an Employer should have the right to take group photos of Employees for
inclusion in a calendar or any other advertisement for purposes of advertisement
of its products. Unless the photos or audiovisual works are used in a manner
detrimental to the Employee such as the Plaintiff in this case, the Employer
should have the right not only to talk about and present its Employees to the
public but also to include them in an advertisement of the company's legitimate
business. Where an Employee who works to produce products marketed openly
does not want his or her photo or motion picture exposed to the public, he or she
should make a reservation with the Employer and be able to present it to court to
show that he or she had an agreement not to be included in any profiling of the
company for purposes of advertisements in any broadcast or publication. Seeking
permission is necessary courtesy of the Employer and in this case the Employees
were informed about the event that was going to take place. The products could
be showcased with other persons in view. In this case the other Employees have
not complained and the implications of the Plaintiff’s suit on the Defendant’s
production needs to be considered as well. They would obviously be a floodgate
of claims against the Employer. In the premises the rights of the Plaintiff if any
have to be considered on other premises.
The last question to be considered in the first issue is the right of privacy. I have
considered the constitutional provisions on the right of privacy namely article 27
of the Constitution of the Republic of Uganda. Article 27 provides for the right to
privacy of the person, or other property. It stipulates that no person shall be
subjected to unlawful search of the person, home or other property of that
person; or unlawful entry by others of the premises of that person. Secondly it
provides that no person shall be subjected to interference with the privacy of that
person's home, correspondence, communication or other property. For the
Plaintiff to fit within the prohibitions to invasion of privacy under article 27 of the
constitution of the Republic of Uganda, he has to demonstrate that there was
unlawful interference with his privacy and with his property.
As an Employee of the Defendant it would be a suggestion that the consent of the
Employee would be necessary before any photo can be taken of workers in the
Decision of Hon. Mr. Justice Christopher Madrama
19