Photos were taken of patrons and car license numbers that were parked outside the venue and it is not yet known if they have been used but as a precautionary measure legal advice was sought on the matter and here is basically the understanding arrived at after the consultation.
There is no law under our statute that can hinder anyone to capture photographs in a public place it is a very delicate area of the law, one does not have a right to ones image if it is taken in a public space without the subjects consent, the law offers no protection from having an image of a person or thing occupying that space. If the photo is used in any way to defame the subjected person(s) involved then under common law there is recourse.
At best a letter or warning of sorts from an attorney of the complainant can be sent to the photographers or the suspected individuals advising them that any use of the photos that were taken without the permission of the subjects would lead to action without any legal recourse to them. This is an option that can be reserved. In France for example members of the public have a right to their image so the photos basically could have been ordered destroyed and the relevant actions taken against the parties involved in capturing the shots.
Jamaican citizens however have the right to protection from defamation, in a common law scenario the court will have to afford protection from being viewed in a derogatory light, one is entitled to their reputation but one cannot protect a reputation that one does not have, the common law however does not allow for others to intrude in person’s privacy.
So the only option in the initial stage is a warning letter through an attorney advising them accordingly that one is aware of the photos captured without consent and the possible legal actions if said photos are used to defame any of the subjected parties.
So much for rights eh?
So as it turns out there is a major loop hole here in terms of personal safety still, what if years down the road these photos turn up then one would have to use legal recourse to stop any defamatory action. The law needs to offer more protection to citizens’ rights and privacy than just after the fact when my image or that of my property is captured and stored somewhere and can be drawn upon to be used without my knowledge or consent or where I can’t act even under suspicion that my image is stored somewhere to have it destroyed.
This is a sad state of affairs though legally.
Peace and tolerance.
H
Please scroll to the relevant post that matches this entry or peruse the audioposts now hosted on GLBTQJA's NING Membership page.
Find more music like this on GLBTQ Jamaica Members' LINKUP
There is no law under our statute that can hinder anyone to capture photographs in a public place it is a very delicate area of the law, one does not have a right to ones image if it is taken in a public space without the subjects consent, the law offers no protection from having an image of a person or thing occupying that space. If the photo is used in any way to defame the subjected person(s) involved then under common law there is recourse.
At best a letter or warning of sorts from an attorney of the complainant can be sent to the photographers or the suspected individuals advising them that any use of the photos that were taken without the permission of the subjects would lead to action without any legal recourse to them. This is an option that can be reserved. In France for example members of the public have a right to their image so the photos basically could have been ordered destroyed and the relevant actions taken against the parties involved in capturing the shots.
Jamaican citizens however have the right to protection from defamation, in a common law scenario the court will have to afford protection from being viewed in a derogatory light, one is entitled to their reputation but one cannot protect a reputation that one does not have, the common law however does not allow for others to intrude in person’s privacy.
So the only option in the initial stage is a warning letter through an attorney advising them accordingly that one is aware of the photos captured without consent and the possible legal actions if said photos are used to defame any of the subjected parties.
So much for rights eh?
So as it turns out there is a major loop hole here in terms of personal safety still, what if years down the road these photos turn up then one would have to use legal recourse to stop any defamatory action. The law needs to offer more protection to citizens’ rights and privacy than just after the fact when my image or that of my property is captured and stored somewhere and can be drawn upon to be used without my knowledge or consent or where I can’t act even under suspicion that my image is stored somewhere to have it destroyed.
This is a sad state of affairs though legally.
Peace and tolerance.
H
Please scroll to the relevant post that matches this entry or peruse the audioposts now hosted on GLBTQJA's NING Membership page.
Find more music like this on GLBTQ Jamaica Members' LINKUP
or from Soundcloud:
1 comment:
I should think that the taking of photos was more to intimidate than anything else. I doubt if they will be used, but they cannot be used to defame or blackmail you without legal recourse.
This issue often arises when paparazzi have taken photos from a long distance showing celebrities naked, etc. The person photographed may be outraged, but there is not much they can do legally, unless the pictures are used to cause harm.
Jamaican press in not going to publish such pictures because of the conspiracy of silence that exists around the issue of homosexuality in Jamaica. They would also be leaving themselves open to a charge of libel.
Post a Comment