter of the Czechoslovak Republic”).

Today, Article 26 of Slovakia’s 1992 Constitution protects press freedom: “Every person has the right to express his or her opinion in words, writing, print, images and any other means, and also to seek, receive and disseminate ideas and information both nationally and internationally. No approval process shall be required for publication of the press. Radio and television companies may be required to seek permission from the State authorities to set up private businesses. Further details shall be provided by law. Censorship shall be prohibited" (Constitute Project, “Slovakia’s Constitution of 1992 with Amendments through 2017” ).

South Africa’s Progressive Federal Party pushed to include freedom of the press as a part of a Bill of Rights during the drafting of the 1983 South African Constitution, but it was ultimately rejected by the rest of Parliament (SAMEDIA, “PFP’s lone stand on ‘Rights’”).

Today, Article 16 of South Africa’s 1996 Constitution protects press freedom: “Everyone has the right to freedom of expression, which includes…freedom of the press and other media" (Constitute Project, “South Africa’s Constitution of 1996 with Amendments through 2012” ).

Chapter IV of the 1972 Sri Lankan Constitution first protected press freedom: “every citizen shall have the right to freedom of speech and expression, including publication" (Parliament of Sri Lanka, "The Constitution of Sri Lanka (Ceylon)").

Article 14 of Sri Lanka’s 1978 Constitution protects press freedom: “Every citizen is entitled to…the freedom of speech and expression including publication" Constitute Project, “Sri Lanka’s Constitution of 1978 with Amendments through 2015” ).

Article 55 of Switzerland’s 1874 Constitution first protected press freedom: “The freedom of the press is guaranteed" (ICL Project, "Switzerland > Constitution 1874" ).

Today, Article 17 of Switzerland’s 1999 Constitution protects press freedom: “Freedom of the press, radio and television and of other forms of dissemination of features and information by means of public telecommunications is guaranteed" (Constitute Project, “Switzerland’s Constitution of 1999 with Amendments through 2014” ).

Tanzania’s 1961 Constitution did not explicitly protect press freedom, but did protect freedom of expression (Citizenship Rights Africa, "The Tanganyika Constitution"

Today, Article 18 of Tanzania’s 1977 Constitution protects press freedom as a part of freedom of expression: “Without prejudice to expression the laws of the land, every person has the right to freedom of opinion and expression, and to seek, receive and impart or disseminate information and ideas through any media regardless of national frontiers, and also has the right of freedom from interference with his communications" (Constitute Project, “Tanzania’s Constitution of 1977 with Amendments through 2005” ).

Article 23 of the 1973 Bahamian Constitution states that:

“Nothing contained in or done under the authority of any law shall be held to be inconsistent with or in contravention of this Article to the extent that the law in question makes provision which is reasonably required for the purposes of protecting the rights, reputations and freedoms of other persons, preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, maintaining the authority and independence of the courts, or regulating telephony, telegraphy, posts, wireless broadcasting, television, public exhibitions or public entertainment” (Constitute Project, “Bahamas (The)'s Constitution of 1973” ).

Article 12 of Togo’s 1963 Constitution first protected press freedom: “Everyone has the right to express and freely disseminate their opinions through speech, pen and image in compliance with laws and regulations” (World Digital Library, “Constitution de la Republique Togolaise”). [Translated from French]

Today, Article 26 of Togo’s 1992 Constitution protects press freedom: “The freedom of the press is recognized and guaranteed by the State. It is protected by the law" (Constitute Project, “Togo’s Constitution of 1992 with Amendments through 2007” ).

Article 12 of the Ottoman Constitution of 1876 first protected press freedom in modern-day Turkey: “The press is free, within limits imposed by law" (The Individualisation of War, "The Ottoman Constitution").

Today, Article 26 of Turkey’s 1982 Constitution protects press freedom: “Everyone has the right to express and disseminate his/her thoughts and opinions by speech, in writing or in pictures or through other media, individually or collectively. This freedom includes the liberty of receiving or imparting information or ideas without interference by official authorities. This provision shall not preclude subjecting transmission by radio, television, cinema, or similar means to a system of licensing" (Constitute Project, “Turkey’s Constitution of 1982 with Amendments through 2017” ).

Article 141 of Uruguay’s 1830 Constitution first protected press freedom: “The communication of thoughts by words, private writings, or published by the press in all matters is entirely free, without the need for prior censorship; the author being responsible, and where appropriate the printer, for the abuses they commit, in accordance with the law" (Republica Oriental de Uruguay, "Constitucion de la Republica," 1830) . [Translated from Spanish]

Article 29 of Uruguay’s 1967 Constitution protects press freedom: “The communication of thoughts is entirely free in all matters, by words, private writings or published in the press, or by any another form of disclosure, without the need for prior censorship" (Centro de Informacion Oficial, "Constitucion de la Republica," 1967) .

Article 10 of Vietnam’s 1946 Constitution first protected press freedom: “A Vietnamese citizen has the rights to freedoms… of the press" (Bloomsbury, "Vietnam Constitution 1946" ).

Article 25 of Vietnam’s 1992 Constitution protects press freedom: “The citizen shall enjoy the right to freedom of opinion and speech, freedom of the press, to access to information, to assemble, form associations and hold demonstrations. The practice of these rights shall be provided by the law" (Constitute Project, “Vietnam’s Constitution of 1992 with Amendments through 2013” ).

Article 20 of Zambia’s 1991 Constitution protects press freedom under freedom of expression: “no person shall be hindered in the enjoyment of his freedom of expression, that is to say, freedom to hold opinions without interference, freedom to receive ideas and information without interference, freedom to impart and communicate ideas and information without interference, whether the communication be to the public generally or to any person or class of persons, and freedom from interference with his correspondence" (Constitute Project, "Zambia's Constitution of 1991 with Amendments through 2016" ).

This clause first appeared in Article 22 of Zambia’s 1962 Constitution (World Statesmen, "Laws of Zambia: The Constitution").

The first piece of legislation granting citizens freedom of the press was the Swedish Freedom of the Press Act of 1776. The law allowed for free printing of anything that did not oppose religious faith, did not attack the constitution, and was not otherwise indecent (Nordin 2017, 137). In 1950, the European Convention of Human Rights accepted these same limitations for free press. The Swedish Freedom of the Press Act also gave citizens access to view official state documents. While other European countries had some level of free press, such as the Netherlands, the right to free press was not written into law (Nordin 2017, 138). The right to freedom of the press was accepted more globally with the publication of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948, which states, “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers” (United Nations 1948) . Still, according to Freedom House, the population of the world with freedom of the press as of 2017 was only thirteen percent, due to limitations imposed by authoritarian regimes and Russian and Chinese regimes seeking to expand their global influence. There were even reports of threats to journalists and limitations to freedom of the press in some democracies (Dunham 2017) .

As for the United States, the first guarantee of freedom of the press was written by George Mason in the Virginia Declaration of Rights in 1776 (Bogen 1983, 429). Thomas Jefferson revised Mason’s statement that “all men are born equally free and independent” when he wrote the Declaration of Independence (Vile). Likewise, James Madison later used the Virginia Declaration of Rights to help him in drafting the First Amendment in 1791. Specifically, the line “The Freedom of the Press is one of the greatest bulwarks of liberty, and can never be restrained by despotic Governments,” within the Virginia Declaration of Rights shows great similarity to Madison's later proposal for the guarantee of freedom of the press within the Bill of Rights (Bogen 1983, 445). Freedom of the press was accepted as a fundamental right for the United States as a whole with the ratification of the First Amendment in 1791 which states that, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people to peaceably assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances” (U.S. Const. amend. I). Freedom of the press is intertwined with freedom of speech, and both rights are seen as fundamental (Stewart).

Privacy, conceptualized as a named legal right, has been fairly new. As stated by Negley, “Few philosophers would argue that privacy is a "natural" right or that the intrinsic nature of privacy establishes it as a legal right” (319). Rather, identification of privacy as a right and not just a value has resulted from various violations of the right throughout modern history. In a United States context, the right to privacy is often associated with the Supreme Court case, Griswold v. Connecticut in 1965, in which the Court overruled a Connecticut law banning contraceptives for married couples by using “the personal protections expressly stated in the First, Third, Fourth, Fifth, and Ninth Amendments to find that there is an implied right to privacy in the Constitution” (“Privacy”). Griswold expanded and highlighted legal and political discourse around privacy as a specific right protected by the US Constitution. The Third and Fourth Amendments, which deal with quartering soldiers in citizens’ houses and unlawful searches and seizures of citizen property, came about because colonists felt violated by the British government’s actions to maintain control of the colonies in the years leading up to the Revolutionary War: “The 1774 [Quartering] Act expanded British officers’ ability to refuse unsuitable housing and seize ‘uninhabited houses, out-houses, barns, or other buildings’ for purposes of quartering soldiers,” (“Historical Background”). Additionally, “the colonists, still under the thumb of the British king, were subject to arbitrary and invasive searches under the “Writs of Assistance,” which allowed British troops and government officials to search homes and private property looking for goods that were imported illegally or on which a tax had not been paid,” (Burling, 2021). This context contributed to early codification of rights related to privacy in the United States.

In 1890, Boston lawyers Samuel Warren and Louis Brandeis wrote an article for the Harvard Law Review entitled, “The Right to Privacy.” The article is often cited by scholars as the invention of the concept of the “right to privacy” in American law (Glancy, 1979). Glancy places the article within the context of “the post-Civil War decades [that] had brought to Boston and the rest of the United States ‘countless, little-noticed revolutions’ in the form of a variety of inventions which made the personal lives and personalities of individuals increasingly accessible to large numbers” (Glancy, 1979, 7). Technological advancement correlating with an increase in discourse about the right to privacy in this era can be mirrored with modern concerns over privacy and technology.

Concerns over government surveillance efforts in the late 20th and early 21st centuries further brought the right to privacy into the spotlight of American politics:

“During the Cold War, the federal government was involved in various programs that spied on the American public’s telephone calls, radio signals, and mail. In programs such as the FBI’s COINTELPRO and the CIA’s Operation CHAOS, not only were individuals considered to be ‘threats to national security’ targeted, but also unrelated citizens who got caught up in the searches. The 9/11 terrorist attacks and the subsequent War on Terror led to another wave of mass surveillance, extending to citizens and their luggage on airplanes, automated drones, and the burgeoning field of global Internet communications” (“Constitutional Amendments”).

These efforts resulted in much discourse about the right to privacy, with supporters claiming that the surveillance was justified under the protection of national security, and opponents arguing that the widespread and invasive nature of the programs was not necessary and therefore a major violation of the right to privacy (“Constitutional Amendments”).

Additional events that contributed to privacy being considered as a fundamental right were the Snowden and Cambridge Analytica scandals, which also brought the right to privacy to light in an international context. Though the right to privacy is enshrined in Article 12 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, according to Humble “the right to privacy has historically not been at the forefront of discussions within the international community and the United Nations. This position changed after the Edward Snowden and Cambridge Analytica revelations.” In 2013, Edward Snowden leaked information on the National Security Agency’s information-gathering programs, revealing “how vulnerable our everyday digital communications are to government surveillance, and how much governments want to collect our information, no matter how trivial or unrelated it may be to any tangible national security threat” (PoKemper, 2014). Additionally, the Snowden scandal changed “the vocabulary through which [the right to privacy] was articulated. At the UN, states are supposed to employ a universal vocabulary, enabling therefore claims for the recognition of privacy as a human right. The enactment of a universal vocabulary destabilizes the core of mass surveillance practices,” (Bauman et al., 2014, 128-129). The Cambridge Analytica scandal, which revealed how users’ personal data on the Facebook social media platform was being collected and used, similarly shed light on issues relating to data privacy rights around the world. The scandal also highlighted users’ opinions about their right to privacy. In a study of young adults in Israel who chose to continue their use of Facebook after the scandal, “in-depth interviews suggest that users perceive privacy not as an integral component of one’s civil rights but as a negotiable commodity traded according to societal norms,” and that “it is the users’ responsibility to manage their privacy, as it is Facebook and other social media companies’ right to profit from activities on their platforms” (Afriat et al., 2021, 116). These individuals viewed privacy not as a fundamental right but rather as a commodity. As technology around the world advances, discourse about the right to privacy as a fundamental right will likely become more present.

References:

Afriat, Hagar, Shira Dvir-Gvirsman, Keren Tsuriel, Lidor Ivan. 2021. “‘This is capitalism. It is not illegal’: Users’ attitudes toward institutional privacy following the Cambridge Analytica scandal.” The Information Society, 37 no. 2 115-127. https://doi.org/10.1080/01972243.2020.1870596

Bauman, Zygmunt, Didier Bigo, Paulo Esteves, Elspeth Guild, Vivienne Jabri, David Lyon, RBJ Walker. 2014. “After Snowden: Rethinking the Impact of Surveillance.” International Political Sociology, 8 no. 2 121-144. https://doi.org/10.1111/ips.12048

Burling, James. 2021. “The 4th Amendment to the Constitution: A Primer.” Pacific Legal Foundation. https://pacificlegal.org/fourth-amendment-primer/?psafe_param=1&gad_source=1&gclid=CjwKCAjw5Ky1BhAgEiwA5jGujndXaC_UxPEgAFNOTC857KpBtWo4qgdidNIMhpLa7QjXW-hiOzn5xhoCvT0QAvD_BwE

“Constitutional Amendments - Amendment 4 - ‘The Right to Privacy.’” Ronald Reagan Presidential Library and Museum. The National Archives. Accessed August 1, 2024. https://www.reaganlibrary.gov/constitutional-amendments-amendment-4-right-privacy

Glancy, Dorothy. 1979. “The Invention of the Right to Privacy.” Arizona Law Review, 21 no. 1. https://law.scu.edu/wp-content/uploads/Privacy.pdf

“Historical Background of the Third Amendment.” Cornell Law School, Legal Information Institute. https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/amendment-3/historical-background-of-the-third-amendment

Humble, Kristian. 2021. “International Law, Surveillance, and the Right to Privacy.” The Right to Privacy Revisited. Routledge Imprint. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9781003252191-2/international-law-surveillance-protection-privacy-kristian-humble

Negley, Glenn. “Philosophical Views on the Value of Privacy.” Duke Law. Accessed August 1, 2024. https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3111&context=lcp

PoKemper, Dinah. 2014. “Dispatches: How Snowden Changed the World.” Human Rights Watch. https://www.hrw.org/news/2014/06/05/dispatches-how-snowden-changed-world?gad_source=1&gclid=CjwKCAjw5Ky1BhAgEiwA5jGujvY_OUa9teDuEfKpXAEkeAFI7h7HVZPk-sobJksUty5h4NiQVLrOXxoCA1sQAvD_BwE

“Privacy.” Cornell Law School, Legal Information Institute. Accessed August 1, 2024. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/privacy

United Nations General Assembly. 1948. “Universal Declaration of Human Rights.” Accessed August 2, 2024. https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights

The recognition of privacy rights as fundamental and legally-protectable can be traced back to seminal writings, key legal cases, and the growing awareness of the impact of technological advancements on personal privacy. The conceptualization of privacy has been widely debated and has undergone significant evolution over the past century. While deeply rooted in historical principles of ancient and common law, the concept of privacy has been continually redefined to address the challenges posed by technology and changing social landscapes. It has often been associated with personal freedom and dignity.

Earlier protections afforded to the inviolability of the home and correspondence made the privacy of property acceptable. These rights, enshrined in many constitutions during the 1800s, laid the groundwork for the modern concept of privacy. For example, the seminal 1789 “Declaration of the Rights of Man” stated, “Since property is an inviolable and sacred right, no one shall be deprived thereof except where public necessity, legally determined, shall clearly demand it, and then only on condition that the owner shall have been previously and equitably indemnified” (Declaration of the Rights of Man 1789). The inviolability of the home protected individuals from unwarranted intrusions by the state, recognizing a private sphere free from governmental interference. Similarly, the protection of correspondence remained confidential, safeguarding the privacy of individual expression.

Samuel Warren and Louis Brandeis’s 1890 article “The Right to Privacy” served as a catalyst in the movement to legally recognize privacy rights. They argued for the necessity of recognizing privacy as a distinct legal right, separate from existing protections of person and property under existing law. Additionally, the conceptualization of privacy was needed to respond to the modern era: “This development of the law was inevitable. The intense intellectual and emotional life, and the heightening of sensations which came with the advance of civilization, made it clear to men that only a part of the pain, pleasure, and profit of life lay in physical things. Thoughts, emotions, and sensations demanded legal recognition” (Brandeis & Warren 1890, 193). Furthermore, they highlighted the inadequacies of existing legal frameworks to address the non-physical aspects of privacy, emphasizing the need for the evolution of the law in response to changing social and technological landscapes. In particular, the right “to be let alone” is a fundamental aspect of privacy to Warren and Brandeis in the modernizing world (Warren & Brandeis 1890, 194).

Despite Warren and Brandeis’s popular arguments, early 20th-century legal developments were slow to incorporate a broad conception of privacy rights. A notable example is the 1928 Supreme Court case Olmstead v. United States, where the Court held that wiretapping a person’s home telephone did not violate the Fourth Amendment because it did not involve a physical trespass (Solove 2008, 1101). However, legal decisions began to shift in the mid-20th century, starting with the 1965 Griswold v. Connecticut case. The Court ruled that a right to privacy could be inferred from several amendments in the Bill of Rights, thereby preventing states from making the use of contraception by married couples illegal (Griswold v. Connecticut 1985). This established privacy as a constitutionally protected right and laid the groundwork for subsequent decisions that expanded privacy protections.

Correspondingly, further landmark cases and bills recognized privacy rights. Katz v. United States in 1967 overruled the Olmstead decision; the Privacy Act of 1974, created in response to the Watergate scandal, aimed to regulation the collection and use of personal information by federal agencies; the Right to Financial Privacy Act of 1978 was passed by Congress in response to a court case that held that individuals had not property interest in their bank records (Solove 2008, 1146; Regan 1995, 366).

Internationally, many institutions influenced the development of privacy rights. Early on, Europe enacted several pieces of legislation to protect privacy. Article 8 of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights explicitly recognized the right to respect for private and family life, home, and correspondence (Bygrave 2014, 12). This right has been one of the most frequently contested in case law and has influenced the development of privacy laws in Europe and across the globe. In fact, the United Nations Human Rights Committee stated, “No one shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his privacy, family, home, or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks upon his honour and reputation” in Article 17 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Bygrave 2014, 57).

In the 21st-century, significant advancements in digital technology make the protection of privacy rights challenging. The explosion of digitized information and the rise of new media forms raise complex questions regarding the adequacy of existing privacy laws. William Prosser’s influential work on privacy tort law, while providing a foundational framework, has been criticized for its limitations in addressing contemporary privacy issues (Richards & Solove 2010, 1187). In response, David Lyon and William Staples have discussed the implications of surveillance for privacy in modern society, highlighting the need for pinging vigilance and adaptation of privacy protections in response to evolving technological and social landscapes (Lyon 2001, 222).

Overall, the recognition of privacy rights as fundamental and legally-protectable has been a dynamic and evolving process. From the early arguments of Warren and Brandeis to the landmark Supreme Court cases and legislative action, the concept of privacy has continually adapted to new challenges and contexts. These actions were all in response to the changing nature of privacy threats and to ensure legal protections could continue to evolve to these new challenges.

References Bygrave, L. A. (2014). "Data Privacy Law: An International Perspective." Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199675555.001.0001. Declaration of the Rights of Man (1789). https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/rightsof.asp. Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965). https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/381/479/. Penfold, R. (2002). [Review of Surveillance Society: Monitoring Everyday Life; Everyday Surveillance: Vigilance and Visibility in Post Modern Life, by D. Lyon & W. Staples]. The British Journal of Criminology, 42(1), 222–224. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23638774 Regan, P. M. (1995). "Legislating Privacy: Technology, Social Values, and Public Policy." University of North Carolina Press. Richards, N. M., & Solove, D. J. (2010). "Prosser’s Privacy Law: A Mixed Legacy." California Law Review, 98(6), 1887-1924. https://scholarship.law.gwu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2104&context=faculty_publications. Solove, D. J. (2008). "Understanding Privacy." Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/3481326. Warren, S.D., & Brandeis, L.D. (1890). “The Right to Privacy.” Harvard Law Review, 4(5), 193-220. https://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/classes/6.805/articles/privacy/Privacy_brand_warr2.html.

In the 1928 Fundamental Statute of the Kingdom of Albania, Article 196 guaranteed the privacy of the home, and Article 201 addressed privacy of correspondence: "The secrecy of correspondence, telegraph and telephone messages is inviolable, except in case of war mobilisation, revolution and the investigation of serious crimes." The 1976 Constitution offered guarantees using similar language, in Articles 57 and 58.

Today, privacy is guaranteed in Articles 35 (data), 36 (correspondence), and 37 (home) of the 1998 constitution (Constitute Project, “Albania 1998 rev. 2016”).

References:

1928 Fundamental Statute of the Kingdom of Albania: https://www.hoelseth.com/royalty/albania/albconst19281201.html

1976: Albania Constitution: https://data.globalcit.eu/NationalDB/docs/ALB%20The%20Constitution%20of%20the%20Peoples%20Socialist%20Republic%20of%20Albania%201976.pdf

1998: Albania Constitution: https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Albania_2016?lang=en.

Articles 14 and 15 of the first and only Andorran constitution protect privacy in the state. Article 14 protects privacy, honor, and reputation, while Article 15 protects the home and communications (Constitute Project, “Andorra 1993” ).

https://constituteproject.org/constitution/Andorra_ 1993? lang=en

In the constitution, Article 3, Section C protects the right to privacy in personal and family life, as well as the home.

References:

“Republic of Antigua and Barbuda / República Del Antigua y Barbuda Constitution of 1981 Constituciones De 1981.” Antigua and Barbuda: Constitution, 1981: https://pdba.georgetown.edu/Constitutions/Antigua/antigua-barbuda.html.

The 1995 Armenian constitution protects several elements of the right to privacy in Articles 20-21. Article 20 states: "Everyone is entitled to defend his or her private and family life from unlawful interference and defend his or her honor and reputation from attack. The gathering, maintenance, use and dissemination of illegally obtained information about a person's private and family life are prohibited. Everyone has the right to confidentiality in his or her correspondence, telephone conversations, mail, telegraph and other communications, which may only be restricted by court order." Article 21 concerned privacy in the home: "Everyone is entitled to privacy in his or her own dwelling. It is prohibited to enter a person's dwelling against his or her own will except under cases prescribed by law. A dwelling may be searched only by court order and in accordance with legal procedures." The 2005 amendments to the Constitution of Armenia added language more explicitly focused on state-collected data and information: "Everyone shall have the right to become acquainted with the data concerning him/her available in the state and local self-government bodies. Everyone shall have the right to correction of any non-verified information and elimination of the illegally obtained information about him/her."

Articles 31-34 of the Constitution of Armenia as amended in 2015 offered further details about these rights. Article 34 created more firmly articulated data rights: "1. Everyone shall have the right to protection of data concerning him or her. 2. The processing of personal data shall be carried out in good faith, for the purpose prescribed by law, with the consent of the person concerned or without such consent in case there exists another legitimate ground prescribed by law. 3. Everyone shall have the right to get familiar with the data concerning him or her collected at state and local self-government bodies and the right to request correction of any inaccurate data concerning him or her, as well as elimination of data obtained illegally or no longer having legal grounds. 4. The right to get familiar with personal data may be restricted only by law, for the purpose of state security, economic welfare of the country, preventing or disclosing crimes, protecting public order, health and morals or the basic rights and freedoms of others. 5. Details related to the protection of personal data shall be prescribed by law." Finally, in 2015 the Constitution specified the conditions under which these rights might be restricted by the law, asserting that they "may be restricted only by law, for the purpose of state security, economic welfare of the country, preventing or disclosing crimes, protecting public order, health and morals or the basic rights and freedoms of others."

References:

"Constitution of the Republic of Armenia" (1995): http://www.parliament.am/legislation.php?sel=show&ID=2425&lang=eng

"Constitution of the Republic of Armenia (with the Amendments of 27 November 2005)": http://www.parliament.am/legislation.php?sel=show&ID=1&lang=eng

"Amendments to the Constitution of the Republic of Armenia" (2015): http://www.parliament.am/legislation.php?sel=show&ID=5805&lang=eng

According to the Austrian Embassy in Washington, D.C., the ratification of the ECHR by Austria in 1958 gave the treaty constitutional law standing in the state. The ECHR is what protects the right to privacy in Austria.

References:

https://www.austria.org/human-rights-and-the-council-of-europe

Articles 25 & 26 of the 1973 Bahrain Constitution protect privacy in the home and all types of communication. Article 25 states: "Places of residence shall be inviolable. They may not be entered or searched without the permission of their occupants except in the circumstances and manner specified by the law." Article 26 states: "Freedom of postal, telegraphic and telephonic communications and the secrecy thereof shall be guaranteed. No communications shall be censored nor the contents thereof revealed except in cases of necessity prescribed by the law and in accordance with the procedures and guarantees stated therein."

References:

“Bahrain Old Constitution (1973).” International Constitutional Law Project: https://www.servat.unibe.ch/icl/ba01000_.html

Article 11(b) of the 1966 Barbados Constitution grants every person in Barbados privacy of their home. Article 20(1) prevents interference in correspondence, and Article 20.2(b) affirmed the State's authority in enforcing laws "protecting the reputations, rights and freedoms of other persons or the private lives of persons concerned in legal proceedings, preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence...."

References:

https://pdba.georgetown.edu/Constitutions/Barbados/barbados66.html#ch1

Article 11 of the 27 October 1830 Draft Constitution of Belgium articulated a defense of the right to privacy in the home, and Article 27 did the same for privacy of correspondence. Articles 10 and 22 of the 1831 Belgium Constitution guaranteed privacy in the home and correspondence, respectively.

References:

English translation of the French text of the draft of the constitution of 27 October 1830 35 (2009): https://heinonline-org.proxygw.wrlc.org/HOL/Page?collection=cow&handle=hein.cow/zzbe0096&id=5&men_tab=srchresults

1831 Constitution of Belgium: https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Belgium_1831

Article 2 of the 15 February 1959 Constitution of the Republic of Dahomey guaranteed the privacy of correspondence, telegraphy, and communication over the telephone, conditioned by respect for public order.

The inviolability of the domicile was guaranteed in Article 10 of the 1964 Constitution of the Republic of Dahomey, and the privacy of correspondence was guaranteed in Article 11 of the 1964 Constitution.

The 1990 constitution protects privacy in the home and of correspondence in Articles 20 and 21, respectively.

References:

1959 Constitution of the Republic of Dahomey: "Of the State and of Sovereignty," Republique du Dahomey, Constitution du 15 fevrier 1959 (1959): 57-57: https://heinonline-org.proxygw.wrlc.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.cow/zzbj0032&id=3&collection=cow&index=#

1964 Constitution of the Republic of Dahomey: English translation of the French original text fo the Constitution of 1964 152 (2011) Title II: The Rights and Duties of the Citizen: https://heinonline-org.proxygw.wrlc.org/HOL/Page?collection=cow&handle=hein.cow/zzbj0002&id=2&men_tab=srchresults

1990 Constitution of the Republic of Benin: https://constitutionnet.org/sites/default/files/Benin%20Constitution%20-%20English%20Summary.pdf

Article 147 of the 1826 Draft Constitution for the Republic of Bolivia protected the inviolability of the home, as did Article 152 of the 6 November 1826 Constitution.

Article 160 of the 1831 Bolivia Constitution protected the privacy of correspondence: "The secrecy of Letters is inviolable; the Employees of the Post Office shall be responsible for the violation of this guarantee, except in such cases as the Laws shall provide." The 1831 Constitution continued to protect the inviolability of the home as well, in Article 152: "Every Bolivian's abode is an inviolable asylum. No forcible entry can be made therein, unless under such circumstances, and in such a manner, as the Law shall determine."

Today, privacy rights are protected in Article 21(3). These protections are general, while Article 25 protects more specific privacy rights in the home and correspondence (Constitute Project, “Bolivia (Plurinational State of) 2009” ).

References:

1826 Draft Constitution for the Republic of Bolivia: English text of the draft Constitution of 1826. 892 (2010) Title XI: Of Guarantees https://heinonline-org.proxygw.wrlc.org/HOL/Page?collection=cow&handle=hein.cow/zzbo0002&id=18&men_tab=srchresults

6 November 1826 Constitution of Bolivia: English translation of the original Constitution of 1826 6 (2010) Title II: Of Religion. https://heinonline.org/HOL/P?h=hein.cow/zzbo0003&i=1

1831 Constitution of Bolivia: English translation of the original text of the Constitution of 1831 836 (2010) Title the Last: Of Guarantees https://heinonline-org.proxygw.wrlc.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.cow/zzbo0004&id=20&collection=cow&index=

“Bolivia (Plurinational Republic of) 2009.” Constitute. https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Bolivia_2009

The 1966 constitution of Botswana includes privacy protections of the home in Article 3(c) and Article 9. Article 12, in protecting freedom of expression, also protects correspondence.

References:

1966 Constitution of Botswana: https://botswanalaws.com/consolidated-statutes/constitution-of-botswana

Brunei lacks any legislation or constitutional provisions for privacy rights. The 1996 United States Department of State Report on Brunei Human Rights even says that law actively allows for intrusions of privacy.

References:

1996 United States Department of State Report on Brunei Human Rights: https://1997-2001.state.gov/global/human_rights/1996_hrp_report/brunei.html

Article 11 of the 1970 Constitution of Upper Volta proclaimed the inviolability of the home. Section One, Paragraph 4 of the 1977 Constitution of Upper Volta protected the privacy of correspondence.

The 1991 Burkina Faso Constitution protects privacy rights in Article 6. It reads, “The residence, the domicile, private and family life, [and] the secrecy of correspondence of every person, are inviolable. It can only be infringed according to the forms and in the cases specified by the law” (Constitute Project, “Burkina Faso 1991 rev. 2015” ).

References:

1970 Constitution of Upper Volta: "Title II: Fundamental Rights and Duties of Man and the Citizen," Constitution of Upper Volta (1970): 1006-1008 https://heinonline-org.proxygw.wrlc.org/HOL/Page?collection=cow&handle=hein.cow/zzbf0015&id=3&men_tab=srchresults

1977 Constitution of Upper Volta: "Section I: The Liberties," Constitution de la Republique Haute-Volta (1977): 2-3 https://heinonline-org.proxygw.wrlc.org/HOL/Page?collection=cow&handle=hein.cow/zzbf0031&id=3&men_tab=srchresults

https://constituteproject.org/constitution/Burkina_Faso_ 2015? lang=en

The 1947 Constitution offered privacy rights with reference to the home and to correspondence. Article 11 of that document held that "The domicile is inviolable. No one may get in except in the cases specified by the Law and according to the forms it prescribes." Article 12 concerned correspondence: "The secrecy of letters is inviolable, temporary derogations being explicitly provided for by the Law when the higher interest of the Nation makes it necessary."

The 1993 constitution contains privacy rights in Article 40: “The rights to privacy of residence, and to the confidentiality of correspondence by mail, telegram, fax, telex and telephone, shall be guaranteed” (Office of the Council of the Ministers of Cambodia, “Constitution of the Kingdom of Cambodia”).

References:

1947 Cambodia Constitution: Advocatetanmoy Law Library. https://advocatetanmoy.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/cambodia-constitution-1947.pdf

1993 Cambodia Constitution as revised up to 1999: https://pressocm.gov.kh/en/archives/9539

According to section E8 of the Constitution Act of 1982, "Everyone has the right to be secure against unreasonable search or seizure."

References:

Constitution Act of 1982: https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/pdf/const_e.pdf

In 1994, a new constitution was passed in the Central African Republic. Article 13 granted private communications inviolable and Article 14 did the same for the private home . Today, private communication is seen in Article 16 and the home is inviolable in Article 19 (Constitute Project, “Central African Republic 2016” ).

References:

Constitution of the Central African Republic, Adopted on 28 December 1994, promulgated on 14 January 1995: https://g7plus.fd.uc.pt/pdfs/CentralAfricanRepublic.pdf

“Central African Republic 2016 Constitution.” Constitute. Last modified 2016. https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Central_African_Republic_2016

Article 16 of the 1812 Provisional Constitutional Regulation of Chile offered protections relevant to the right to privacy: "The right that the citizens have to the security of their persons, homes and effects and papers, will be respected; and no orders will be made without probable cause, supported by a judicial affirmation [juramento], and without designating with clarity the places or things that will be examined or apprehended." Article 224 of the 1822 Constitution of Chile proclaimed the sanctity of "the inviolability of letters and the freedom of private conversations".

The right to privacy is protected under the current constitution. Article 19.4 protects personal life and data: "Respect and protection of the private life and honor of the individual and his family, and specifically, the protection of his personal data. The treatment and protection of these data will be handled in the manner and conditions set forth by law...." Article 19.5 protects the home and communication: "The inviolability of the home and of all forms or private communication. The home can only be searched and the private communications and documents intercepted, opened or registered in the circumstances and manner prescribed by law...."

References:

1812 Provisional Constitutional Regulation of Chile:"Provisional Constitutional Regulation, 26/27 October 1812," Provisional Constitutional Regulation, 26/27 October 1812 (1812): 1-10: https://heinonline-org.proxygw.wrlc.org/HOL/Page?collection=cow&handle=hein.cow/zzcl0108&id=9&men_tab=srchresults

1822 Constitution of Chile: English translation of the Spanish original text of the Constitution of 1822 27 (2013) Chapter IV: Of the Administration of Justice and of the Individual Guarantees https://heinonline-org.proxygw.wrlc.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.cow/zzcl0114&id=27&collection=cow&index=

1980 Chile Constitution with revisions up to 2021: https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Chile_2021

Article 169 of the 1821 Constitution of the Republic of Colombia protected the privacy of the home, and article 170 of that Constitution protected the privacy of correspondence.

The 1991 Colombian constitution is very explicit in its privacy protections in Article 15. Section 1 grants privacy to people and family life, section 2 is for data privacy, section 3 is for correspondence (Constitute Project, “Colombia 1991 rev. 2015” ).

References:

1821 Constitution of the Republic of Colombia: English translation of the Spanish original text of the Constitution of 1821 718 (2009) Title VIII: General Regulations: https://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.cow/zzco0007&id=21&collection=cow&index=#

1991 Colombia Constitution (rev. 2015): https://constituteproject.org/constitution/Colombia_2015

Today, privacy rights are protected in Articles 23 (the home) and 24 (communications and intimacy) (Constitute Project, “Costa Rica 1949 rev. 2020” ).

https://constituteproject.org/constitution/Costa_Rica_ 2020? lang=en

The 2019 constitution protects personal and familial privacy in Article 48, the home in Article 49, and correspondence in Article 50 (Constitute Project, “Cuba 2019” ). Privacy was not in the previous Cuban constitution of 1976 (Constitute Project, “Cuba 1976 rev. 2002” ).

https://constituteproject.org/constitution/Cuba_ 2019? lang=en https://constituteproject.org/constitution/Cuba_ 2002? lang=en

Article 7(1) of the 1993 constitution guarantees the inviolability of persons and private life. Article 10 protects life from intrusion by others, and it also protects data privacy (Constitute Project, “Czech Republic 1993 rev. 2013” ).

https://constituteproject.org/constitution/Czech_Republic_ 2013? lang=en

In the 1953 constitution, Article 72 protects the right to privacy in the home, while also preventing the search of private communications. It states that “The dwelling shall be inviolable,” which includes “house searching, seizure, and examination of letters and other papers.” (Constitute Project, “Demark 1953” ) The general form of the constitution derives from the 1849 Danish Constitution (Danish Parliament, “The Constitutional Act of Denmark”).

References:

1849 Constitutional Act of Denmark: https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Denmark_1953

1953 Denmark Constitution: https://www.thedanishparliament.dk/en/democracy/the-constitutional-act-of-denmark

Article 1(c) of the only constitution Dominica has had, written in 1978, protects the right to privacy in the home. Article 7(1) protects privacy during a search (Constitute Project, "Dominica 1978 rev. 2014" ).

https://constituteproject.org/constitution/Dominica_ 2014? lang=en

The Constitution of East Timor, or Timor-Leste, protects the right to private life, home, and communication during evidence collection in Article 34, privacy in general in Article 36, and privacy in the home and communication in Article 37. The text of Section 36 is noteworthy for the generality of its protection: "Every individual has the right to honour, good name and reputation, protection of his or her public image and privacy of his or her personal and family life."

References:

2002. Constitution of the Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste. http://timor-leste.gov.tl/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/Constitution_RDTL_ENG.pdf.

The 1923 constitution of Egypt protects personal freedom in Article 4, privacy in the home in Article 8, and correspondence in Article 11 (Constitution Net, “Royal Decree No. 42 of 1923 On Building a Constitutional System for the Egyptian State”). Today, these rights are protected in Articles 57 & 58 (Constitute Project, “Egypt 2014 rev. 2019” ).

References:

“Royal Decree No. 42 of 1923” 1923: https://constitutionnet.org/sites/default/files/1923_-_egyptian_constitution_english_1.pdf

https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Egypt_2019?lang=en

Today, Article 13 of the 1991 constitution protects rights and freedoms. In section 1(g), the right to privacy in communications and the home is protected (Constitute Project, “Equatorial Guinea 1991 rev. 2012” ). Translations of the 1968, 1973, and 1982 constitutions could not be found.

https://constituteproject.org/constitution/Equatorial_Guinea_ 2012? lang=en

The 1920 constitution of Estonia protected personal privacy in Paragraph 8. Paragraph 10 protected the homestead and Paragraph 14 protected communications (Wikisource, “Constitution of the Esthonian Republic ( 1920) ”). Today, privacy rights are guaranteed in Section 26 (Riigi Teataja, “The Constitution of the Republic of Estonia”).

https://www.riigiteataja.ee/en/eli/521052015001/consolide https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_Esthonian_Republic_( 1920)

The 1931 constitution protects correspondence privacy in Article 26 (Ethiopian Legal Brief, “Ethiopian Constitution of 1931” ). In Article 25, the home is claimed as private. Article 26 of the 1994 Constitution establishes the right to privacy, including in their home and communication: “Everyone has the right to privacy. This right shall include the right not to be subjected to searches of his home, person or property, or the seizure of any property under his personal possession. Everyone has the right to the inviolability of his notes and correspondence including postal letters, and communications made by means of telephone, telecommunications and electronic devices.”

References:

https://chilot.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/ethiopian-constitution-of-1931.pdf

https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Ethiopia_1994

The 1970 Fiji constitution, its first after independence from Britain, protected the right to privacy in the home in Article 3(c) (Constitution Net, “Fiji Independence Order 1970 and Constitution of Fiji”). Today, the 2013 constitution expands the right to privacy from the home to include the right to private and family life, privacy in correspondence, and data privacy in Article 24 ("Constitution of Fiji, 2013” ).

References:

1970 Constitution of Fiji: https://constitutionnet.org/sites/default/files/1970_constitution.pdf

2013 Constitution of Fiji: https://www.laws.gov.fj/Home/information/constitutionoftherepublicoffiji#:~:text=The%20Constitution%20of%20the%20Republic,the%20procedures%20in%20the%20Constitution.

The right to privacy in France is implied in Article IV of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen of 26 August 1789. Article IV reads, “Liberty consists of being able to do everything that does not harm anybody else: thus the exercise of the natural rights of every man has no boundaries except those that ensure to other Members of the Society the enjoyment of those same rights” (Hardt, Kiiver, Kristofertisch). The Declaration of the Rights of Man is still in force today due to the Preamble of the 1958 French Constitution.

Sascha Hardt, Phillip Kiiver & Gisela Kristofertisch. ( 2019) . Comparative Constitutional Law Documents. “Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen [Declaration des Driots de L’Homme et du Citoyen] of 26 August 1789” and “Constitution of the V. Republic of 4 October 1958. ”

Today, Article 15 in the 1995 constitution of Georgia protects the right to personal privacy, personal space, and privacy of communication. Additionally, Article 9 claims the inviolability of human dignity (Constitute Project, “Georgia 1995 rev. 2018” ).

https://constituteproject.org/constitution/Georgia_ 2018? lang=en

In the 1992 constitution, still in force today, the right to privacy in the home and correspondence is found in Article 18(2) (Constitute Project, “Ghana 1992 rev. 1996” ).

https://constituteproject.org/constitution/Ghana_ 1996? lang=en

The 1973 constitution of Grenada, the country’s first, protected the right to privacy in Article 1(c) (Commonwealth Parliamentary Association, “The Grenada Constitution Order 1973” ). Specifically, it protected the home and other property. Today, the 1973 constitution takes on similar language in Article 1(c) (Constitute Project, “Grenada 1973, reinst. 1991, rev. 1992” ).

https://constituteproject.org/constitution/Grenada_ 1992? lang=en https://www.cpahq.org/media/gq5dtcj5/gre_constitution.pdf

The 2010 constitution of Guinea protects private life, correspondence, and the home in Article 12: “The domicile is inviolable. It may be infringed only in the case of grave and imminent peril, to evade [parer] a common danger or to protect the life of the persons. All other infringement, all search may only be ordered by the judge or by the authority that the law designates and in the forms prescribed by it. The secrecy of correspondence and of communication is inviolable. Each one has the right to the protection of their private life” (Constitute Project, “Guinea’s Constitution of 2010” ).

https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Guinea_ 2010. pdf

In 1966, Guyana gained independence from Britain and, in the same order, passed its constitution. The 1966 constitution provided for protection in the home from others in Article 3(c) (Guyana Parliament, “The Guyana Independence Order 1966” ).

http://parliament.gov.gy/new2/documents/bills/2 1123/ statutory_instrument_guyana_independence_order_ 1966_ no_575.pdf

The 1982 constitution provides for privacy protections in Article 76. In this text, one is granted “The right to honor, to personal privacy, to family, and to one's dignity” (Constitute Project, “Hungary 1982 rev. 2013" ).

https://constituteproject.org/constitution/Honduras_ 2013? lang=en

Article 71 says, “Everyone shall enjoy freedom from interference with privacy, home, and family life” (Constitute Project, “Iceland 1944 rev. 2013” ). This article is in the 1944 constitution, which is largely based on the 1874 constitutional text that preceded it (Icelandic Human Rights Center, “Icelandic Law”).

https://www.humanrights.is/en/laws-conventions/icelandic-law https://constituteproject.org/constitution/Iceland_ 2013? lang=en

While the Republic of Indonesia’s Constitution does not explicitly mention privacy, it protects the right to communication in Article 28(f) and the right to security of oneself and one’s property in Article 28(g), concepts which are often in accordance with property rights (“State of Privacy,” 2019). However, separate laws in Indonesia have dealt with privacy rights, including the 1999 Law on Telecommunications. Article 40 of this law prohibits eavesdropping; Article 42(1) requires telecommunications providers to keep transmitted information confidential; and Article 42(2), Article 43, and Article 44 highlight the procedures for the state to gain information from telecommunications providers in criminal investigations. Additionally, protection of personal data and information has been included in a multitude of legislation in the past few decades, including but not limited to: the 1998 Banking Law, 1999 Consumer Protection Law, the 2008 Electronic Information and Transaction Law, and the 2009 Hospital Law (“State of Privacy,” 2019).

References:

“Constitution of Indonesia 1945 (reinst. 1959, rev. 2002)”. Constitute Project. https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Indonesia_2002

“Law of the Republic of Indonesia No. 36 of 1999 Regarding Telecommunications.” Department of Communications Directorate General of Post and Telecommunications. https://www.postel.go.id/content/EN/regulasi/telecommunication/uu/law36-1999.pdf

“State of Privacy in Indonesia”. 2019. Privacy International. https://www.privacyinternational.org/state-privacy/1003/state-privacy-indonesia

Article 15 of the 1925 Iraq Constitution protected the privacy of communication: "All postal and telegraphic correspondence and all telephonic communications shall be secret and free from censorship or detention, except in such circumstances and in such manner as may be prescribed by law." Article 8 guaranteed the "inviolability of all places of residence".

The 2005 constitution protects the right to personal privacy in Article 17(1) and the right to privacy in the home in Article 17(2).

References:

Iraq 1925 Constitution: https://constitution.org/1-Constitution/cons/iraq/iraqiconst19250321.html

“Iraq 2005 Constitution.” Constitute. Accessed July 19, 2023. https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Iraq_2005.

Articles 13, 14, and 15 of the Italian Constitution deal with various aspects of the right to privacy. Article 13 states that no person shall be inspected or searched without an order from the Judiciary. Article 14 expands upon that, stating that “home inspections, searches, or seizures shall not be admissible save in the cases and manners complying with measures to safeguard personal liberty. Controls and inspections for reason of public health and safety, or for economic and fiscal purposes, shall be regulated by appropriate laws.” Article 15 provides freedom of confidentiality of correspondence, with limitations only by judicial decision. Also, the 1997 Data Protection Act created the Italian Data Protection Authority which protects “fundamental rights and freedoms in connection with the processing of personal data, and to ensure respect for individuals' dignity.”

References:

“Constitution of the Italian Republic.” Senato della Repubblica. https://www.senato.it/documenti/repository/istituzione/costituzione_inglese.pdf

“The Italian Data Protection Authority: Who We Are.” Garante Per La Protezione Dei Dati Personali. https://www.garanteprivacy.it/web/garante-privacy-en/the-italian-data-protection-authority-who-we-are#:~:text=The%20Italian%20Data%20Protection%20Authority%20

Chapter III of the 1962 constitution protects the fundamental rights and freedoms of Jamaicans. In Section 3(j) of Article 13, privacy protections are granted to persons, property, private and family life, and communication (Constitute Project, “Jamaica 1962 rev. 2015” ).

https://constituteproject.org/constitution/Jamaica_ 2015? lang=en

Article 7 of the 1952 constitution says, “1. Personal freedom shall be guaranteed. 2. Every infringement on rights and public freedoms or the inviolability of the private life of Jordanians is a crime punishable by law.” Article 18 protects communications and Article 10 protects the home (Constitute Project, “Jordan 1952 rev. 2016” ).

https://constituteproject.org/constitution/Jordan_ 2016? lang=en

In 1963, the Kenyan Constitution protected privacy in the home and other property in Article 14(c) (Kenya Law, “ 1963 Constitution”). Article 23(1) protected correspondence from interference.

Today, Article 31 of the 2010 Kenyan Constitution gives every person the right to privacy in their person, home, possessions, family life, and correspondence (Constitute Project, “Kenya 2010 Constitution”).

References:

1963 Constitution of Kenya: http://kenyalaw.org/kl/fileadmin/pdfdownloads/1963_Constitution.pdf

2010 Constitution of Kenya: https://constituteproject.org/constitution/Kenya_2010

Article 3 of the 1979 constitution calls for the protection of privacy in the home and Article 9 protects a person from searches (Constitute Project, “Kiribati 1979 rev. 2013” ).

https://constituteproject.org/countries/Oceania/Kiribati?lang=en

According to Article 39.2 of the 1993 Constitution of the Kyrgyz Republic as amended in February 1996, "The state shall guarantee everyone a protection from arbitrary and unlawful interference with one's private and family life, infringement of one's honor and dignity, breach of secrecy of correspondence and telephone conversations."

References:

1993 Constitution of the Kyrgyz Republic as amended in February 1996: http://hrlibrary.umn.edu/research/kyrgyzrepublic-constitution.html

Article 96 of the 1922 constitution states “Everyone has the right to inviolability of his or her private life, home and correspondence” (Constitute Project, “Latvia 1922, reinst. 1991, rev. 2016” ).

https://constituteproject.org/constitution/Latvia_ 2016? lang=en

The 1993 constitution of Lesotho sets forth fundamental rights which are granted to each person in Lesotho in Article 4. In Section 1(g) of Article 4, the right to respect for family and private life is protected. In Article 11, this right is expanded upon and clarified: "Every person shall be entitled to respect for his private an family life and his home." Article 14 guaranteed freedom of interference with correspondence. (Constitute Project, “Lesotho 1993 rev. 2018” ).

References:

https://constituteproject.org/constitution/Lesotho_ 2018? lang=en

The interim constitution of 2011 is the first to grant privacy rights. It does so in Articles 11-13. These articles protect homes, private life, and correspondence (Constitute Project, “Libya 2011 rev. 2012” ).

https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Libya_ 2012? lang=en

Articles 22 and 24 grant privacy rights in Lithuania. Article 22 declares the inviolability of the private life, including correspondence and data, and Article 24 protects the home (Constitute Project, “Lithuania 1992 rev. 2019” ).

https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Lithuania_ 2019? lang=en

Article 13(1) governs privacy rights in Madagascar. It assures each individual “the inviolability of their person, their domicile and of the secrecy of their correspondence” (Constitute Project, “Madagascar 2010” ).

https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Madagascar_ 2010? lang=en

Data privacy was guaranteed by the Personal Data Protection Act of 2010. This law came into force in 2013 and is focused on data privacy specifically rather than privacy rights generally.

References:

https://thelawreviews.co.uk/title/the-privacy-data-protection-and-cybersecurity-law-review/malaysia Malaysia's Constitution of 1957 with Amendments through 2007: https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Malaysia_2007.pdf

Various aspects of the right to privacy are protected in Mali’s 1992 Constitution. Article 6 states that “The domicile, domain (people and things), private and family life, secrecy of correspondence and communication shall be inviolable. These areas shall only be touched within conditions preordained by the law.” Additionally, Law No. 15 of 2013 governs the protection of personal data in Mali, and the Mali Data Protection Authority (APDP) monitors data protection in the state (Watt and Itoua, 2024).

References:

“Mali 1992 Constitution.” Constitute Project, translated by Daniel G. Anna. Accessed July 19, 2024. https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Mali_1992

Watt, Fatoumata, and Ismael Itoua. 2024. “Mali - Data Protection Overview.” Data Guidance. https://www.dataguidance.com/notes/mali-data-protection-overview

Section 13 of the Marshall Islands’ constitution protects personal autonomy. It says: “All persons shall be free from unreasonable interference in personal choices that do not injure others and from unreasonable intrusions into their privacy” (Constitute Project, “Marshall Islands 1979 rev. 1995” ).

https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Marshall_Islands_ 1995? lang=en

The sole constitution of Mauritius from 1968 is limited in what it says about privacy rights. It only protects a person and their property from a search in Article 9 (Constitute Project, "Mauritius 1968 rev. 2016" ).

https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Mauritius_ 2016? lang=en

Today, Articles 28-30 of the 1994 constitution protect privacy rights in Moldova. Article 28 grants privacy in private and family life, Article 29 in the home, and Article 30 in correspondence (Constitute Project, “Moldova 1994 rev. 2016” ).

https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Moldova_ 2016? lang=en

Article 87 of the 1940 Constitution of the Mongol People's Republic: "The inviolability of the homes of citizens and privacy of correspondence are protected by law."

Article 16(13) of the 1992 constitution protects the right to personal liberty and safety. It says, “The privacy of citizens, their families, confidentiality of correspondence and communication, and the inviolability of home residence shall be protected by law” (Constitute Project, “Mongolia 1992 rev. 2001) . References:

1940 Constitution of the Mongol People's Republic: Peaslee Amos J. Constitutions of Nations. Concord, Rumford Press (1950). https://heinonline-org.proxygw.wrlc.org/HOL/Page?collection=cow&handle=hein.beal/connat0002&id=494&men_tab=srchresults

https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Mongolia_ 2001? lang=en

The 2011 Moroccan constitution was the first to have fundamental rights based on international treaties (Moroccan Government, “Constitution”). This made it the first to guarantee the right to privacy, which was achieved in Article 24 (Moroccan Government, “Constitution”; Constitute Project, “Morocco 2011” ). Article 24 protects private life, the home, and correspondence (Constitute Project, “Morocco 2011” ).

https://www.maroc.ma/en/content/constitution https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Morocco_ 2011? lang=en

Article 160 in the 1974 Burmese Constitution grants privacy for home, property, correspondence, and communications (Burma Library, “THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNION OF BURMA ( 1974) ”). Today, these same protections are afforded in Article 357 (Constitute Project, “Myanmar 2008 rev. 2015” ).

https://www.burmalibrary.org/docs07/ 1974C onstitution.pdf?__cf_chl_jschl_tk__=pmd_uXw1EkLnkyq9T6FqkzA_NO9lvJaIhzdgyzAJ1J1s5Ko-163543 1051- 0-gqNtZGzNAiWjcnBszQjR https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Myanmar_ 2015? lang=en

The preamble to Part II Fundamental Rights and Freedoms in the 1968 constitution grants everyone the “respect for his private and family life” (Constitute Project, “Nauru 1968 rev. 2015” ).

https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Nauru_ 2015? lang=en

New Zealand governs privacy rights with the 1993 Privacy Act, which has since been replaced with the 2020 Privacy Act.

https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/ 1993/ 0028/latest/DLM296639.html

The 2010 constitution only protects the domicile of people in terms of privacy rights. This is done in Article 27 (Constitute Project, “Niger 2010 rev. 2017” ).

https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Niger_ 2017? lang=en

Article 79 of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea 1972 constitution grants that citizens and homes are inviolable and that communications are private (Constitute Project, “Korea (Democratic People’s Republic of) 1972 rev. 2016” ).

https://constituteproject.org/constitution/Peoples_Republic_of_Korea_ 2016? lang=en

Article 102 of Norway’s 1814 Constitution states that “inquiries in private houses are not permitted, unless in criminal cases.” The 2018 Norwegian Data Protection Act additionally protects personal data and implements the European Union General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) (“Data Protection Law,” 2024).

References:

“Constitution of the Kingdom of Norway, 1814”. Norwegian Government (1814), World Constitutions Illustrated, HeinOnline: https://heinonline.org/HOL/COWShow?collection=cow&cow_id=312

“Data Protection Law in Norway.” 2024. DLA Piper. Accessed July 19, 2024. https://www.dlapiperdataprotection.com/index.html?t=law&c=NO

The 1973 constitution, reinstated in 2002, in Article 14 cites the inviolability of man’s dignity and privacy in the home as fundamental (Constitute Project, “Pakistan Constitution reinst. 2002, rev. 2018” ).

https://constituteproject.org/constitution/Pakistan_ 2018? lang=en

The 1863 Constitution of the Sovereign State of Panama, enacted while Panama was under Colombian rule, guarantees in Article 2(14) “the inviolability of domicile and of private writings; so that the one cannot be forcibly entered into, nor the others intercepted or examined, but by competent authority, for the effect and with the formalities determined by law.” Article 28 of the Constitution of the Republic of Panama in 1904 enacted after independence states that “correspondence and other private documents are inviolable, and neither the former nor the latter can be held or examined except by virtue of competent judicial authority and under the formalities prescribed by the Laws. In all cases secrecy will be observed in connection with the matters relating to the object of holding and examining same.” Article 23 prohibits home searches without a warrant. The 1972 Constitution expands upon the right to communication privacy in Article 28, stating that “private telephone communications also are inviolable and may not be intercepted. The examination of documents shall always take place in the presence of the interested person or of a member of his family, or if they are absent, before two honorable residents of the same place.” Additionally, exceptions for privacy of the home are permitted in Article 25 for labor, social welfare, and health officials if they give prior notice. The Data Protection Law, enacted in 2019 and supplemented by an executive decree in 2021, regulates and protects personal data in Panama (“Data Protection Law,” 2024).

References:

“Constitution of the Republic of Panama, Constitución (1904) English.” 1909. HathiTrust and University of Michigan. https://hdl.handle.net/2027/mdp.35112104577715

“Data Protection Law in Panama.” 2024. DLA Piper. Accessed July 19, 2024. https://www.dlapiperdataprotection.com/index.html?t=law&c=PA#:~:text=The%20Constitution%20provides%20that%20every,the%20provisions%20of%20the%20law.

“Political Constitution for the Sovereign State of Panama.” 1863. Translated 1864 C.T. Bidwell. World Constitutions Illustrated, HeinOnline. https://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.cow/zzpa0105&id=1&collection=cow&index=

“Political Constitution of the Republic of Panama.” 1972. Organization of American States, 1974. World Constitutions Illustrated, HeinOnline. https://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?collection=cow&handle=hein.cow/zzpa0032&id=8&men_tab=srchresults

The 1870 Constitution of the Republic of Paraguay guarantees in Article 19 that “domicile as well as correspondence and private papers are also inviolable; but a law may provide in which cases and on what grounds an order can be made as to when one may be entered and the other seized.” Article 23 additionally protects privacy, stating that “private acts, which in no way affect public order or morals or do wrong to third parties, are reserved for God alone and exempted from the jurisdiction of the constituted authorities.” The 1992 Constitution contains similar language about both privacy of the home and personal and familial intimacy. The protection of data falls under the rights guaranteed in Paraguay’s Constitution combined with its 2002 Private Information Law which “regulates the collection, storage, distribution, publication, modification, destruction, duration, and overall processing of personal data in files, registers, data banks, or other technical means of processing of public or private data intended to provide reports” (“Paraguay”).

References:

“Constitution of the Republic of Paraguay.” 1870. Comparative Constitutions Project, 2008. World Constitutions Illustrated, HeinOnline. https://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?collection=cow&handle=hein.cow/zzpy0009&id=6&men_tab=srchresults

“Constitution of the Republic of Paraguay.” 1992. Translated by Maria del Carmen Gress, HeinOnline, 2008. World Constitutions Illustrated, HeinOnline. https://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?collection=cow&handle=hein.cow/zzpy0024&id=10&men_tab=srchresults

“Paraguay.” DataGuidance. Accessed July 19, 2024. https://www.dataguidance.com/jurisdiction/paraguay

The 1935 Constitution, enacted prior to independence from the United States, grants “the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated” in Article III, Section 1(3) (Official Gazette, “The 1935 Constitution”). Today, similar language is used in Article II, Section 1(2) (Official Gazette, “The 1935 Constitution”). The Philippines gained independence in 1946 and ratified the new constitution in 1973. Article 4 Section 3 of the 1973 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines guarantees “the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures of whatever nature and for any purpose shall not be violated,” and outlines the procedures for the state to gain search warrants. Section 4 additionally ensures the privacy of communication and correspondence. Confidentiality of personal data is also protected in the 2012 Data Privacy Act and implemented by the National Privacy Commission of the Philippines (“Republic Act 10173”). Various “zones,” or aspects of privacy, such as privacy in the workplace, decisional privacy, and informational privacy, are further protected in Philippine case law (Bautista and Llanillo, 2020).

References:

Bautista, Khersien, and Llewellyn Llanillo. 2020. “Zones of Privacy: How Private.” Defense Counsel Journal 84, no. 3. International Association of Defense Counsel. https://www.iadclaw.org/defensecounseljournal/zones-of-privacy-how-private/

“Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines.” 1973. World Constitutions Illustrated, HeinOnline. https://heinonline.org/HOL/P?h=hein.cow/zzph0009&i=8

“Republic Act 10173 - Data Privacy Act of 2012.” National Privacy Commission. Accessed July 19 2024. https://privacy.gov.ph/data-privacy-act/

https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/constitutions/the- 1935- constitution/

https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/constitutions/ 1987- constitution/

Portugal’s first protection of privacy was in the 1976 constitution. Article 26(1) says “Everyone shall possess the right to a personal identity, to the development of their personality, to civil capacity, to citizenship, to a good name and reputation, to their likeness, to speak out, to protect the privacy of their personal and family life, and to legal protection against any form of discrimination.” Article 65 grants privacy in the home (Constitute Project, “Portugal 1976 rev. 2005) .

https://constituteproject.org/constitution/Portugal_ 2005? lang=en

Article 40(5) protects the inviolability of the dwelling (Constitute Project, “Ireland 1937 rev. 2017” ). This same protection was afforded in Article 7 of the Constitution of the Irish Free State from 1922 (electronic Irish Statute Book, “Constitution of the Irish Free State (Saorstát Eireann) Act, 1922” ).

https://constituteproject.org/constitution/Ireland_ 2019? lang=en https://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/ 1922/ act/1/enacted/en/print

The first constitution of Romania was enacted in 1866 and contains two references to privacy rights. Article 15 states “The domicile is inviolable. No domiciliary visit can be made except in the cases expressly provide for by the law and in the form which is prescribes. Article 25 states “The privacy of letters and of telegraphic dispatches is inviolable. A law shall determine the responsibility of the agents of the government for the violation of this privacy of letters and dispatches entrusted to the post and to the telegraph.” (Wright, 1919). Article 26 of the current Romanian Constitution outlines personal and family privacy rights in Romania. It states, “The public authorities shall respect and protect the intimate, family, and private life” (Constitution of Romania). The Romanian Constitution goes on to extend privacy rights to domiciles, which is outlined in Article 27. “The domicile and the residence are inviolable. No one shall enter or remain in the domicile or residence of a person without his consent.” (Constitution of Romania). Romania is a member of the European Union, which passed the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in 2016. This regulation establishes rules for the protection of peoples data and establishes that citizens have the right to data protection. “This Regulation protects fundamental rights and freedoms of natural persons and in particular their right to the protection of personal data.” (General Data Protection Regulation 2016/679). Romania, as well as every EU member state, follows these regulations and it allows all EU member countries to have synchronized data protection/privacy regulations.

References:

Constitution of Romania. “Chapter II: Fundamental Rights and Freedoms.” HeinOnline, 1991. https://heinonline-org.proxy.lib.miamioh.edu/HOL/Page?handle=hein.cow/zzro0001&id=6&collection=cow&index=#.

General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). “General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) – Legal Text,” 2016. https://gdpr-info.eu/.

The right to privacy in Rwanda is protected by Articles 23 and 34. Article 23 states “The privacy of a person, his or her family, home or correspondence shall not be subjected to interference in a manner inconsistent with the law; the person's honour and dignity shall be respected. A person's home is inviolable. No search or entry into a home shall be carried out without the consent of the owner, except in circumstances and in accordance with procedures determined by the law.” Article 34 states “Private property, whether owned individually or collectively, is inviolable” (Constitute Project, "Rwanda 2003 rev. 2015" ).

https://constituteproject.org/constitution/Rwanda_ 2015? lang=en

Chapter I, Protection of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms, of the 1978 constitution immediately grants every person in St. Lucia “protection for his family life, his personal privacy, the privacy of his home and other property and from deprivation of property without compensation” (Constitute Project, “Saint Lucia 1978” ).

https://constituteproject.org/constitution/St_Lucia_ 1978? lang=en

There is no mention of privacy rights in the constitution, which has been updated as recently as 2017 (Constitute Project, “Samoa 1962 rev. 2017” ). Section 50(2) of the Telecommunications Act 2005 protects the privacy of telecommunications customers (Samoa). This was the earliest found reference to privacy rights in Samoa.

https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Samoa_ 2017? lang=en https://www.regulator.gov.ws/images/Act/TELECOMMUNICATIONS_ACT_ 2005_ -_Eng.pdf

The 1992 Saudi Constitution does not explicitly protect privacy but claims privacy in communications and homes in Articles 37 and 40 (Constitute Project, “Saudi Arabia’s Constitution of 1992 with Amendments through 2005” ).

https://constituteproject.org/constitution/Saudi_Arabia_ 2013? lang=en

The Serbian Constitution does not include an explicit overall right to privacy. Privacy is referred to throughout the document, such as when it allows the press and public to be excluded from court proceedings due to the protection of private life of the parties, and in the assertion that citizens have the freedom of religion both in private and public (Constitution of the Republic of Serbia). The Serbian Constitution does guarantee the confidentiality of communications and the protection of personal data in Articles 41 and 42 (Constitution of the Republic of Serbia).

References:

Constitution of Serbia. “Section 2: Human RIghts and Freedoms.” HeinOnline, 2006. https://heinonline-org.proxy.lib.miamioh.edu/HOL/Page?handle=hein.cow/zzcs0021&collection=cow.

The 1978 constitution protected the privacy of the home and property under Article 12 (The Laws of Sierra Leone on the Sierra Leone Web, “The Constitution of Sierra Leone, 1978” ).

http://www.sierra-leone.org/Laws/ 1978- 12s.pdf

Article 16(1) of the 1992 constitution states “The inviolability of the person and its privacy is guaranteed. It may be limited only in cases laid down by law” (Constitute Project, “Slovakia 1992 rev. 2017) . Sections 2 and 3 of Article 19 protect private life and data collection and publication (Constitute Project, “Slovakia 1992 rev. 2017) . Article 21 claims the home is inviolable, while Article 22 protects communications (Constitute Project, “Slovakia 1992 rev. 2017) .

https://constituteproject.org/constitution/Slovakia_ 2017? lang=en

Article 9 of the Solomon Islands Constitution protects the privacy of the home and other property: “Except with his own consent, no person shall be subjected to the search of his person or his property or the entry by others on his premises.” (Constitute Project, “Solomon Islands 1978 rev. 2018” ).

https://constituteproject.org/constitution/Solomon_Islands_ 2018? lang=en

The 1993 Interim Constitution of South Africa was the first to grant privacy rights. The right to privacy includes “the right not to be subject to searches of his or her person, home or property, the seizure of private possessions or the violation of private communications” (South African Government, “Constitution of the Republic of South Africa Act 200 of 1993” ). Today, the 1996 Constitution offers similar protections in Article 14 (Constitute Project, “South Africa 1996 rev. 2012) .

https://www.gov.za/documents/constitution/constitution-republic-south-africa-act-200- 1993# 13%20Privacy https://constituteproject.org/constitution/South_Africa_ 2012? lang=en

Article 22 of the 2011 South Sudan constitution protects the right to privacy: “The privacy of all persons shall be inviolable; no person shall be subjected to interference with his or her private life, family, home or correspondence, save in accordance with the law” (Constitute Project, “South Sudan 2011 rev. 2013” ).

https://constituteproject.org/constitution/South_Sudan_ 2013? lang=en

Sri Lanka’s constitution does not protect the right to privacy, though privacy is mentioned briefly in Article 14A(2) (Constitute Project, “Sri Lanka 1978 rev. 2015” ). Sri Lanka is also lacking comprehensive privacy legislation, instead opting to write in provisions when regulating other industries (Data Guidance, “Sri Lanka – Data Protection Overview”).

https://constituteproject.org/constitution/Sri_Lanka_ 2015? lang=en https://www.dataguidance.com/notes/sri-lanka-data-protection-overview

The 1975 Suriname Constitution protected the home and private life in Article 14 (Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, 1983, “Report on the Human Rights Situation in Suriname”). Today, these rights are protected under Article 17 of the 1987 Constitution (Constitute Project, “Suriname 1987 rev 1992” ).

https://constituteproject.org/constitution/Surinam_ 1992? lang=en http://www.cidh.org/countryrep/Suriname83eng/chap.1.htm

The 1992 Federal Act on Data Protection was the first formal protection of privacy in Switzerland (DLA Piper, “Data protection laws of the world: Switzerland”). Since then, the right to privacy was added to the 1999 Swiss Constitution. Article 13 of the current Swiss Constitution is titled Right to Privacy. “Every person has the right to privacy in their private and family life and in their home, and in relation to their mail and telecommunications. Every person has the right to be protected against the misuse of their personal data.” (Federal Constitution of the Swiss Confederation). Switzerland is not a member of the EU, so they do not follow the GDPR. However, a revision of the Federal Act on Data Protection (FADP) was passed in 2020. This law is essentially the same as the GDPR and serves to protect the data of Swiss citizens from unlawful use, including privacy protections for certain kinds of data like “sensitive personal data” which includes data relating to a persons religious, philosophical, or political views, their health, their genetic and biometric data, and more. (Federal Act on Data Protection)

References:

DLA Piper, “Data protection laws of the world: Switzerland”: https://www.dlapiperdataprotection.com/index.html?t=law&c=CH

Federal Constitution of the Swiss Confederation. “Chapter 1: Fundamental RIghts.” HeinOnline, 1999. https://heinonline-org.proxy.lib.miamioh.edu/HOL/Page?collection=cow&handle=hein.cow/zzch0349&id=4&men_tab=srchresults.

Fedlex. “Federal Act on Data Protection,” 2023. https://www.fedlex.admin.ch/eli/cc/2022/491/en

Article 24 of the 1975 Constitution, still in effect today, states “Personal identity and the confidentiality of the intimacy of private and family life are inviolable” (Constitute Project, Sao Tome and Principe 1975 rev. 2003) . Additionally, Article 25 grants that communications and one’s home are also private (Constitute Project, Sao Tome and Principe 1975 rev. 2003) .

https://constituteproject.org/constitution/Sao_Tome_and_Principe_ 2003? lang=en

The 1965 constitution of Tanzania did not explicitly provide for privacy but defaulted “to safeguard the inherent dignity of the individual in accordance with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights” during the preamble (World Statesmen, “The Interim Constitution of Tanzania”). Today, the 1997 constitution (as amended in 2005) privacy and personal security in Article 16 (Constitute Project, “Tanzania’s Constitution of 1977 with Amendments through 2005” ).

http://www.worldstatesmen.org/Tanzania-Constitution- 1965. pdf https://constituteproject.org/constitution/Tanzania_ 2005? lang=en

Article 15(c) protects the right to privacy in one’s home. Article 21 extends this right to exist during searches (Constitute Project, “Bahamas (The) 1973” ).

https://constituteproject.org/constitution/Bahamas_ 1973? lang=en

Articles 27, 28, and 29 in the 1992 Togolese Constitution protect private property, the home, private life, and image, and correspondence. Article 28 is explicit to the right to privacy, while Articles 27 and 29 fit into the privacy penumbras subscribed by the United States (Constitute Project, “Togo’s Constitution of 1992 with Amendments through 2007” ).

https://constituteproject.org/constitution/Togo_ 2007? lang=en

The 1976 constitution does not explicitly protect the right to privacy. However, Article 4 protects fundamental human rights, such as “the right of the individual to respect for his private and family life” and protection of the law (Constitute Project, “Trinidad and Tobago 1976 rev. 2007" ).

https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Trinidad_and_Tobago_ 2007? lang=en

The 1924 Turkish Constitution protects personal liberty except for the provision of law under Article 72 (World Statesmen, “The New Constitution of Turkey”). Article 71 protects the inviolability of the home, life, property, and honor. Article 81 allows for private communications.

https://www.worldstatesmen.org/Turkeyconstitution 1924. pdf

The 1996 constitution protects privacy rights under Articles 11(h) and 21 (Constitute Project, “Tuvalu Constitution of 1996” ). Article 11(h) reads “Every person is entitled…to the following fundamental freedoms: […] (h) protection for the privacy of his home and other property” (Constitute Project, “Tuvalu Constitution of 1996” ).

https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Tuvalu_ 1986. pdf?lang=en

Articles 30, 31, and 32 of the 1996 Constitution grant the right to privacy (Constitute Project, “Ukraine’s Constitution of 1996 with Amendments through 2016” ). Article 30 gives privacy in the home, Article 31 allows privacy protections to communications, and Article 32 prevents interference into personal and family life (Constitute Project, “Ukraine’s Constitution of 1996 with Amendments through 2016” ).

https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Ukraine_ 2016. pdf?lang=en

The Human Rights Act of 1998 outlines the rights everyone in the UK is entitled to. It is based on the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and is the UK’s way of making the rights outlined in the convention applicable to their laws. Article 8 of the Human Rights Act of 1998 and the ECHR is titled “Right to respect for private and family life”. It reads “Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence. There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.” (Human Rights Act of 1998). The Human Rights Act of 1998 refers to “convention rights” when it outlines how the UK government and courts will uphold those rights (Human Rights Act of 1998). Regarding data protection and privacy, the UK passed the Data Protection Act in 2018, which regulates how companies, organizations, and the government can use personal data. It establishes stronger legal protection for sensitive personal information like race, ethnicity, political opinions, religious beliefs, trade union membership, genetics, biometrics, health, and sex life or orientation (Data Protection Act 2018)

References:

ECHR. “European Convention on Human Rights.” Accessed July 19, 2024. https://echr.coe.int/european-convention-on-human-rights.

Human Rights Act 1998. “Part 1: The Convention.” HeinOnline, 1998. https://heinonline-org.proxy.lib.miamioh.edu/HOL/Page?collection=cow&handle=hein.cow/zzgb0026&id=20&men_tab=srchresults.

The 1966 constitution was the first translated into English to mention privacy rights. It is protected in Articles 10, 11, and 28. Article 10 grants individuals’ privacy, Article 11 makes the home private, and Article 28 protects communications (Constitute Project, "Uruguay 1966, reinst. 1985, rev. 2004" ). Uruguay has based their data privacy and protection law off the European Union’s rules under the GDPR and has independently passed legislation to enact the provisions of the GDPR in Uruguay (Nougrères, 2024).

https://constituteproject.org/constitution/Uruguay_ 2004? lang=en

General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). “General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) – Legal Text,” 2016. https://gdpr-info.eu/.

Nougrères, Ana Brian. “Uruguay - Data Protection Overview.” DataGuidance, 2024. https://www.dataguidance.com/notes/uruguay-data-protection-overview.

Article 5(1)(j) in the 1980 Vanuatu Constitution protects privacy in the home and property (Constitute Project, “Vanuatu’s Constitution of 1980 with Amendments through 2013” ).

https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Vanuatu_ 2013. pdf?lang=en

The 1992 Vietnam Constitution was the first since its independence that recognized the “inviolability of personal privacy” in Article 21 (Constitute Project, “Viet Nam’s Constitution of 1992 with Amendments through 2013” ).

https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Socialist_Republic_of_Vietnam_ 2013. pdf?lang=en https://constitutionnet.org/country/constitutional-history-vietnam

Privacy was protected in the first constitution of Zambia in 1964 in Chapter 3, Articles 13(c) and 19 (World Statesmen, “Laws of Zambia: The Constitution”). Today, Article 11(d) and 17 of the 1991 Zambian Constitution protect the right to privacy (Constitute Project, “Zambia’s Constitution of 1991 with Amendments Through 2016” ).

https://www.worldstatesmen.org/Constitution-Zambia 1964. pdf https://constituteproject.org/constitution/Zambia_ 2016. pdf?lang=en

TThe right to privacy has diverged in many ways since its most notable first mention in The Right to Privacy by Samuel Warren and Louis Brandeis. What started in 1890 as the idea of protection against gossip about oneself and the ability to enjoy life uninterrupted has evolved into various international and national conventions and laws. The right to privacy was first enshrined at a supranational level before it was established in individual states (Krishnamurthy, 2020, 26). The right’s first appearance in legal documentation was in the United Nation’s (UN) 1948 Universal Declaration on Human Rights (UDHR). Article 12 of the UDHR (1948) states “No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.” The UHDR is not a treaty, so the right was not yet entrenched and more of a suggestion for states to incorporate into their laws and practices. Two years later, the Council of Europe passed the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR) which has similar tones in Article 8, though with an exception for national security in Article 8 (2) but is legally binding (1950). Article 8 of the ECHR specifically protects one’s family life, personal life, correspondence, and home (Roagna, 2021, 9). Worldwide, the right to privacy became codified in 1966 with the passage of the UN’s International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), in which Article 17 has almost identical language to the UDHR’s Article 12. In subsequent UN treaties, this right to privacy was explicitly granted to children and migrants as well (Convention on the Rights of the Child, 1989, Art. 16; International Covenant on the Protection of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families, 1990, Art. 14). Complying with the ICCPR: In the United States, the right to privacy was not originally codified but established through a variety of Supreme Court cases beginning in the 1960s (Privacy, n.d.). In 1965, the Court ruled on Griswold v. Connecticut. The majority opinion written by Justice Douglas claims that the express personal freedoms named in the First, Third, Fourth, Fifth, and Ninth Amendments create an implied “zone of privacy” (Privacy, n.d.). Justice Harlan’s concurring opinion, referenced in later Supreme Court privacy cases, claims privacy zones derive from the Fourteenth Amendment (Privacy, n.d.). Later, legislation was passed regulating specific sectors, beginning in 1974 with the Family Educations Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), which protects student data, and the Privacy Act which regulates the use of data by federal agencies (History of privacy timeline, 2021). The European Court of Human Rights has refined the implementation of ECHR Article 8 through case law (Roagna, 2021, 7). In deciding these cases, the Court must decide if the complaint is related to Article 8 and, if so, if the right has been interfered with outside of the exceptions laid out in Article 8 (2) (Roagna, 2021, 11). For this reason, there is no clear-cut definition as to which national laws may conflict with Article 8 (Roagna, 2021, 12). The Court has provided protections for ‘quasi-familial’ relationships, relationships that may develop later (i.e., one has the right to adopt), the development of personality, photographs, and data collection, ruling these areas are part of private and/or family life (Roagna, 2021, 10-19). The Court has also provided lengthy protections to family life with a broad definition of family which evolves with European customs (Roagna, 2021, 27). The protection of a home has also been interpreted broadly, requiring continuous ties to a location, mostly due to the French translation of “home” to “domicile” (Roagna, 2021, 30-31). The Court rules for high protection of means of communication as it can be easily breached (Roagna, 2021, 32). This protection includes information gathered from monitored internet use and remains in places no matter the content of the message (Roagna, 2021, 32). The Digital Era: Since these international conventions have become effective and enforceable, there has been a lot of technological change and little change in these agreements (Human right to privacy, n.d.). The UN Human Rights Committee (UNHRC) noted in General Comment 16, adopted regarding ICCPR’s Article 17 in 1988, that the legislation in many states was not enough to ensure the “protection against both unlawful and arbitrary interference,” and that data collection “must be regulated by law” (Krishnamurthy, 2020, 27; UN Human Rights Committee, 1994, para. 2 & 10). In essence, this comment was requesting states enact more protective privacy law legislation, and, specifically, data regulation law, as the right to privacy evolved to be dominated by electronic data (Krishnamurthy, 2020, 27). There have been two approaches to this call for better data privacy regulation: general regulation and regulation by sector. The European Union has taken the general regulation approach with the passage of the 1995 European Data Protection Directive and the 2016 General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). The GDPR affects people and companies worldwide, requiring that data collected is truly needed, accurate, processed safely, and that all of this is done in a clear, legal, and transparent way (Krishnamurthy, 2020; Wolford, n.d.). The United States has chosen to regulate privacy data by sector, beginning with FERPA in 1974 (Krishnamurthy, 2020, 29; History of privacy timeline, 2021). This approach has led to some strict laws preventing unauthorized access to personal information in some areas regulated by specific legislation (Krishnamurthy, 2020, 29). In areas without specific legislation, however, Americans take great liberties while collecting data (Krishnamurthy, 2020, 29). Put in combination with the lacking legislation preventing interference or data attacks, some question how compliant the United States is with Article 17 of the ICCPR (Krishnamurthy, 2020, 29). However, as of 2020, 29% of states are still drafting or have yet to draft such legislation (UN Committee on Trade and Development). Privacy in Former Sovereign States It is worth noting that some states have always had some privacy rights since they gained independence because their previous constitution and laws contained such provisions. This is the case with states that were formerly in the Soviet Union. The 1977 Constitution (Fundamental Law) of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, which was then implemented in nearly identical form in the various republics as their own constitution, protected “the privacy of citizens, and of their correspondence, telephone conversations, and telegraphic communications” in Article 56 (USSR, 1982, 35). Additionally, Czechoslovakia protected privacy rights of the person, home, and correspondence in Article 30 & 31 in the 1960 constitution (Czechoslovakia, 1964, 233).

REFERENCES:

Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. The Council of Europe. Nov. 4, 1950. https://rm.coe.int/1680a2353d

Convention on the Rights of the Child. United Nations (UN) General Assembly (UNGA). Nov. 20, 1989. https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/crc.aspx

Czechoslovakia. (1964). Constitution of Czechoslovakia July 11, 1960. Orbis: Prague. From https://www.worldstatesmen.org/Czechoslovakia-Const1960.pdf

History of privacy timeline. (2021). The University of Michigan. Retrieved Sept. 9, 2021, from https://safecomputing.umich.edu/privacy/history-of-privacy-timeline

Human right to privacy in the digital age, The. (n.d.). American Civil Liberties Union. Retrieved Sept. 8, 2021, from https://www.aclu.org/other/human-right-privacy-digital-age

International Covenant on the Protection of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families. UNGA. Dec. 18, 1990. https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/ProfessionalInterest/cmw.pdf

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. UNGA. Dec. 16, 1996. https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/ccpr.aspx

Krishnamurthy, V. (2020, Jan. 6). A tale of two privacy laws: The GDPR and the International Right to Privacy. AJIL Unbound 114, 26-30. doi:10.1017/aju.2019.79 Privacy. (n.d.). Cornell Law School Legal Information Institute. Retrieved Sept. 8, 2021, from https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/privacy

Roagna, I. (2012). Council of Europe human rights handbook: Protecting the right to respect for private and family life under the European Convention on Human Rights. Council of Europe. https://www.echr.coe.int/LibraryDocs/Roagna2012_EN.pdf

UN Committee on Trade and Development. (2020). Data Protection and Privacy Legislation Worldwide. Retrieved Sept. 9, 2021, from https://unctad.org/page/data-protection-and-privacy-legislation-worldwide

UN Human Rights Committee. (1994). General Comment 16. Thirty-third session. HRI/GEN/1/Rev. 1 Retrieved Sept. 9, 2021, from https://undocs.org/HRI/GEN/1/Rev.1

Universal Declaration on Human Rights. UNGA. Dec. 10, 1948. https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights

USSR. (1982). Constitution (Fundamental Law) of the Union of Soviet Socialist States: Adopted at the Seventh (Special) Session of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, Ninth Convocation, on October 7, 1977. Novosti Press Publishing House: Moscow. From https://www.marxists.org/history/ussr/government/constitution/1977/constitution-ussr-1977.pdf

Wolford, B. (n.d.). What is GDPR, the EU’s new data protection law? GDPR EU. Retrieved Sept. 9, 2021, from https://gdpr.eu/what-is-gdpr/

The original formation of the right to vote within the Constitution was motivated by a worry as to who would maintain control within the political sphere. The framers of the Constitution realized that the right to vote is a fundamental component of democracy and liberty. To this extent, they did not want to fully restrict voting rights of minority groups, however, they also worried that non-property owners could construct a majority over property owners if they were to allow voting rights to be expanded to all. Because of this dilemma, the framers originally gave states the power to enact their own voter restrictions (The Library of Congress).

After years of discrimination with regard to suffrage, the Selma to Mongomery March took place. Many Americans were angry with the little weight the 15th Amendment actually held in the South. On March 7th, 1965, more than 600 Americans marched through Selma Alabama, led by John Lewis, a political activist. They marched to peacefully protest the ongoing racial discrimination. The protesters faced violence from state troopers, and many were unrightfully arrested. The sight of unwarranted and brutal violence ultimately motivated many to fight for racial equality and more equitable voting rights. Martin Luther King, Jr. was among those who were arrested. He had helped to rally the state for change when he came to the city to speak in January and expressed his support for the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee who worked to register black voters (A&E Television Networks, 2009). Evidently, the call for racial equality played a large role in the recognition of the importance of voting rights.

Equally important were the forces that expanded voting rights for women. Beginning in 1840, when Lucretia Mott and Elizabeth Cady Stanton were barred from a conference in London because they were female, they began to fight for women's rights. In 1948, they established the United State’s first women’s rights convention in order to express their grievances, specifically with women’s lack of voting rights. This led to the formation of the National Suffrage Association by Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton where they argued for a universal suffrage amendment which would include women. Following was the creation of the American Woman Suffrage Association, which operated on a more moderate platform and even succeeded to win suffrage for women in some states, as they operated on a state by state basis. This led to the establishment of the National American Woman Suffrage Association, an integration of the two previous associations. After many protests and amendment proposals from 1878 until 1919, women were finally granted the right to vote by the 19th Amendment (The Library of Congress).

References:

History.com Editors. “Voting Rights Act of 1965.” History.com, A&E Television Networks, 9 Nov. 2009, www.history.com/topics/black-history/voting-rights-act.

The Founders and the Vote : The Right to Vote : Elections : Classroom Materials at the Library of Congress : Library of Congress. The Library of Congress. (n.d.). https://www.loc.gov/classroom-materials/elections/right-to-vote/the-founders-and-the-vote/.

The 1964 Constitution of Afghanistan turned Afghanistan into a modern democracy, and the right to vote was established in Article 46. The 1964 Constitution of Afghanistan granted women equal rights including universal suffrage and the right to run for office.

References:

University of Nebraska, "Constitution of Afghanistan": https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1005&context=afghanenglish

Algeria gained independence from France in 1962 and a new Constitution was passed the following year. Article 13 of the 1963 Constitution held: " Every citizen having reached 19 years of age has the right to vote ." In the 1989 Constitution, Article 62 holds that all people meeting the legal requirements have the right to vote and to be elected (Constitute Project, "Algeria 1989" ).

References:

1963 Algeria Constitution: “The Algerian Constitution.” The Middle East journal 17, no. 4 (1963): 446–450.

1989 Algeria Constitution: https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Algeria_2016

According to Article 20 of the 1975 Constitution, "All citizens over the age of eighteen, other than those legally deprived of political rights, have the right and the duty to take an active part in public life, to vote and to be elected or appointed to any State organ, and to discharge their mandate with complete dedication to the cause of the Fatherland and the Angolan people." However, according to Britannica.com: "The constitution of 1975 established a one-party state headed by a president who was also chairman of the MPLA, which declared itself a Marxist-Leninist vanguard party in 1977."

Article 28 of the 1992 Constitution offered a revised characterization of the right to vote: "It shall be the right and duty of all citizens aged over 18, other than those legally deprived of political and civil rights, to take an active part in public life, to vote and stand for election to any State body, and to fulfill their offices with full dedication to the cause of the Angolan nation."

Article 54 of the 2010 Angola Constitution uses similar language: "1. Every citizen who has attained the age of eighteen years shall have the right to vote and stand for election for any state or local authority body and to serve their terms of office or mandates, under the terms of the Constitution and the law. 2. The right to vote may not be restricted except with regard to the incapacities and ineligibilities prescribed in the Constitution. 3. The exercise of the right to vote shall be personal and non-transferable and shall be a civic duty."

References:

1975 Angola Constitution: “The Constitution of the People’s Republic of Angola.” World Constitutions Illustrated, Heinonline. https://heinonline.org/HOL/P?h=hein.journals/rsl2&i=197

1992 Angola Constitution: https://constitutionnet.org/sites/default/files/Angola%20Constitution.pdf

2010 Angola Constitution: https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Angola_2010

https://www.britannica.com/place/Angola/Government-and-society