In today’s digital age, social media has become a powerful space for conversation, information-sharing, and community engagement. As more aspects of our lives move online, it is essential to understand the importance of privacy, freedom of expression, and responsibility—especially when using platforms like Facebook. These values are vital not only for personal protection but also for fostering respectful public policy discussions that help build stronger, more informed communities.

Why Privacy Matters

Privacy is a fundamental human right. It protects our dignity, our personal security, and our freedom to express ideas without fear. On social media, privacy means having control over what we share, how we share it, and who sees it. Without proper boundaries, people can easily cross the line into personal attacks or expose someone’s private life in ways that are unfair and even illegal.

Why Facebook Allows Pseudonyms and Anonymous Posts

Facebook has evolved to support more private or pseudonymous accounts in certain settings, such as groups or Pages. This is not to encourage hiding behind a fake identity for malicious intent, but rather to allow people to express opinions safely—especially in discussions involving sensitive topics like politics, gender issues, community concerns, or public policy debates. Creating a safe space for honest dialogue helps protect individuals while encouraging thoughtful and respectful conversations that benefit society as a whole.

Using a pseudonym or anonymous identity gives people a way to participate in public dialogue without the fear of harassment, retaliation, or judgment. It creates space for whistleblowers, victims, or concerned citizens to speak up. However, with this freedom comes the responsibility to use it respectfully and constructively.

Your Rights to Privacy in Vanuatu

In Vanuatu, the right to privacy is protected under the Constitution. Article 5(1)(q) of the Constitution of the Republic of Vanuatu guarantees “protection for the privacy of the home and other property and from unjust deprivation of property.” Additionally, the Constitution upholds freedom of expression, including the right to speak without disclosing your identity. These protections support safe and respectful public policy discussions online, allowing individuals to engage openly while maintaining their privacy.

In addition, the Cybercrime Act No. 22 of 2021 also includes provisions that prohibit unlawful access to personal information, sharing private content without consent, and online harassment. This means individuals who deliberately reveal another person’s identity, private messages, or personal life online without their permission may be held accountable under the law.

The Harmful Digital Communication Act further strengthens these protections by addressing harmful or offensive digital communications, ensuring that individuals who deliberately reveal another person’s identity, private messages, or personal life online without permission can be held accountable under the law.

I’ll explain more later in the blog, but just so you know, what I’m sharing here is my own personal view on the topic. If you need more detailed advice or help, it’s best to consult a legal professional or trusted expert.

Discussing Issues Without Getting Personal

When we post on social media—especially in public forums or groups—it’s crucial to remember that the topics are for discussion, not for targeting individuals. Public discussions can raise awareness, challenge ideas, and promote accountability, but they must be handled diplomatically.

Here are a few ground rules we must follow:

• Focus on the issue, not the person. Talk about policies, systems, and events—not people’s private lives.
• Do not name individuals unless it is public information and legally appropriate. Respect people’s right to privacy.
• Avoid defamatory language. Even if you disagree, speak respectfully.
• Do not publish private information. Screenshots of private conversations, addresses, phone numbers, or personal photos should never be posted without consent.

Here’s how Vanuatu and other countries’ laws address this (Examples)

• Philippines – Data Privacy Act 2012:
  Sharing someone’s name and associating it with private matters or controversy without consent is a violation.
• South Africa – POPIA:
  Using someone’s name in an online post without lawful basis may violate their right to privacy.
• European Union – GDPR:
  Individuals can request the removal of their name from online content if it was shared without legal reason.
• Vanuatu – Cybercrime Act 2021:
  Harassment, bullying, or causing harm through publication of personal information (including names) online is a punishable offense.
• Vanuatu – Online Safety (Harmful Digital Communications) Act 2024
  Revealing sensitive personal information, such as someone’s identity or private facts, without consent and with intent to cause emotional harm, is now a punishable offence under Section 11. The law defines harm as serious emotional distress, and protects people from privacy violations, online harassment, and exposure.
• Vanuatu Constitution – Fundamental Rights
  Freedom of Expression: You have the right to speak or post without disclosing your identity.
  Right to Privacy: Your personal life is protected from unlawful exposure or forced identification.

What does Harmful Digital Communication Act Says about Privacy?

The Harmful Digital Communications Act No. 14 of 2024 (Vanuatu) does not use the word “privacy” in a long detailed section, but it strongly protects privacy in effect, especially through the following provisions:

---

Section 4 – Communication Principles

This section sets clear principles for all digital communication. It prohibits:

• (a) “Communications that disclose sensitive personal facts about an individual.”

This is essentially a privacy clause. If someone shares private or identifying information about you online—especially if it was meant to stay private—it could violate this principle.

---

Section 5 – Meaning of Harm

“Harm means serious emotional distress.”

If the disclosure of private information leads to emotional distress, that can qualify as harm under the law. This definition gives weight to privacy violations—even if no physical harm occurred.

---

Section 11 – Offences

“A person who posts a digital communication with the intent to cause harm… and who causes harm to the individual… commits an offence.”

This means that if someone shares private information (such as your identity, photos, location, or personal experiences) with the intention of hurting you, or even recklessly, and it causes distress, they can be prosecuted.

---

Also important:

While the word “privacy” isn’t a dedicated section heading, the law uses the concept of “sensitive personal facts” and “causing harm” to protect your digital and emotional boundaries.

---

But In summary:

Yes, the Act protects your privacy, especially when:

• Private information is disclosed without your consent;
• That disclosure causes emotional distress;
• The person who shared it intended to hurt you or acted carelessly.

Public Policy Discussions and Responsible Digital Conduct

Our digital platforms are powerful tools for public policy discussions and driving positive change. However, these platforms must be used with care and respect. If we want to build a more informed and democratic society in Vanuatu, we must uphold the values of respect, dignity, and the rule of law—both online and offline.

Engaging in public policy discussions is important for our communities, but it does not mean exposing individuals’ private lives or using social media for character attacks. Online spaces should focus on ideas, policies, and constructive debate—not personal attacks or unlawful sharing of private information.

Let’s protect one another by being mindful, diplomatic, and lawful in how we share and engage. Social media should be a bridge for ideas, not a weapon against people.
Online discussions are for ideas — not character attacks.
We must separate public dialogue from people’s private lives.

---

Let us use social media as a bridge for ideas, not as a weapon against people.