In the US you have the 4th amendment which proscribes unreasonable search and seizure but that is not a right to privacy. Thus, there is no such right articulat

In the US you have the 4th amendment which proscribes unreasonable search and seizure but that is not a right to privacy. Thus, there is no such right articulated in the amendments themselves. Therefore, it's decided by case law (which is how all such things are decided in common law systems of jurisprudence). Chief amongst such cases is Griswold v. Connecticut, where the ruling found such a right is established by the constitution through a "reading between the lines" (penumbral reasoning). Okay this isn't conlaw 101 but my point is privacy and right to privacy are technical terms, possibly unintuitive to you. Now someone's rights may have been arrogate here - I don't know - but that would be again argued in a court of law.