Mashrura Hoque Wafa

On behalf of the Applicant

1. Mr. Afzal has violated Mr. Akmal's right to the protection of life and personal liberty
under
Article 32 of the Constitution of Thermadore.

Sub issue 1.1: Whether Mr. Afzal's recording of Mr. Akmal without his consent constitutes
an unlawful invasion of Mr. Akmal's privacy.

Sub issue 1.2: Whether there has been an infringement of the right to reputation.

Summary of Facts:

1. The Constitution of Thermadore guarantees certain fundamental rights including

protection of the right to life, protection of personal liberty, and freedom of expression
2. Mr. Afzal is a social media influencer with a significant number of followers and influence
3. Mr. Akmal is a reputed businessman with a great amount of wealth and property in the
capital of Rekha
4. Mr. Akmal had a collision with a homeless person and at one point of the fight he slapped
and bad-mouthed the homeless person.
5. Mr. Afzal was passing by at that time while people surrounding Mr. Afzal were trying to stop
him from giving another blow.
6. Mr. Afzal recorded only that part of the incident. He shared the video on his platform without
Mr. Akmal's consent stating how miserable people are being ailed at by the wealthy of the
society.
7. Upon seeing the post including the video of Mr. Akmal without his consent going viral on
social media Mr. Akmal petitioned before the court through his lawyer on the ground that actions
by Mr. Afzal were an infringement of the right to protection of personal liberty under Article 32
of the Constitution of Thermador.
Summary of Pleadings

Submission I: There has been an unlawful invasion of the petitioner's right to privacy.

Taking a video of a petitioner and uploading the video to social media is a clear violation of Mr.
Akmal's right to privacy under article 32 of the constitution of Thermadore which ensures every
individual has the right to privacy and to be left alone and no person should be deprived of
personal liberty.

Submission II: There has been a clear infringement of the right to reputation.

Article 32 of the Constitution propounds the right to life and personal liberty, ensuring that
everyone is entitled to live with dignity and decency. Mr. Afzal posted the video without
providing full context which harmed Mr. Akmal's right to reputation as it went viral on social
media.

Pleadings in Details:

Submission I: There has been an unlawful invasion of the petitioner's right to privacy.

According to Article 32 of the constitution, no person should be deprived of life or personal

liberty save under the law. Every person has a right to privacy which includes protection against
unlawful surveillance, unauthorized recording, and the right to maintain personal space free from
unwarranted intrusion. Here Mr. Afzal violated Article 32 of the constitution as he
unauthorizedly recorded Mr Akmal without his consent which is subject to unlawful surveillance
violating the right to privacy. According to Article 17 of the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights(ICCPR) no one shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his
privacy. Even if an individual is in a public space, it doesn't mean they have given up all his
privacy rights. Privacy rights remain in the public space. In the case of Puttaswamy v Union of
India (2017) 10 SCC 1 it was held by the court that privacy was not surrendered entirely when
an individual is in the public sphere. So even if Mr. Akmal is in a public space he is still entitled
to the right to privacy and Mr. Afzal's recording and posting the video without Mr. Akmal's
consent is a violation of his fundamental right.
Submission II: There has been an infringement of the right to reputation.

Article 32 of Bangladesh's constitution propounds the right to life and personal liberty, ensuring
that everyone is entitled to live with dignity and decency. Mr. Afzal posted the unconsented
video to his social media account without the full context with a large following which harmed
Mr. Akmal's right to reputation which is protected by Article 32 of the Constitution. Reputation
is a great possession and asset of a man and it is entitled to get protection. Under section 499, the
Penal Code of 1860, says that whoever, by words, signs, or by visible representations, makes or
publishes any imputation concerning any person intending to harm the reputation or such person,
is said, barring exceptions, to defame that person. Publishing the defamatory video concerning
him in public which lowers his social and professional status is an infringement of his right to
reputation as well as his right to live. Mr. Afzal was just passing by and posted the video without
proper knowledge of what had instigated the violence, posting it on the s with clickbait headlines
and fabricated content. The media has the fundamental right to publish information to protect the
public interest, but the content must not defame any person, or encroach upon decency or
morality. Here Mr. Akmal's posting fabricated video to defame the reputation of Mr. Akmal is a
violation of Mr. Akmal's right to life and personal liberty.