"In its recent issues paper on workplace privacy, the Victorian Law Reform Commision9 stated: The term [privacy] has different meanings indifferent contexts. One thing “is clear”, however: most people use the term in a way that suggests that “privacy” is a meaningful and valuable thing. It then went on to state: [P]rivacy always includes and refers to autonomy and dignity. This means that the protection of privacy will always encompass the following rights: *not to be turned into an object or thing, that is not to be treated as anything other than an autonomous human being; and *not to be deprived of the capacity to form and develop relationships. Thus, according the Victorian Law Reform Commission, “privacy is understood as a right underpinned by autonomy and dignity”. This analysis is conceptually flawed. It confuses the notion of “definition” and “justification”. To define a term or concept is to set out the necessary and sufficient conditions which demarcate the correct usage of the term or concept. This isa “descriptive” process. The process of justification, on the other hand, is generally “normative” in character, in that it provides reasons in support of a practice. The inclusion of normative concepts in the definition of privacy skews the parameters of the discussion making it logically impossible t evaluate the desirability of the practice or interest against the full catalogue of moral principles and theories. The incorporation of moral virtues *such as autonomy) into the deifnition begs the question of why we should value privacy. It is almost universally agreed that autonomy and dignity are desirable virtues. Hence, any interest that is derived from them will obviously also be morally desirable. Quite simply, the definition assumes too much. The definition advanced by the Victorian Law Reform Commission is especially unhelpful for an even more basic reason. It runs foul of the most basic “rule of deifning”: to clarify the term or interest at hand. The distinction between being treated as an object and an autonomous person, and the freedoms that are necessary to form meaningful relationships, are inherently grey and use of such concepts introduces more confusion than clarity."