Search

The charter of human rights is a holy document and role model for the world. Article 3 of the UDHR reads that “right to life, liberty and security of a person” cannot be deprived without “due process of law.” Moreover, right to get free education, clean water, unpolluted environment and home are basic rights of human beings. Islam gives us a complete code of life and full explanation of which can be witnessed in the Holy Quran and Sunnah. Slogan of “liberty, equality and fraternity” paved the way for great French and U.S revolutions. First ten amendments of US constitution are known as “Bill of Rights” and all of them are basic rights of citizens. The story of rights began with the fall of man. Ancient thinkers and philosophers like Hobbes and Locke spent their lives for achievement of rights of mankind. 20th century is the period of independence of countries and emergence of human rights. Right to life is so important today that it has been guaranteed by almost all constitutions of the world including Pakistan. It is believed that the end of law is justice, and as such the very purpose of this article is to protect right to life of man. Main aim of this paper is, therefore, to highlight importance of this constitutional provision concerning “right to life”, seeking guidance from higher law, like the Holy Quran and Sunnah and other relevant cases law on “right to life”.

Copyright of Human Sciences Journal / Revue des Sciences Humaines is the property of Universite des Freres Mentouri Constantine and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The trend toward the "humanization" of international law reflects a greater emphasis on individuals rather than simply states as objects of concern. The advance of human rights law (HRL) has been an important impetus for this trend. Some observers suggest that humanization can be furthered even more by applying HRL rather than international humanitarian law (IHL) to hostilities between states and nonstate armed groups, unless a state explicitly declares that it is engaged in an armed conflict. This essay argues, however, that a court should not defer to a state's characterization of hostilities, but should base its analysis on whether hostilities meet the criteria for an armed conflict. Applying HRL to hostilities that effectively are an armed conflict but not acknowledged as such risks diluting the legitimacy and normative force of HRL. On the one hand, if a court applies conventional stringent HRL standards, this body of law may be seen as unrealistic and is likely to be ignored. On the other hand, a court that adapts HRL standards to armed conflict may need to take a consequentialist approach at odds with HRL's deontological foundations. Clearly differentiating between HRL and IHL may thus best promote the humanization of warfare. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Children are the most vulnerable members of society, and it is our responsibility to ensure that they are protected from harm and provided with a safe and nurturing environment to grow and thrive. It is essential to recognize the rights of the unborn child and protect them, as they are the future of society. The rights of the unborn child are an integral part of sustainable development, as they represent the future generation that we must protect and nurture. By recognizing the rights of the unborn child, we can ensure that every child has a fair and equal chance to live a healthy and fulfilling life. The rights of the unborn child are crucial for their survival and well-being. The Indian Constitution guarantees certain fundamental rights to all individuals, including the right to life and personal liberty, which extend to the unborn child. The rights of the unborn child under personal laws are based on the same principles as those under the Constitution of India, namely the right to life and personal liberty. Personal laws play an essential role in shaping the rights of individuals, including the unborn child. While these laws provide some protections, there is still a need for stronger legal protections and enforcement mechanisms to ensure that the rights of the unborn child are upheld. It is essential to recognise the importance of protecting the rights of the unborn child, as they are the future of society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper investigates how policies on migration in West Africa and from the region to Europe address and frame migrants’ deaths and right to life in general and actions recommended in objective 8 of the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration (GCM) in particular. The paper is based on an analysis of West African national, as well as African and (West) African-European transnational policy and strategy documents. It finds that while the adoption of GCM objective 8 has contributed to slightly increase policy attention to migrants’ deaths and right to life, narrative frames have been key for the justification of how the six actions recommended in the objective have been addressed and implemented at the national, regional, and transregional levels. African policy documents supporting human right-oriented narrative frames have tended to include more comprehensive provisions, and European Union-(West) African policy documents supporting deterrence-oriented frames have tended to include less provisions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The nuclear-contaminated water containing radionuclides discharged into the ocean by Japan will enter the entire ecosystem through circulation and biomagnification and enter the human body through the food chain, posing a great risk of irreversible impacts on the ecosystem and human health. Such damage will become increasingly pronounced with the continuous discharge of nuclear-contaminated water. It is an international consensus that human rights should be respected and guaranteed, and the obligation to protect basic human rights is a substantive obligation of the state under international law and domestic laws. Since the Fukushima nuclear accident, Japan has continued to violate its international legal obligations to safeguard human rights in such areas as the resettlement of disaster victims, the reduction of radiation levels, and the disposal of contaminated water, and its actions have already jeopardized and will continue to jeopardize basic human rights such as the right to the environment, the right to life, the right to development, and the right to food, for its own people and for the people of all countries in the world. In the aftermath of the Fukushima nuclear meltdown, people and workers involved in the disposal of nuclear contaminants were continuously exposed to high levels of radiation, which threat‑ ened their rights to survival, development, and health. The Japanese people’s environmental and food rights to healthy existence and food in a suitable environment free from the effects of nuclear radiation have been jeopardized by the negligence of the country ’s efforts to resettle the victims and restore the environment. As a result of the discharge of the nuclear-contaminated water, the people of neighboring countries and even the world are also potential victims of Japan ’s nuclear contamination and bear the risk of human rights violations. The principle of human rights is the basic concept and purpose of the theory of a human community with a shared future, and human rights is an important area in which China actively participates in the affairs of the United Nations as well as global governance. The 20th National Congress of the Communist Party of China clearly stated that ‘we will follow a Chinese path of human rights development, actively participate in global human rights governance, and promote all-around advancement of human rights.’ The fact that China has taken the initiative to speak out against Japan’s possible violations of human rights around the world demonstrates the role of China as a responsible major country. There are many remedies for Japan’s violation of its legal obligations and human rights. China should call on the international community to hold Japan accountable for crimes against humanity in accordance with the Rome Statute, and to promote doctrinal discussions on the crimes of ecocide and crimes against the marine environment. In addition, China should insist on requesting an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice and attempting to pursue substantive accountability in parallel, while making use of the relevant procedures of international human rights organizations to make its voice heard. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

With the promulgation of the Autonomous Driving Act in summer 2021, Germany took the worldwide lead on regulating self-driving cars. This Article discusses the (non-)regulation of moral dilemmas in this act. To this end, it clarifies the role of the so-called trolley problem, which influenced the report of the German Ethics Commission that paved the way for this act in particular and the relationship between philosophical reasoning, empirical studies, and the law in general. By introducing the international legal community to the (non-)regulation of moral dilemmas in the German act, the Article critically reviews the German goal, which is to serve as a European and international role model. This will be preceded by a discussion as to why self-driving cars should be allowed as well as the moral dilemmas they cause which should be regulated by the law. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The case Mortier v. Belgium is the first case where the Court comments on the figure of euthanasia. The area of euthanasia in particular raises the issue of finding a balance between the protection of the patients' right to life in Article 2 of the Convention and that of the right to respect for his or her private life and personal autonomy in Article 8 of the Convention. The Court confirmed the States must be afforded a margin of appreciation in finding this balance. However, it does not concern an unlimited margin as the Court reserved its power to review the States fulfilment of its obligations under Article 2. After deciding that there had been no breach of article 8 in the performing of euthanasia as such, the Court examined the positive obligation of Belgium to foresee in sufficient safeguards to protect the right to life. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We argue that the right to life—for example under Article 2 of the European Convention—has become an increasingly fragile thing, prone to sharp rationing by domestic law and policy makers, almost to the extent seen in certain works of dystopian science fiction. The near-future novel 'Logan's Run' (1967) depicts a brutally austere regime, that is 'justified' in law on the basis that finite, scarcening resources must somehow be preserved, to enable survival. Over—population means that human rights are now fictive however—there are neither family life rights nor privacy rights, and human dignity is in short supply. An all-powerful AI 'being' governs via algorithms to ration and curtail lifespans, so that no one is allowed to be older than 21. This rule is enforced via 'voluntary' submission to euthanasia, and the intervention of a murderous militia for those who do not comply. As ever, patriotic behaviour is key. Arguably, not dissimilar crisis thinking was seen during the pandemic, with various resources diverted or triaged towards the worthiest citizens—those with the best chances of survival—through the use of such things as 'frailty algorithms.' Recent UK case law is then analysed to gauge the extent to which dystopian reasoning might be encroaching upon the effectiveness of human rights protections, post-pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article examines the biomedical and ethical principles of transplantation in the context of the protection of human rights and the application of the Oviedo Convention. The Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine established the basic principles of protection of living donors (Article 19 and Article 20), in particular directed against any financial or comparable benefit resulting from the use of the human body or body parts (Article 21). The additional protocol to the Convention extended their effect to all aspects of the transplantation process, in particular the procurement and distribution of organs and tissues and the technical and medical techniques used in this process. It is noted that the requirement for the transplantation system is to ensure the safety of potential recipients by guaranteed tracking of the origin of all organs, tissues or cells intended for transplantation. This requirement should not conflict with the need to protect the privacy and personal data of donors and recipients. Its ultimate goal, together with the requirement to comply with ethical standards, is to optimally use the available organs while simultaneously reducing the possibility of their unfair distribution and preventing the risk of trafficking in them. It was emphasized that the Additional Protocol establishes important requirements of transparency and fairness: the transplantation system created in the states must be well structured, take into account all available organs and follow the official sequence of their distribution (Article 3). The nature or organization of the transplantation system is not defined in the Additional Protocol itself, so whether to involve local, regional, national or international organizations in order to guarantee the functioning of such a system is up to each state to decide at its own discretion. Transplant candidates should be prioritized on a medical basis, and the persons or bodies responsible for deciding on the allocation of places in the queue should adhere to this framework. The transparency of the distribution system of donor materials is important in this aspect. This is stated, in particular, in Art. 3 of the Protocol, according to which the transplantation system itself exists to ensure fair access of patients to transplantation services. At the same time, organs and tissues «are distributed only among patients from the official waiting list according to transparent, objective and duly confirmed rules and medical indications», and the transplantation system «provides for the collection and recording of information that is necessary to ensure the tracking of organs and tissues» . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Kırıkkale Law Journal (KLJ) is the property of Kirikkale Law Journal and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The discussion of legal aspects of euthanasia and assisted termination of life has been going on for many years. It touches upon complex topics such as legal, moral, health, religious or societal issues. In terms of human rights, it focuses primarily on juxtaposing the right to life with other rights, such as the right to privacy, the right to decide for oneself, or freedom from torture and inhumane treatment. At the level of international law, the European Court of Human Rights has not decided to establish uniform standards for the protection of the right to life regarding euthanasia and assisted termination of life, allowing the application of the principle of freedom of assessment by the signatory states of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. The consequence of this is the establishment by individual countries of non-uniform legal regulations, which leads to a differentiation in the legal situation of their citizens. The purpose of this article is to determine whether it is possible to derive a universal right to dignified death, and what the consequences of a lack of an international standard on legal regulations in the field of euthanasia and assisted termination of life are for the protection of human rights. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Universal Periodic Review (UPR), established in 2006, has been hailed as an innovative mechanism of the United Nations' Human Rights Council. The peer review mechanism assesses the human rights records of all UN Member States and provides recommendations to further the global promotion and protection of human rights. This article provides an analysis of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia's third UPR in 2018 with a specific focus on the State's use of capital punishment. It explores the challenges faced by the UPR and issues recommendations to foster meaningful discourse, in the international community, to protect the right to life and engender change at the domestic level. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Przeglad Sejmowy is the property of Kancelaria Sejmu and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Faced with restrictive border policies, third-country nationals are increasingly turning to the European Court of Human Rights to protect their lives. Until recently, Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights has not been much pronounced upon in the Court's asylum and migration jurisprudence. However, its three recent judgments concerning pushbacks and border deaths M.H. and Others v. Croatia, Safi and Others v. Greece and Alhowais v. Hungary, advance the Court's case law on the right to life. This article scrutinises the Court's overall strong response to national pushback practices carrying life-threatening risks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper aims to defend the following thesis: It is rational to believe that the right of life is restrictively a Divine right and not a human right; that is, only God has the (moral/legal/religious) authority to enact and issue the laws surrounding life and death. This paper is structured as follows: after some introductory points are given, two arguments in favor of the above thesis will be formulated; the first argument is based on the fallibility of human knowledge and judgment, and the second argument is based on the rejection of the human right of life because of its implausible implications. Finally, some implications and advantages of the favored thesis will be explained briefly. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The text aims at reconstructing the structure of the arguments of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal in the judgment of 22 October 2020, in which the so-called eugenic grounds for termination of pregnancy were held unconstitutional. The assumption of the presented considerations is the recognition that this judgment amounts to be a possible and natural development of jurisprudence regarding the disputed constitutional issue. The authors argue that the essential structural elements of the Tribunal's reasoning (i.e. its two-stage nature consisting in examining the constitutional subjectivity of the nasciturus and carrying out the proportionality test) do not raise objections in the light of the method of resolving the constitutional problem adopted by the Constitutional Tribunal. In turn, the partial conclusions of these argumentation stages (i.e. recognition of the subjectivity of the nasciturus on the basis of Article 38 of the Constitution regulating the legal protection of life, as well as the recognition that the challenged regulation does not meet the proportionality test) are based on the existing doctrinal stipulations, and even more so on the existing jurisprudence of the Tribunal. The judgment is largely of an application nature in relation to the fundamental findings of the Constitutional Tribunal's ruling of 28 May 1997, but these findings are embedded in other constitutional categories: the life of a nasciturus is not only recognized as a "constitutional value" detached from the subject, but as a good an entity who entitled to the constitutional right to legal protection of life. In turn, the decisions of the ordinary legislator as to the intensity and type of this protection must meet the requirements of proportionality test, taking into account the constitutional importance of the right to legal protection of life and its close connection with the protection of human dignity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Prudentia Iuris is the property of Pontificia Universidad Catolica Argentina and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

As of September 2023, consensual same-sex sexual acts between adults (for both men and women) in private were criminalised in a total of 67 United Nations (UN) member States. Most of these States were in Africa, a continent of more than 1.4 billion people, where more than 30 out of Africa Union's 55 States criminalised consensual same-sex sexual acts between adults in private. The justification advanced in favour of criminalisation is that non-heterosexual sexual acts do not conform to the moral, cultural or religious views of a section of society. In some States, consensual same-sex sexual acts between adults in private were punishable by a maximum penalty of death or long prison sentences. The African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights (the Charter) and several protocols adopted under the Charter do not prohibit explicitly discrimination based on real or perceived sexual orientation, gender identity and sexual characteristics. Thus, sexual orientation has remained on the margins of the African regional human rights system and has also remained largely outside the consideration of the African Commission (and the African Court) on Human and Peoples' Rights, the limited jurisprudence is mainly between negative and retrogressive. This article examines the criminalisation of private, consensual same-sex relations, sexual or affective, between adult persons of the same gender or sex in Africa with particular reference to Uganda's Anti-Homosexuality Act 2023 and its impact on human rights including respect for life, privacy, human dignity, integrity, liberty and security of the person, equality and non-discrimination, health, as well as freedom of association, expression and peaceful assembly. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Derecho Penal y Criminologia is the property of Universidad Externado de Colombia, Departamento de Derecho Penal y Criminologia and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Derecho Penal y Criminologia is the property of Universidad Externado de Colombia, Departamento de Derecho Penal y Criminologia and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Opposable erga omnes, the right to life is an absolute and intangible right of the human being and is protected by criminal law in the interest of the whole society, including for the purpose of ensuring human coexistence. In other words, the interest of the criminal law is to impose on all citizens the obligation to respect the life of each individual, to respect the human desire to live. Seen as an attempt on the person’s life, the act of determining or facilitating suicide could not remain outside the incrimination in the Criminal Code as a crime. The present paper is a study of this incrimination from the perspective of the defense of the right to life.

The right to life is the leading natural human right which is respected in all legal systems. It is preliminary to the many rights which are basic to the human being and there are tight restrictions on the circumstances one might be deprived of it. Recruiting an analytical-critical approach, the present study is aimed at examining human rights documents to determine (a) the extent to which the right is cherished, (b) how "death penalty and abortion" is viewed, and finally (c) whether the documents adopt a consistent stance on the circumstances which lead to the deprivation of the right. Findings suggest that despite the highly restricting approach on death penalty, abortion is legally and rather generously accredited. Finally, it is maintained, such a paradoxical stance on the right to life- emanating from the liberal and feminist views- is in obvious opposition to both religious values and human rights standards.

The right to a healthy environment is not explicitly mentioned in the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms from 1950. The mentioned right is more recent and belongs to human rights of the third generation In the final Declaration of the United Nations conference on the human environment held in Stockholm in 1972, the basic human right to freedom, equality and adequate living conditions in an environment that allows an individual to live in dignity and wellbeing is mentioned for the first time. Although the right to a healthy environment is not mentioned in the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, it is still given importance through the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights, which is responsible for considering violations of the said Convention. The protection of that right is linked to other rights guaranteed by the Convention, such as, for example, the right to life, right to private and family life, etc. The aim of the research in this paper is to indicate the importance of establishing a guarantee of the right to a healthy environment, as well as the increasing importance of its protection as a prerequisite for the enjoyment of some other basic human rights. The paper uses the method of content analysis. In addition to the analysis of the Draft Protocol to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, we also analyze the content of the verdicts of the European Court of Human Rights.

The paper aims to shed light on the interpretation of mercy killing, i.e., euthanasia, in European Court of Human Rights cases. This controversial phenomenon has a specific legal status. More specifically, due to the complexity of euthanasia, it is impossible to create universally accepted international standards. On the other hand, modern society creates a need to expand the legal boundaries regarding bioethical issues related to the compassionate end-of-life care. The European Court of Human Rights is a unique international organization that interprets universal legal documents, especially the European Convention on Human Rights, in the context of euthanasia. Bearing this in mind, it is important to collect and analyze the information resulting from the specific decision-making process of the European Court of Human Rights. The Court's past and future similar cases will certainly affect the future legal status of euthanasia both internationally and at the level of member states.

This paper explores the practice of pushback operations in the Mediterranean Sea in the last decade, observing it both through the prism of states’ security interests and through their obligations under human rights law. Analysis of the content of some of the basic human rights – in particular the right to life, the prohibition of refoulement and the prohibition of collective expulsions – and their applicability in the context of pushback operations reveals that it is virtually impossible to reconcile pushbacks as a means of safeguarding states’ borders and states’ human rights obligations. It seems that the Mediterranean states and the European Union have come full circle – from the Italian pushback programme in 2009, through the condemnation of the practice by the European Court of Human Rights in the landmark decision of Hirsi Jamaa v. Italy and the subsequent replacement of the practice of pushbacks with the practice of pullbacks, to renewed systemic hot returns. A viable solution at the European Union level needs to be found or otherwise the states which are on the front line of migratory flows will continue to prioritise their own security interests over their human rights obligations.

The author critically analyses the decision of the Human Rights Committee (HRC) in Daniel Billy et al. v. Australia and argues that this decision leaves several gaps in its interpretation and application of 'right to life' and rights of children in a climate change case. This is the second decision in which the HRC holds that climate change, sea-level rise, coastal erosion etc. is likely to negatively impact right to life of people residing in affected coastal regions in the next 10–15 years, preventing the HRC to hold that climate change or sea-level rise is an 'imminent' or 'foreseeable' threat to the right to life of people. For the rights of children, he HRC rules that right to culture was impaired, specifically because the islanders ability to disseminate their culture to future generations was impaired. While this rationale was used to hold 'right to culture' violations, this rationale was not applied in the context of 'rights of children'. The HRC decision overall does not take the inter-dependability of human rights into consideration, while holding that one right is violated and other is not. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista Catalana de Dret Públic is the property of Revista Catalana de Dret Public and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Marmara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Hukuk Araştırmaları Dergisi is the property of Marmara University and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Revista CES Derecho is the property of Universidad CES and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Focusing on two topics, the right to life and the right to property, this study highlights the use of the principle-method of cross-disciplinarity in classes administered at the Law Faculty. This principle, according to Pope Francis, implies "situating and stimulating all disciplines against the backdrop of the Light and Life offered by the Wisdom streaming from God's Revelation". [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper aims to shed light on the interpretation of mercy killing, i.e., euthanasia, in European Court of Human Rights cases. This controversial phenomenon has a specific legal status. More specifically, due to the complexity of euthanasia, it is impossible to create universally accepted international standards. On the other hand, modern society creates a need to expand the legal boundaries regarding bioethical issues related to the compassionate endof- life care. The European Court of Human Rights is a unique international organization that interprets universal legal documents, especially the European Convention on Human Rights, in the context of euthanasia. Bearing this in mind, it is important to collect and analyze the information resulting from the specific decision-making process of the European Court of Human Rights. The Court's past and future similar cases will certainly affect the future legal status of euthanasia both internationally and at the level of member states. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]