Article 8 of the European Court of Human Rights has been interpreted to include "personal identity" within the meaning of "private life.
The ECHR highlighted in the case of Bruggemann and Scheuten v Germany Yearbook the significance of relationships concerning the "emotional field" and "the development of one's own personality.
In the case of Handyside v UK the court stated "Freedom of expression constitutes one of the essential foundations of such a society, one of the basic conditions for its progress and for the development of every man.
[9] For example, some believe women who have freely chosen to wear the Islamic headscarf or full-face veil are expressing their religious beliefs and personal identity.
But Marshall highlights that the ban is disproportionate and it is not government's place to determine what women should wear especially when it misrecognises her and disrespects her identity and personality.
Finally, Amnesty International has repeatedly urged France not to impose the ban, saying it violates European human rights law.
[citation needed] The issue of the full-face veil ban in France and Belgium illustrates the extent of legal protection an individual has on their personal identity.
This is a contested issue and others believe that the banning of full-face veils is about liberating females to express their sexuality and providing them the opportunity to show the world who they truly are.
Personality rights emerged from the German legal system in the late twentieth century to seek distance from the horrors of Nazism.
Through the help of the German Constitutional Court, an individual can actively seek and create an intimate sphere so his personality can develop and be protected.
[18] For example, France, South Africa and England have an all-embracing law that protects an individual's interest concerning physical integrity, feelings, dignity and privacy and identity.
The static aspects of identity concern attributes that make one visible to the outside world, for example, physical features, sex, name, genetics, and nationality.
[32] Lionel Bently is also concerned with this idea and highlights his worry through a quote from the Du Boulay case: "Property rights in 'identity'… have the potential to curtail the liberties of those who wish to build their own identities, in whatever way, and for whatever reason.
"[33] Other scholars believe that enshrining personal identity into the law is restricting people's choices and flexibility to transform and change who they are.
While developing personal identity comes down to the individual to manifest character and work out 'who they are,' Marshall highlights that jurisprudence has evolved to create a positive obligation on states to provide social conditions such as private and personality rights to be respected, demonstrating that the international audience acknowledges that legal recognition is necessary to allow individuals to choose how they want to live and who they are.