According to some lies from western traditions meant to separate and segregate people (and things), each of us is living inside an invisible personal bubble, a place we theoretically own, and freedom is the empty space separating our own bubble from others bubbles. According to that, one's freedom supposed to begin where others freedom ends. Again, not true, total lie.
Civil justice systems in western countries (and most others now) sit on that very lie, created from a false belief, the belief that we are separated from each other, which we are not. Yes I know, switching a belief for another may seem pointless, but it isn't. Just prove me wrong, prove me you can live in a vacuum in total separation. Not feasible, not viable.
Separation was invented as a way to facilitate ownership. If one can establish a right to some place, some things, some idea, some animal or some other people, one can own justice upon others and protect invalid claims.
The other way around would be to just share stuff when we don't use them, educate people on fair usage, and limit ownership to basic stuff we won't share because of say, hygiene, like underwears and toothbrush.
Maybe, one day, we could meet halfway and work something out, like an hybrid ownership system, but we're not there yet. Where we're at is a place in which one call right to freedom all the shit one permits itself to unload onto others, for no good reason.
According to some other traditions, and many people restricted in their movements for many years (like inmates, hostages, victims of abuse and human trafficking), freedom is within, nowhere else. I agree with that view, as it makes sense. Because isolation is a fragile construction that isn't viable, at all. And how we share space with others has nothing to do with freedom or exercise of freedom.