Public interest or is it interesting to the public?

Kenneth Juror | Kenya

Herman Omiti | Kenya

The freedom of expression and information just like other rights and freedoms are not exclusive; there are limitations within which these rights and freedoms can be enjoyed. One of these limitations is the right to privacy. The constitution guarantees every person the right to privacy (Article 31). The question that has always been moot is how do we harmonize these two rights and freedom?   

Last month, Conjestina Achieng – world number five female boxer, was featured on television in a not so good mental state. She was seen losing her mental sense one too many times as she muttered incomprehensible words. 

The issue that arose was whether she consented to such intrusive coverage or could she have had the capacity to consent to such coverage in her mental condition? Obviously, she did not consent; then, was it in order for the media to air her story especially in her condition? 

Did the media give prominence to the story because it was in the public interest or was it interesting to the public?    

A school of thought in support of the media’s action was that since Conje is a public figure, a world boxing champion, thus it was in the interest of the public to know what happens to her. Whilst this might be a valid argument, there must be difference between what is in public interest and what is interesting to the public.   

The other school thought that the media had over stepped its boundary in bringing out Conje’s private life to light which consequently can cause her family anguish and tantamount to putting them to public ridicule.    

Supposing that it is of public interest to know her well being then where does the balance lie between her fundamental right to privacy, freedom of the media on one hand and the right to information on the other. Is it a right to know someone else’s private life just because he is a public figure? 

These questions are significant, if one right is left to ride brakeless then it could easily stumble and run over the other; accordingly, all rights are guaranteed in the constitution. 

This discussion may not be conclusively put to rest as to whether it was in the interest of the public to know Conje’s mental state or was it simply a story interesting to the public.

NB: The resultant impact of the story was however an excellent heed to a call.