Anonymised respondent (brother/family member)

Enquiry is closed to the satisfaction of all parties under section 6 of the data protection act 2017 (dpa). DPO, 4 October 2024.

Record ID

mu-dpo-2024-0183

Case reference

Decision No 183

Jurisdiction

Mauritius

Regulator

DPO

Type

determination

Date decided

4 October 2024

Respondent type

individual

Sector

residential

Violations

CCTV cameras installed by respondent (complainant's brother) on shared terrain to surveil complainant's private activities

Provisions cited

section 6 of the Data Protection Act 2017 (DPA)

Outcome

enquiry is closed to the satisfaction of all parties under section 6 of the Data Protection Act 2017 (DPA)

Status

final

Source

Official document ↗

Record verified

17 July 2026

Summary

The complainant, writing in Mauritian Creole, alleged that the respondent (the complainant's brother) had installed multiple cameras on shared terrain to surveil the complainant's private activities, while the complainant had previously been required by police to move their own camera. A police site visit confirmed that the respondent's CCTV cameras were not capturing images inside the complainant's premises and no audio was being recorded. The enquiry was closed under section 6 of the Data Protection Act 2017.

CCTV · FAMILY DISPUTE · RESIDENTIAL PRIVACY

Cite this decision

Track Mauritius enforcement

Get decision alerts by email

Tell us your jurisdictions and we email you when a regulator's decision passes verification. Privacy.