invasion of privacy

Creepshotting

I was quoted in an article entitled “Cheap Shots” by Renyi Lim in ELLE Malaysia (March 2017). The article spoke about the practice of “creep shotting”, the act of taking picture of a person, generally a woman, without his or her knowledge or consent.

I said:-

Unfortunately, creepshotting is not against the law or an invasion of privacy,” explains Foong Cheng Leong, chairperson of the Kuala Lumpur Bar Information Technology Committee. “To be an invasion of privacy, there must be a reasonable expectation of privacy. A person cannot reasonably claim expectation if that person is in a public area, and pictures taken of that person involve parts of his or her body that can be seen by anyone in public, like their face or body.

Notwithstanding the above, creepshotting can be a criminal act if it falls under section 509 of the Penal Code. S 509 of the Penal Code states as follow:-

Whoever, intending to insult the modesty of any person, utters any word, makes any sound or gesture, or exhibits any object, intending that such word or sound shall be heard, or that such gesture or object shall be seen by such person, or intrudes upon the privacy of such person, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to five years or with fine or with both.

But it is unlikely to be a criminal act if the shots were taken on a part of a person which can be seen by anyone e.g. a person’s face, body etc.

However, this would be different if that person is constantly harassing the victim e.g. stalking her day to day. If this happens, the victim can consider initiating an action for harassment.

BFM Podcast: WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOUR SEX TAPE IS PUBLISHED?

I was interviewed by BFM Radio to talk about invasion of privacy in Malaysia and the podcast was published on 27 April 2016.



On March 21th, a six-person jury awarded Hulk Hogan, the stage name of retired professional wrestler Terry Bollea, $140 million in civil damages for a sex tape that gossip website Gawker published in 2012. In doing so, the jury believed that Hulk Hogan’s privacy was violated as the tape was made and distributed without his permission. How far can public interest encroach into privacy rights? Lawyer Foong Cheng Leong explains how such a case would play out in a Malaysian court.

 Scroll to top