A successful theory of right should be able to explain why it is immediately clear that my unauthorized medical operation on your body is a violation of your right but why it is not as clear that my drawing of your hand from afar in a public library is a violation of your right. In other words, a successful theory should be able to clarify the boundaries of right so that it either does include the right to bodily integrity but excludes the right to not be observed in a certain way, or, if it does include both, to which extent the latter right extends. Kantian theory of right has been criticized to not be able to do so, despite its distinctive advantages in other aspects. Here, I argue and demonstrate that the Kantian right to freedom can provide such clarifications, by providing a systematic account of the content of the right to freedom, which focuses on the relational nature of Kantian rights.