We sat down with Akbar Aalamy, a lawyer and certified legal expert in the field of “privacy” and its place in various cultures and laws, especially in Iran. Mr. Aalamy, who was also a former representative of the National Security and Foreign Policy Commission in the sixth and seventh terms of the Islamic Consultative Assembly in Iran, believes that the extremist faction known as the Principlists do not have a tendency to pass human rights bills and laws until they and their supporters are faced with issues such as invasion of their own privacy.

Mr. Aalam, society mostly refers to you as an individual who pays special attention to the concepts and indicators of citizenship rights, both in words and actions, especially during your time as a member of parliament. In the first question, allow me to ask you to explain the concept of privacy, which you also advocate for, to our readers.

Every living being in this world has boundaries called privacy, which separates their territory from others. The privacy of a plant is the area where its roots, stems, and leaves grow and continue its life, and if this privacy is violated, its life may be in danger. The exclusive territory of an animal is where it is born, raised, hunts, and reproduces, and if it can, it will defend this territory from others with all its might.

Human, as the most noble creature and the one known as the representative of God on earth, possesses a special realm due to its physical and spiritual qualities, needs, and desires. This entitles them to prohibit others from any interference or invasion without permission and to claim exclusive use and ownership of it.

Based on this, it can be said that privacy is the inviolable boundaries and sanctity of an individual’s personal life, which is the right of only one person to benefit from it, and entry into it is only allowed with the person’s permission and obtaining a visa. Otherwise, it is considered a violation of a person’s private territory.

In your opinion, what is the function of this inviolable privacy and security in individuals’ lives in society? Why is preserving this privacy emphasized?

The most important aspect that distinguishes humans from other living beings is their precious essence known as “human dignity and status”, which has been entrusted to them by the Creator. The foundation and basis of this dignity and nobility, and its preservation, is closely tied to the fulfillment of a set of rights and responsibilities. If these are violated or threatened, the person’s honor, humanity, and dignity are at risk and will be compromised. Respecting the privacy of individuals is one of the most important of these responsibilities.

Therefore, protecting the privacy of each citizen in any country is a vital matter and leads to the preservation of the family and society, security, self-esteem, self-confidence, and ultimately the vitality and sustainability of a society. On the contrary, in societies where citizens do not feel secure in this regard and their human dignity is violated, that society will sooner or later face insecurity, chaos, and collapse.

What is the definition of privacy and how does it work? How does an individual understand its meaning and boundaries? Is there a universal definition of privacy in the world or is it a variable domain with changing dimensions?

Culture and religion, beliefs and power structures are among the most important components in defining the privacy boundaries of individuals and their contexts. In fact, it can be said that each of these components influences the nature and limits of personal privacy in a society by affecting its laws.

Therefore, the definition, scope, and examples of privacy in different societies are not necessarily similar to each other, as mentioned, they can vary depending on culture, religion, customs, power structure, level of development and growth, and specific conditions and considerations of each society. However, in many cases, these boundaries are shared and originate from the nature and instinct of humans, not the components mentioned.

According to your perspective, which considers privacy as derived from natural and inherent rights, but also influenced by various cultural and religious factors as well as power structures in defining its limitations in different societies, where does respect for this privacy stand in the laws of different countries today?

Respect for people’s privacy is a fundamental human right and a basic human right. Although most countries in the world do not have a comprehensive law to protect privacy, the importance of protecting individuals’ privacy is emphasized in various principles of the constitution and in the heart of other domestic laws in most countries. Each of them has provided provisions and mechanisms in their legal and criminal laws to protect the privacy of citizens in accordance with the mentioned components. However, the content and nature, intensity and weakness, and limitations of each of them depend on the system and power structure, culture, religion, and level of development of that society.

In addition to these countries that adhere to international conventions and laws regarding privacy, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, they are obliged to comply with such laws in their constitutions and ordinary laws.

It seems that the governments and people of developed countries place more importance on the privacy of citizens compared to other countries, and therefore have stricter rules in their laws for protecting privacy and punishing violators.

Although evidence suggests that in the past decade, in developed countries as well, the privacy of citizens has been compromised in many cases and violated by governments under the pretext of security measures.

How is it in our country? To what extent do lawmakers recognize the privacy rights and its expansion for Iranian citizens?

In the Constitution and other relevant laws of the Islamic Republic of Iran, special attention has been paid to the privacy of citizens in various dimensions, both material and spiritual.

In fact, the Constitution is inspired by the Quran, Islamic law, and the Constitutionalism without directly mentioning the term “privacy”. In articles 12, 22, 23, 24, 25, 28, 32, 33, 38, 39, and 46, in the five areas of belief, physical, spatial, informational, communicational, and personal, it emphasizes the importance of respecting the privacy of citizens and considers its violation a crime.

In various ordinary laws, the privacy of citizens has been considered in different dimensions and areas such as medical, economic, tax, cultural, social, and political, which include provisions from civil law, criminal and legal procedure law, Islamic penal law, law on publication and free access to information, law on respecting legitimate freedoms and preserving citizens’ rights, and law on cyber crimes.

However, in addition to the exceptions mentioned in the laws, according to the jurisprudential principle of “no harm and no infliction of harm”, and in accordance with Article 40 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran, no one is allowed to use their rights as a means of causing harm to others or violating public interests.

Therefore, in all cases mentioned, privacy is respected to the extent that it does not interfere with the rights of others or public interests. Otherwise, with the authorization and determination of competent judicial authorities, violation of privacy and interventions in it are possible.

Unfortunately, the existence of these restrictions and conditions in our country’s laws sometimes allows certain authorities to violate individuals’ privacy by using their own interpretations and preferences.

In your opinion, does this cliché view that governments violate the privacy of citizens cause us to forget about other violators? Can citizens themselves not violate their own privacy? What is the fundamental difference between the violation of this privacy by these two groups?

Both can violate privacy, but their nature, dimensions, amount, and impact may differ from each other, or in some cases, violating privacy may be inherent despite the availability of facilities that citizens do not have. For example, eavesdropping is more common in government agencies than in citizens, and in case of privacy violation by citizens, the possibility of prevention, pursuit, and punishment is greater than violating governments.

Mr. Eslami, as you know, in the seventh parliament, a bill titled “Protection of Individuals’ Privacy” was presented by Mohammad Khatami, the former president, in the last days of his government’s activity.

The type and quality of support for privacy protection was unprecedented. However, this bill was rejected in parliament. Please provide a brief explanation of the story behind this bill and its implications for readers of the peace line.

Yes, one of the articles (133) of the Fourth Five-Year Development Plan had obligated the judiciary to prepare a draft for the protection and promotion of citizens’ rights and the protection of individuals’ privacy and submit it for approval to the relevant authorities.

Therefore, in order to protect privacy, the last bill of Mr. Khatami’s government was presented to the parliament on the last day and at the same time as his farewell ceremony in the Islamic Consultative Assembly, in accordance with the implementation of the development plan.

In this bill, which was drafted based on articles 22 and 25 of the Constitution and in order to respect the dignity and independence of individuals, five personal privacy boundaries were established: physical privacy, information privacy, privacy of places and homes, privacy in the workplace, privacy of communications, and the responsibilities resulting from their violation. Furthermore, separate punishments were provided for violators of each of these privacy boundaries.

Unfortunately, this bill was rejected in the seventh session of the Parliament’s Industries Commission and the Ahmadinejad government demanded its return in April 2006.

Four months after the return of this bill, in July 2006, a group of minority representatives presented a proposal to protect privacy, which unfortunately did not yield any results. Finally, in October 2006, the general principles of the “Publication and Free Access to Information” bill were approved by the parliament, which in fact only addresses one aspect of the five dimensions of the returned bill.

What was the reason for the rejection of this bill in the seventh parliament? Were legal issues raised or were political differences a barrier to the approval of this bill?

As I mentioned, this bill was rejected by the Industries Committee of the Parliament and was returned by the government. However, the extremist faction known as the Fundamentalists essentially have no interest in approving human rights bills and laws until they themselves face problems such as invasion of their own privacy. They do not see the existence of such laws as beneficial or necessary for the people and the country, and they may even believe that by approving such laws, the people may become more rebellious and put the interests of Islam and the system at risk. However, I believe that many human rights laws are in line with religious orders and have no conflict with them.

Now that we are talking about the activities of the Islamic Consultative Assembly, considering your background and expertise, can you briefly refer to the laws passed in the Islamic Republic of Iran that protect and emphasize the privacy and citizenship rights?

Similar laws have been approved in various cases in all assemblies, including legal provisions for protecting individuals’ privacy within the Islamic Penal Code, the Criminal Procedure Code, and the Cyber Crimes Code, as well as the Law on Respect for Legitimate Freedoms and Protection of Citizens’ Rights, passed by the Sixth Assembly, and the Law on Publication and Free Access to Information, passed by the Seventh Assembly. It can be said without exaggeration that the majority of laws passed in relation to human rights have been during the Sixth Assembly, and assemblies with a majority of representatives from the so-called conservative or fundamentalist parties have shown the most opposition to such laws. However, the non-approval or rejection of such laws is more of a matter for the Guardian Council than the Assembly itself.

Has the parliament taken any action to address the violation of people’s privacy, especially in regards to their privacy being violated in cyberspace, by providing reports or collecting complaints in relevant committees? Does such a mechanism exist in the parliament?

The virtual space is filled with such protests and complaints, including the hacking of various individuals’ emails. Certainly, representatives who are involved with the internet have personally experienced this problem and do not need to obtain specific reports from others.

And then people usually complain to an authority to ensure that their complaints and protests are addressed. When the parliament does not spend time addressing such complaints, it is unlikely that people will waste their time bringing such protests to the parliament.

As the final question, what is your opinion about the Hi Police of the production and exchange of information, or the “FATA Police” that we are currently witnessing a lot of criticism about its activities and are accused of violating citizens’ privacy in the cyber space? To what extent do you agree with these criticisms and where do you see the problem?

To prevent cyber crimes and combat them, cyber police operate in many countries. Therefore, the establishment of a judicial regulation for dealing with cyber crimes is essential.

However, leaving the determination of such crimes to the discretion of the police and security forces and regulating the virtual space, especially against those who engage in peaceful political activities and publish their constructive criticisms in the virtual space, is by no means permissible. In order to prevent arbitrary actions by the police in the production and exchange of information, firstly, the origin of its creation must be legal and approved by the parliament, and its scope of action must also be in accordance with general principles as stated in the Constitution and frameworks determined by the law.

Undoubtedly, when the cyber police act solely on the orders of the commander of the law enforcement forces, it is clear that their arbitrary actions restrict the space for legitimate online activities, violate the law, infringe upon the legitimate and legal freedoms, and invade individuals’ privacy. It sometimes happens that the independence of the branches of government is completely violated and the judicial authorities take it upon themselves to issue judgments and punishments.