Foundations: ethics, privacy and the law
Privacy as a right, and where ethics goes beyond the law
See privacy as a recognised human right, and learn to tell the difference between what the law permits and what is ethical, because the two are not the same.
By the end of this lesson you can explain why privacy is treated as a right, and tell the difference between what is legal and what is ethical.
Why it matters
Laws set the floor, not the ceiling. A practice can be perfectly legal and still break trust, harm people, and end up in the newspapers. The professionals who protect an organisation best are the ones who ask not only "may we?" but "should we?" This lesson gives you that second question, and the judgment to use it.
The idea in plain words
Privacy is widely recognised as a basic human right: the idea that each person should have some control over information about themselves and some space free from being watched. It appears in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, whose Article 12 says no one should be subjected to arbitrary interference with their privacy, and it is written into the constitutions of many countries, including Nigeria.
Law and ethics overlap, but they are not the same. Some things are both illegal and wrong. Some things are legal but still wrong, such as quietly tracking people far more than they would ever expect. The skilled worker lives in the gap and uses judgment there.
The law and ethics overlap, but each has a part the other does not cover. Aim for the middle, and watch the "legal but wrong" edge.
Privacy: a person's claim to some control over information about themselves, and to a space free from unwanted watching. Recognised as a human right in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Article 12, 1948) and in many national constitutions.
Law vs ethics: the law is the agreed minimum, enforced by penalties. Ethics is the wider question of what is right, enforced by trust, reputation and conscience. Meeting the law is necessary but not always enough.
See it done
Two short cases. For each, ask the two questions: is it legal, and is it ethical?
Case A. A shop puts a clear sign at its entrance saying the premises are filmed for security, and keeps the footage for a short time before deleting it. Legal: yes, with notice and a real purpose. Ethical: yes, the watching is proportionate and the people are told.
Case B. A free mobile torch app quietly collects its users' exact location every few minutes and sells it on, buried in a long policy almost nobody reads. This may slip past the letter of some rules, but it is widely seen as wrong: the tracking is far beyond what a torch needs, and no reasonable user expects it. Legal in places, perhaps. Ethical, no.
The lesson of the two cases: being able to point to a line in a policy is not the same as doing right by people. Ask whether a reasonable person, told plainly what you do, would feel treated fairly.
Your turn, with help
A company is legally allowed to keep job-applicant data for a set period. It decides to keep every rejected applicant's full file forever, "just in case".
- Is keeping it likely legal?
- Is keeping it forever ethical? Why or why not?
Hints: Think about whether forever is necessary, and how a rejected applicant would feel.
Show the answer
- Keeping applicant data for a reasonable, stated period is usually legal. Keeping it forever starts to breach the principle that data should not be kept longer than needed (you will meet that principle in Module 2).
- It is not ethical. There is no real need to hold a rejected applicant's full file forever, and most people would feel it unfair and unsafe. The right thing is to keep only what is needed, for only as long as needed.
Your turn, alone
For each, say whether it is mainly a legal problem, an ethical problem, or both.
- Selling customers' health information without telling them.
- Reading a partner's private messages on their phone without asking.
- Using a clear, honest sign to tell visitors a building is filmed.
Watch out
- "It is in our policy" is not the same as "it is right". A buried clause does not make an unfair practice fair.
- Legal lines move; ethics is your steadier guide. What is lawful today may be banned tomorrow.
- The reasonable-expectation test is powerful. If people would be surprised or upset to learn what you do, that is a warning, whatever the rulebook says.
Say it back
- Where is privacy recognised as a human right?
- Give an example of something legal but unethical.
- What is the "reasonable expectation" test?
What is next
Privacy is an old idea, but the laws protecting it are mostly new. Next we see why this subject went from a quiet corner to record fines in just a few years, and why it now reaches a business almost anywhere in the world.