Um die anderen Arten von Veröffentlichungen zu diesem Thema anzuzeigen, folgen Sie diesem Link: The right to liberty.
Zeitschriftenartikel zum Thema „The right to liberty“
Geben Sie eine Quelle nach APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard und anderen Zitierweisen an
Machen Sie sich mit Top-50 Zeitschriftenartikel für die Forschung zum Thema "The right to liberty" bekannt.
Neben jedem Werk im Literaturverzeichnis ist die Option "Zur Bibliographie hinzufügen" verfügbar. Nutzen Sie sie, wird Ihre bibliographische Angabe des gewählten Werkes nach der nötigen Zitierweise (APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver usw.) automatisch gestaltet.
Sie können auch den vollen Text der wissenschaftlichen Publikation im PDF-Format herunterladen und eine Online-Annotation der Arbeit lesen, wenn die relevanten Parameter in den Metadaten verfügbar sind.
Sehen Sie die Zeitschriftenartikel für verschiedene Spezialgebieten durch und erstellen Sie Ihre Bibliographie auf korrekte Weise.
1
Wells, Mark, Scott Simmons und Diana Klim. „LIBERTY FOR CORVIDS“. Public Affairs Quarterly 31, Nr. 3 (01.07.2017): 231–54. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/44732794.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Abstract We argue that at least some corvids morally ought to be granted a right to bodily liberty in the US legal system and relevantly similar systems. This right would grant immunity to frivolous captivity and extermination. Implementing this right will require new legislation or the expansion of existing legislation including the elimination of various "pest" clauses. This paper proceeds in three parts. First, we survey accounts of the moral grounds of legal rights. Second, to establish an overlapping consensus supporting corvid bodily liberty rights, we survey the empirical literature on corvid cognition. Third, we illustrate what a corvid right to bodily liberty might look like, by looking to recent developments in animal law, as well as previous advocacy on behalf of primates and cetaceans.
2
Kates, Carol A. „Reproductive Liberty and Overpopulation“. Environmental Values 13, Nr. 1 (Februar 2004): 51–79. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/096327190401300104.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Despite substantial evidence pointing to a looming Malthusian catastrophe, governmental measures to reduce population have been opposed both by religious conservatives and by many liberals, especially liberal feminists. Liberal critics have claimed that ‘utilitarian’ population policies violate a ‘fundamental right of reproductive liberty’. This essay argues that reproductive liberty should not be considered a fundamental human right, or certainly not an indefeasible right. It should, instead, be strictly regulated by a global agreement designed to reduce population to a sustainable level. Three major points are discussed: 1) the current state of the overpopulation problem; 2) the claim of a fundamental human right of reproductive liberty; 3) an outline of a global agreement to address overpopulation as a ‘tragedy of the commons’.
3
Moore, Michael S. „LIBERTY AND THE CONSTITUTION“. Legal Theory 21, Nr. 3-4 (Dezember 2015): 156–241. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1352325216000057.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
ABSTRACTThe article uses the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in the same-sex marriage caseObergefell v. Hodgesas the springboard for a general enquiry into the nature and existence of a constitutional right to liberty under the American Constitution. The discussion is divided into two main parts. The first examines the meaning and the justifiability of there being a moral right to liberty as a matter of political philosophy. Two such rights are distinguished and defended: first, a right not to be coerced by the state when the state is motivated by improper reasons (prominent among which are paternalistic reasons); and second, a right not to be coerced by the state when there are insufficient justifying reasons for the state to do so, irrespective of how such state coercion may be motivated. Neither right is regarded as “absolute,” and so it is morally permissible for the state to override such rights in certain circumstances. The second part of the article examines the distinct and additional considerations that must be taken into account when these two moral rights to liberty are fashioned into corresponding legal rights under American constitutional law. Both such rights survive the transformation, but each becomes altered somewhat in its content. This legal transformation includes recognition of the nonabsolute nature of moral rights, such recognition taking the form of some doctrine of “compelling state interests.” The discussion in these two main parts of the article is prefaced with a defense of the article's use of political philosophy to inform constitutional law, a defense motivated by Chief Justice Robert's denunciation of such an approach to constitutional law in his opinion inObergefell.
4
Riley, Jonathan M. „Liberty as a right“. Philosophers' Magazine, Nr. 46 (2009): 46–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/tpm20094641.
Der volle Inhalt der Quelle
5
Lazareva, Daria. „Subject matter, content and structure of the right to freedom and personal inviolability: problem aspects.“ Naukovyy Visnyk Dnipropetrovs'kogo Derzhavnogo Universytetu Vnutrishnikh Sprav 3, Nr. 3 (30.09.2021): 72–79. http://dx.doi.org/10.31733/2078-3566-2021-3-72-79.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
The scientific article draws attention to the subject of the right to liberty and security of person and its place in the science of legal law. The content of this right in terms of its components is also studied. Particular attention is paid to the structure of the right to liberty and security of person, namely: the division into two independent structural elements: the right to liberty and the right to personal integrity. The case law of the European Court of Human Rights is studied through the prism of guarantees of the right to liberty and security of person contained in Art. 5 of the Convention. Freedom and personal inviolability are personal human rights, which in the theory of legal and philosophical thought are defined as natural rights that belong from birth and, according to the generally accepted classification, belong to the first generation of (civil and political) human rights. The right to liberty and security of person is a fundamental right of every person and citizen, inalienable and personal, and belongs to the list of natural rights and is perceived by civil society through the prism of the theory of natural law, which has existed for several centuries. The article forms a certain position on the approach to the study of the right to liberty and security of person, its structural elements, it is important to follow a systematic approach, to consider this right as a set of interrelated elements on the principles of integrity, structure, plurality and equality. «Freedom» and «personal inviolability», which in close cooperation form a single complex. These categories should be considered the subject of the right to personal inviolability in the narrow sense, but the freedom of the individual from unlawful encroachment on property, honor, dignity, from unauthorized interference in private and family life is the subject of the right in the broadest sense.
6
Sobel, Jordan Howard. „Rights to Punish for Libertarians“. Dialogue 34, Nr. 4 (1995): 675–94. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0012217300011057.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Thomas Hurka derives rights to punish from what I will term the Libertarian Rights Principle, which is “that there is really only one natural right, namely the equal right of all persons to the most extensive liberty compatible with a like liberty for other persons, and that all other natural rights are species or instances of the right to liberty.” These rights to punish, he says, (1) extend only to punishing violators of rights, never to “punishing” the innocent; (2) extend only to punishing for violations pursuant to intentions publicly announced prior to these violations; (3) are subject to the “upper limit qualification” (p. 652) that a permissible punishment for the violation of a right cannot be an act that would violate a more important right (i.e., a punishment that would infringe on a liberty more important than the one infringed upon in the violation); and (4) are subject to the “minimum necessary qualification” (p. 653) that a punishment p for violating a right r is not permissible if a punishment p' that would, were it permitted, violate a less important right than would p, would protect r as effectively as would p.
7
De la Garza Camino, Mercedes. „Sobre libertad e igualdad religiosas“. Theoría. Revista del Colegio de Filosofía, Nr. 18 (01.07.2007): 41–50. http://dx.doi.org/10.22201/ffyl.16656415p.2007.18.337.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
The right to religious liberty that every individual has is based on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and can no longer be questioned. Based on this premise, this article deals with religious liberty and equality, presenting in the first place religion as a historical fact, free from any dogma, and in the second place an analysis of human rights and cultural rights, taking the violation of the right to religious liberty in native mayan communities as an example.
8
Абламська, В. В. „Normative Provision of the Right to Liberty and Integrity of the Person in the Light of International and National Legislation“. Bulletin of Kharkiv National University of Internal Affairs 90, Nr. 3 (23.09.2020): 93–101. http://dx.doi.org/10.32631/v.2020.3.10.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
The normative provision of the right to liberty and integrity of the person in the light of international and national legislation has been studied. The provisions of generally recognized international legal acts guaranteeing the right to liberty and integrity of the person have been provided. At the same time, there are also convention regulations, which provide cases of possible restriction of the researched right, and we note that such a right is not absolute in this regard. It has been determined that the norms of the Constitution of Ukraine, which regulate the right to liberty and integrity of the person, comply with international legal acts.
Particular attention has been paid to the analysis of the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, which emphasize the importance of this right, especially in the context of interpreting the requirements of the Art.. 5 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 1950. In this regard, it has been emphasized that any restriction of the right to liberty and integrity of the person must comply with the provisions of paragraph 1 of the Art. 5 of the said Convention and in no case go beyond its limits, i.e. to be consistent with its purposes (objective). In case of the violation of this right, a person can apply for the protection of his violated rights to the European Court of Human Rights.
Taking into account scientific points of view, analysis of the relevant provisions of international and legal acts and national legislation, the author has clarified that the right to liberty and integrity of the person is a natural, inalienable and fundamental right of every human being. In this regard, each Member State, having ratified an international treaty guaranteeing the right to liberty and integrity of the person, is obliged to establish an effective legal mechanism for the protection of such a right in national law.
9
Borisova, Valentina I., Yurii M. Zhornokui und Larysa V. Krasytska. „RESTRICTIONS OF THE RIGHT TO LIBERTY“. Wiadomości Lekarskie 73, Nr. 12 (2020): 2915–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.36740/wlek202012235.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
The aim: To determine the grounds of involuntary admission of a mentally ill person in the context of the possibility to restrict his or her right to liberty. Materials and methods: The authors have studied and analyzed international legal acts, legislation of certain countries, judgments of the European Court of Human Rights, case law on involuntary admission of a mentally ill person by using philosophical, general and special scientific research methods. Conclusions: The imperfection of the legal regulation of relations concerning the involuntary admission of a mentally ill person leads to illegal restriction of the personal right to liberty. It has been proven that involuntary admission and restriction of the freedom of a mentally ill person can be justified, if we take into account the requirement of “therapeutic necessity” for a mentally ill person, the requirement of protecting the rights of others and guaranteeing their safety, the requirement of ensuring the best interests of a mentally ill person.
10
Panichas, George E. „THE BASIC RIGHT TO LIBERTY“. Journal of Social Philosophy 21, Nr. 1 (März 1990): 55–76. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9833.1990.tb00266.x.
Der volle Inhalt der Quelle
11
Ienca, Marcello. „The Right to Cognitive Liberty“. Scientific American 317, Nr. 2 (16.07.2017): 10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/scientificamerican0817-10.
Der volle Inhalt der Quelle
12
Neumann, Tom. „Religious Liberty: An Inalienable Right“. Journal of Law and Religion 8, Nr. 1/2 (1990): 241. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1051277.
Der volle Inhalt der Quelle
13
Lazareva, Daria. „Fundamental legal acts of international importance on the observance of the right to liberty and security of person: a retrospective analysis“. Naukovyy Visnyk Dnipropetrovs'kogo Derzhavnogo Universytetu Vnutrishnikh Sprav 2, Nr. 2 (30.06.2021): 25–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.31733/2078-3566-2021-2-25-31.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
The article examines the content of the right to liberty and security of person in fundamental international regulations in retrospect. In particular, attention was paid to the disclosure of the essence of the rules that determine certain principles of respect for the right to liberty and security of person, which are the violation of this right, specific definition of grounds and terms of imprisonment or restriction of liberty on legal grounds. The scientific article emphasizes the growing number of appeals to the European Court of Human Rights, which indicates the underdeveloped structures of human rights protection, both at the international and national levels. Respect for any human and civil right, regardless of its place in the classification system and importance for the standard of living of a particular individual is the main task and responsibility of both the world community and the individual state. Today, the number of states in the world that define the term "legal" in the basic national legislation is increasing, but in order for this feature to take effect for a particular political-territorial entity, the protection and protection of human rights must be effective and provided by a number of mechanisms. In particular, this applies to recourse to international law, which is the standard for national regulations, because on its basis are constructed codified laws and other bylaws. A thorough analysis of fundamental legal acts of international importance should be conducted at least in order to emphasize their importance for a number of national laws and the need to comply with mandatory norms on human rights and freedoms (jus cogens). The present study analyzes the main legal acts, which enshrine the right to liberty and security of person, identify grounds for deprivation or restriction of liberty on legal grounds and reveal the concept of the right to liberty and security of person as fundamental.
14
Dougin, AM. „Legal protection in psychiatry. The jurisprudence of the organs of the European convention of human rights“. European Psychiatry 13, S3 (1998): 101s—106s. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0924-9338(98)80040-0.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
SummaryThe European Convention of Human Rights recognises a certain number of rights and freedoms for persons within States' jurisdiction. For those confined in psychiatric hospitals, this legal protection concerns first of all the lawfulness of deprivation of liberty, which must conform to the conditions laid down by the Convention as interpreted by the case-law of the Convention organs (the Commission and Court of Human Rights). The Convention also guarantees to person deprived of their liberty further rights: the right to information, the right to appear before a court, the right to compensation and also the right to the respect of privacy and correspondence.
15
Lazareva, D. „Problems of preserving the right to freedom and personal integrity during criminal proceedings“. Analytical and Comparative Jurisprudence, Nr. 3 (28.09.2022): 242–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.24144/2788-6018.2022.03.44.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
The scientific article highlights the issue of observance of the right to liberty and security of person in criminal proceedings, given the difficulties in implementing the legal basis for ensuring this right by authorized officials. The procedural actions of observance of this right and their realization within the framework of the criminal process and the corresponding procedures provided by the current Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine are comprehensively analyzed. Empirical analysis of all available materials by foreign and Ukrainian authors allows us to form realistic assessments of respect for the right to liberty and security of person. Methods of analysis, synthesis, deduction, ascent from the abstract to the concrete were used to carry out qualitative research. Restrictions on certain rights and freedoms, including the right to liberty and security of person, necessitate their observance in criminal proceedings. Recently, the legal community in this regard draws attention to the case law of the European Court of Human Rights, which is based on the provisions of the Convention, which in turn gives grounds to perceive this practice as an interpretation of standards of human rights and freedoms. The mechanisms of implementation of special procedures, such as: initiation of proceedings by the detainee regarding the validity of the detainee, have been studied. Forms of ensuring the right to liberty and security of person are derived. The right to liberty and security of person in the pre-trial investigation is ensured not only by the prosecution by virtue of the performance of their duties, but also by the defense, which is involved in a number of cases and is mostly involved by detainees, suspects interests during criminal proceedings. Thus, the legislator in Art. 206 of the CPC of Ukraine represents the presence of a lawyer as one of the forms of ensuring the right to liberty and security of person, which we have considered in a scientific article
16
McWhirter, Rebekah. „The Right to Liberty in a Pandemic“. University of Queensland Law Journal 40, Nr. 2 (29.07.2021): 159–79. http://dx.doi.org/10.38127/uqlj.v40i2.5721.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
The European Convention on Human Rights has given rise to the most extensive and influential case law of any human rights jurisdiction, and the inclusion of an express infectious diseases exception to the right to liberty suggests that its jurisprudence is likely to provide the best available guidance to states on the circumstances in which such measures may be justifiable and lawful. However, this article argues that the principles developed to date are limited in their applicability to the current crisis, and are insufficient for determining the appropriate balance between public health and the right to liberty when seeking to control the spread of a large-scale, highly infectious disease.
17
Pelekh, Zoriana. „REGULATORY LEGAL PRINCIPLES FOR THE REALIZATION OF PUBLIC RIGHT TO LIBERTY AND INTEGRITY OF THE PERSON“. Administrative law and process 32, Nr. 1 (2021): 70–86. http://dx.doi.org/10.17721/2227-796x.2021.1.06.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Purpose. The purpose of the article is to determine regulatory legal principles for the realization of public right to liberty and integrity of the person beyond the sphere of criminal proceedings (from administrative law standpoint). Methods. The research methodology consists of general and special methods of scientific cognition, including system, comparative and legal, grouping, structural and logical, method of analysis, synthesis, deduction, induction and others that were used while studying the provisions of scientific papers, regulatory legal acts, while forming the directions of the realization of the right to liberty and integrity of the person, system of regulatory legal documents and while making author’s conclusions, propositions and recommendations. Results. The author has clarified the state of scientific developments in the first section of the article in regard to regulatory legal guaranteeing for the realization of the right to liberty and integrity of the person, has characterized regulatory legal acts of general nature as a source of regulatory legal regulation in this area and has defined their specific characteristics. The author has studied special regulatory legal acts in the second section of the article. The specified acts reveal the provisions of regulatory legal documents of general nature concerning the realization of the right to liberty and integrity of the person. Certain directions for the realization of the right to liberty and integrity of the person have been formulated. The author has emphasized the expediency of adopting regulatory legal act that regulates the mechanism for the realization of the right to liberty and integrity of the person and will include the provision on the concept and content of this right, directions of its realization, entities, instruments and procedures of guaranteeing, control over the compliance of this right and legislation in this area, liability for the violation, etc. The author has emphasized the necessity for further scientific research of this issue. A number of international regulatory legal acts have been presented in the third section. Those acts form the legal basis of the directions for the realization of the right to liberty and integrity of the person. The author has provided own vision on the correlation of the provisions of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms with the Civil Code of Ukraine and applied approaches to regulatory legal regulation of the right to liberty and integrity of the person. Conclusions. The author has concluded that the system of regulatory legal acts constitute regulatory legal principles for the realization of the right to liberty and integrity of the person. The level of regulatory legal guaranteeing for the realization of the right to liberty and integrity of the person has been commented. The author has outlined the directions and perspectives of scientific research concerning the realization of the right to liberty and integrity of the person.
18
Tarnu, Lucian Ioan. „Liberty Of Conscience, Natural Right And Essence Of Liberty Of Thinking“. International conference KNOWLEDGE-BASED ORGANIZATION 21, Nr. 2 (01.06.2015): 520–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/kbo-2015-0089.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Abstract Liberty of thinking is an absolute characteristic of human rights manifested in our society and it has both an individual dimension - meaning having opinions and beliefs - and a social and political dimension - if we think at their development. Liberty of thinking, conscience and religion represent some of the basic components of a democratic society. This also occurs as the most important elements of the identity of a nation and it contributes significantly to its proper development. Human conscience can not and should not be directed by administrative means, but it should always be the result of its liberty of thinking and revealing thoughts. As it is regulated at the constitutional level, liberty of conscience has a complex content. It is one of the oldest citizen liberties, one of tradition, which is known under either its proper name or various aspects, such as liberty of speech, liberty of association and liberty of press.
19
Kowalczyk, Ks Stanisław. „Etyka – zagrożenie wolności nauki?“ Annales. Etyka w Życiu Gospodarczym 13, Nr. 2 (15.05.2010): 19–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.18778/1899-2226.13.2.02.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Paper has three parts. Te first part gives the reasons for need of liberty external-social of science guaranteed by law. Speaks about it Declaration of human rights in 1948 and social teaching of Church – including documents of Vaticanum II and Jean Paul II, which indicate of subjectivity and dignity of man as person. The second part of this paper based on personalism demonstrates that science can harmoniously develop only in the climate of internal-moral freedom of scientist. The purpose of science is revelation of truth, but effects of scientific investigations – in particular of biological-medical sciences – influence on the life of human individuals and societies. Conscious and free activity of man has ethical character, therefore liberty of science ought to be responsible liberty and then to be subordinated the ethical criterions. Science cannot ignore values and rules moral. The third part of paper stated that good of human person and common good of society demand juridical limitations of scientific inquiries’ liberty. Liberty is man’s right but also its obligation to respect of human person’s fundamental rights – including right to life, integrality and dignity. Therefore internal-ethical and external-juridical limitations are necessary of scientist’s liberty.
20
Bukhta, Yu. „Restrictions on the rights to liberty and security of person in the conditions of COVID -19“. Uzhhorod National University Herald. Series: Law, Nr. 68 (24.03.2022): 35–40. http://dx.doi.org/10.24144/2307-3322.2021.68.6.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
The article provides a comprehensive analysis of the theoretical provisions and legal basis for establishing restrictions on the rights to liberty and security of person in terms of preventing the spread of acute respiratory disease COVID-19 caused by the coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 in Ukraine.The study argues that the implementation of human rights restrictions in the context of preventing the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic should be based on criteria of quality of law, justification of purpose and public necessity.Based on the analysis of certain provisions of the current legislation, which establish restrictions on human rights during a pandemic, it was found that most often in a pandemic are a restriction of the right to respect for private life; the right to liberty and the right to security of person; the right to freedom of movement; the right to freedom of peaceful assembly; the right to freedom of religion; the right to access medical care and some others.The article analyzes the various restrictions on human rights to liberty and security of person in the context of the spread of the disease. Among them, considerable attention is paid to the study of the legality of compulsory hospitalization of patients to observers, the use of the service “Action. Home” in the context of interference in the privacy of a person and restricts his personal rights and freedoms; appropriate measures to prevent the spread of acute respiratory disease COVID-19 caused by SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus in pre-trial detention facilities and penitentiary institutions.It is proved that today the legislation of Ukraine does not develop a unified approach to the establishment and regulation of quarantine restrictions in the field of human rights. There are many cases of contradictions between the current legislation in this area and acts designed to establish certain restrictions on the exercise of their rights to liberty and security of person.
21
Enonchong, Laura-Stella. „Applying International Standards in Enforcing the Right to Personal Liberty in Cameroon: Challenges and Prospects“. Journal of African Law 60, Nr. 3 (Oktober 2016): 389–417. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0021855316000140.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
AbstractThis article examines the problematic enforcement of the right to personal liberty in Cameroon. It offers a critical review of that right by assessing its compatibility with international standards endorsed by article 9 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and article 6 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights. It finds that, although a small number of provisions are not sufficiently robust to protect that right adequately, for the most part the Cameroonian provisions reflect international standards. In the light of that assessment, the article seeks to identify the impediments to the effective enforcement of the right and to recommend the most effective and feasible mechanisms for developing a robust enforcement framework for the protection and promotion of the right to personal liberty in Cameroon.
22
Tonetto, Milene Consenso. „The human right to liberty and Brazilian abortion practices“. Revista Bioética 26, Nr. 1 (Januar 2018): 58–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1983-80422018261226.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Abstract The aim of this paper is to justify women’s right to abortion in the first trimester of pregnancy. Considering human rights as the protection of our normative agency or personhood, this paper will argue that human rights cannot be extended to human embryos and foetuses. In the first trimester of pregnancy, the moral status of the foetus is not sufficient to overcome the woman’s right to the freedom to control her own body. There may be, however, moral considerations other than human rights that could restrict abortions after the first trimester of pregnancy. In order to protect human personhood and the most fundamentally accepted human rights – the rights to freedom, life, health and security of the body – countries like Brazil should decriminalize abortion in the first trimester of pregnancy and provide access to safe abortions through the public health care system.
23
Banduła, Paweł. „The Prisoner’s Right to Freedom of Conscience and Religion in the European System of Human Rights Protection“. Biuletyn Stowarzyszenia Absolwentów i Przyjaciół Wydziału Prawa Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego 14, Nr. 2 (03.01.2023): 7–16. http://dx.doi.org/10.32084/sawp.2019.14.2-1.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
The article aims to present the prisoner’s right to the freedom of conscience and religion in the European system of human rights. A detainee is a subject of special human rights because he or she is deprived of the right to liberty. Public authorities are obliged to strictly observe the law related to the sphere of convicts and their views. The right of people deprived of liberty is to exercise their free thought, conscience and religion. No one should be subjected to coercion which would limit their freedom of religion, except as stipulated by the legislator. Public authorities are obliged to provide prisoners with the opportunity to participate in religious events, to contact a priest, to manifest religious beliefs and to be administered medical care. Discipline and security issues may justify the imposition of restrictions of liberty on the grounds of security and public order. Taking advantage of religious freedom must not violate the principles of tolerance or disrupt the established order in prison.
24
Jameel, Anas, Waseem Ahmed und Altamash Imam. „Exploring the Dimensions of Religious Freedom: A Global and Comparative Analysis“. Sprin Journal of Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences 3, Nr. 9 (07.10.2024): 22–29. http://dx.doi.org/10.55559/sjahss.v3i9.363.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Religion constitutes a fundamental aspect of the cultural and spiritual lives of individuals globally, encompassing an array of traditions, rituals, and practices. Within the context of liberal democracy's evolution, religion emerges as a critical element of political liberty and personal conscience. On an international scale, the right to religious freedom has been established as a core human right, essential for the sustenance of democratic governance. Despite its recognition, the right to religious liberty remains a highly contentious issue. Even in democracies that provide constitutional protections for religious freedom, debates persist regarding the extensive interpretation and implementation of this right, particularly concerning the rights of religious minorities within these nations. This study explores the concept of religious freedom as a globally recognized right, examining its representation and interpretation across various international and regional legal frameworks. Through this analysis, the paper endeavors to provide a comprehensive overview of religious freedom on both a global and regional scale. Furthermore, it delves into the state of religious freedom in various political systems, ranging from democracies such as United States to theocracies and monarchies like the United Kingdom and countries characterized by a strict demarcation between religion and state affairs, exemplified by France's secularist approach.
25
Klissenbauer, Irene. „Equal Liberty – Questioning the Right to Freedom of Religion?“ Interdisciplinary Journal for Religion and Transformation in Contemporary Society 7, Nr. 1 (08.07.2021): 283–301. http://dx.doi.org/10.30965/23642807-bja10012.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Abstract This paper tackles the question of how to handle the phenomenon of “religion” by widely secularized judicial systems by analyzing the “Equal Liberty”-concept from legal scholars Eisgruber and Sager. While they assume that everything worth protecting is already covered by existing anti-discrimination laws, freedom of expression and association, and judge the right to religious freedom as itself discriminatory, this paper considers how this right can be part of an emancipatory human rights approach, which helps us think beyond an antagonistic relationship between religious freedom and other human rights.
26
Ahdar, Rex Tauati. „The Vulnerability of Religious Liberty in Liberal States“. Religion & Human Rights 4, Nr. 2-3 (2009): 177–95. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/187103109x12459002443574.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
AbstractReligious liberty enjoys a large measure of protection in liberal democratic states. This historically hard-won right will nevertheless always remain somewhat vulnerable. This article examines the relationship between liberalism and religionists who challenge key liberal tenets. The limits of liberal tolerance are seen when the state confronts those devout believers who behave or speak in the public domain in a manner that secular liberals perceive to be intolerant or bigoted. The courts and legislatures cannot be relied upon to protect the exercise of religion in situations where fundamental liberal premises are at stake.
27
Sharma, Dr Bhavana. „Right to Shelter an Expanded form of Right to Life and Personal Liberty: An Analysis“. International Journal of Psychosocial Rehabilitation 23, Nr. 4 (20.12.2019): 1467–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.37200/ijpr/v23i4/pr190471.
Der volle Inhalt der Quelle
28
Corte-Real de Araújo, Alexandre Gentil. „Sacred Liberty The Bright In Constitution Of The Democratic Republic Of Timor-Leste (2024)“. American Journal of Medical and Clinical Research & Reviews 03, Nr. 08 (2024): 01–11. http://dx.doi.org/10.58372/2835-6276.1197.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Introduction: Sacred liberty consists of autonomy to profess their faith, liberty of integrity and adoration period, and is considered a fundamental correct of people, which is positive in the important rule of state law. Spiritual autonomy is a fundamental human right preserved in the United Nations of Human Rights in the application of the world (1948; and is optimistic in Timor-Leste important law cited by (Corte Real AG & Tilman CB., 2024). Research Objectives: The inspect the legal assumptions of existing sacred autonomy and their legal effects on spiritual practice and pleasure of sacred rights by religious peoples and protection of spiritual admissions in Timor-Leste, to scrutinize the vital susticulture of fundamental constitutional rights on sacred freedom, identify gaps, challenges and propose legislative-alternative solutions to the protection of the rights of sacred minorities to liberty as a fundamental right that is exercised through spiritual concessions.
29
Perera, Ramindu. „Beyond the Minimalist Critique: An Assessment of the Right to Education in International Human Rights Law“. Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights 39, Nr. 4 (06.11.2021): 268–90. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/09240519211057240.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
The minimalist critique of human rights advanced by legal historian Samuel Moyn argues that human rights are ineffective in addressing material inequality because, rather than striving for equality, they focus on ensuring sufficient protection levels. This article analyses the right to education model which international human rights bodies have expanded to demonstrate the overstretched nature of the minimalist critique. By examining how the right to education provisions of international human rights treaties are interpreted by various United Nations human rights mechanisms, the article argues that the international human rights system has advanced a model of right to education that reaches beyond the notion of sufficiency. The works of these bodies are analysed in light of the privatisation of education. In defining the connection between the equality and liberty dimensions of the right to education, international human rights bodies have prioratised ensuring equal opportunities over the liberty to private education. The aim of the right to education is not merely to provide basic literacy to the poor but also to assure equal educational opportunities to all.
30
McSorley, Amanda. „Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards“. InnovAiT: Education and inspiration for general practice 13, Nr. 1 (28.11.2019): 53–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1755738019885398.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Article 5 of the Human Rights Act, 1998 states that: ‘Everyone has the right to liberty and security of person. No-one shall be deprived of his or her liberty unless in accordance with a procedure prescribed in law.’ However, there are occasions when it is necessary and appropriate to deprive a person of their liberty in order to keep them safe from harm. Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards are the legal framework introduced in 2009 to ensure that this occurs only when absolutely necessary and no alternative, less restrictive measures can be utilised to ensure safe care. This article outlines the key points relating to DOLS, considering how they relate to GPs during their training and careers.
31
Linton, Paul Benjamin. „Roe v. Wade and the History of Abortion Regulation“. American Journal of Law & Medicine 15, Nr. 2-3 (1989): 227–33. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0098858800012223.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
In Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court held that “[the] right of privacy … founded in the Fourteenth Amendment's concept of personal liberty … is broad enough to encompass a woman's decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy.” The Court acknowledged that “[t]he Constitution does not explicitly mention any right of privacy.” Nevertheless, the Court held that a “right of personal privacy, or a guarantee of certain areas or zones of privacy, does exist under the Constitution.” However, “only personal rights that can be deemed ‘fundamental’ or ‘implicit in the concept of ordered liberty,’ … are included in this guarantee of personal privacy.”
32
Koch, Ida Elisabeth. „Social Rights as Components in the Civil Right to Personal Liberty: Another Step Forward in the Integrated Human Rights Approach?“ Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights 20, Nr. 1 (März 2002): 29–51. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/016934410202000103.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
The article seeks to get closer to an understanding of the legal implications of the notion of the indivisibility of human rights as distinct from the philosophical implications. While the first part of the article (Sections I-IV) deals with the notion of indivisibility in a general way by discussing possible interpretations and legal principles for pursuing an integrated human rights approach, the second part of the article (Sections V-VIII) deals with indivisibility in the concrete context of deprivation of liberty for medical or social reasons. Despite increased awareness of the possibilities of an integrated human rights approach, the European Court of Human Rights has in this particular context been reluctant to accept a blurred dividing line between social and civil rights. By emphasising the close connection between the existence of treatment and the duration of the confinement, the article, however, argues that fulfilment of the civil right to personal liberty is dependent on recognition of the interdependence between social rights and civil rights. Even though social and civil rights have been separated into two conventions proportionality and teleological considerations lead to the conclusion that the (social) right to treatment ought to be considered an integrated component of the (civil) right to personal liberty.
33
Pelekh, Z. „PERIODIZATION OF THE FORMATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE RIGHT TO LIBERTY AND PERSONAL INVIOLABILITY: SUBSTANTIATION OF SCIENTIFIC APPROACH“. Bulletin of Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv. Legal Studie, Nr. 121 (2022): 58–63. http://dx.doi.org/10.17721/1728-2195/2022/2.121-10.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
The purpose of the article is to substantiate the scientific approach regarding periodization of the formation and development of the right to liberty and personal inviolability. To achieve the purpose of the article, the author used general and special methods of scientific cognition including historical and legal, comparative and legal analyses, systematization, classification, deduction, induction, synthesis, etc. The author of the article has presented the main historical facts, which are associated with the formation and development of the right to liberty and personal inviolability in the legal literature. The analysis of scientific sources assisted to formulate the main scientific approaches used by scholars in determining the periodization of the development of the right to liberty and personal inviolability. The expediency of allocating certain historical periods of the development of this right has been clarified. The author has formulated the individual point of view on the periodization of the formation and development of the right to liberty and personal inviolability. In the conclusions four stages of the formation and development of the right to liberty and personal inviolability were singled out, namely: 1) the origin of the right to liberty and personal inviolability in the form of liberties for certain segments of the population, which lasted in ancient times, the Middle Ages and till the late ХVIII century; 2) the transformation of liberties for certain segments of the population into a fundamental, inalienable and natural human right, which endowed all people without any exception. This stage lasted from the late ХVIII century, when the process of recognition and constitutional consolidation of the right to liberty and personal inviolability for all citizens in France was launched, to the late 30s of the XX century, when that tendency became characteristic for Ukraine and the USSR; 3) the development of legal regulation of the right to liberty and personal inviolability in national regulatory legal acts (mainly criminal, criminal and procedural) and international legal documents, which lasted from the late 1930s up to 1991; 4) the improvement of legal guaranteeing of the right to liberty and personal inviolability, that can be characterized as modern and has been lasting since Ukraine's independence.
34
Kapur, Neera Badhwar. „Autonomy, Liberty, and Utility“. Dialogue 28, Nr. 3 (1989): 487–98. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0012217300015997.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Lawrence Haworth's book, Autonomy, discusses “Autonomy as a Psychological Idea”, and “Autonomy as a Normative Idea”. Part 1 discusses autonomy in relation to rationality, agency, and responsibility, defends it against Skinnerian sceptics, and outlines a theory of autonomous decision-making and the autonomous task environment. Haworth's conception of autonomy integrates and builds on the concepts of S. I. Benn, G. Dworkin, H. Frankfurt, and R. W. White. Part 2 centres on social/political theory, and not, despite the book's subtitle, on ethics as such. Haworth argues that only autonomy, and not liberty or happiness, is an intrinsic (non-moral) value, and fundamental right. His “autonomist” theory of liberty rights, a form of revisionary liberalism derived from the later idealists, is opposed to the classical liberal/libertarian theory. The arguments prompt a re-examination of the role of autonomy in the arguments for liberty (and happiness), but do not, in my view, make a persuasive case for “autonomism” against classical liberalism (hereafter liberalism). The book is chiefly noteworthy for its success in covering many important topics connected with autonomy, in an impressively short space, and in an always clear and often very insightful way.
35
Syroyid, Tetyana. „International legal standards for ensuring the right of minors deprived of liberty to health“. Naukovyy Visnyk Dnipropetrovs'kogo Derzhavnogo Universytetu Vnutrishnikh Sprav 3, Nr. 3 (30.09.2020): 32–37. http://dx.doi.org/10.31733/2078-3566-2020-3-32-37.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
The article analyzes the general and special international legal acts in the field of regulation of the right to the highest standard of living (right to health) of minors deprived of liberty, in particular: Declaration of the Rights of the Child, 1924, United Nations Declaration of the Rights of the Child, 1959, International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 1966, Convention on the Rights of the Child, 1989, United Nations Minimum Standard Rules on the Administration of Juvenile Justice (Beijing Rules), 1985, United Nations Guidelines for the Prevention of Juvenile Delinquency (The Riyadh Guidelines), 1990, UN General Assembly special resolutions on the protection of the rights of the child, including children deprived of their liberty, etc. The emphasis is placed on key problematic aspects of the protection of the right to health of minors deprived of their liberty, in particular: the use of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment; harm to the mental and physical health of children in all situations of imprisonment; the spread of sexually transmitted infections. The article focuses on the special needs of children with disabilities. Given the existing problems of drug use, which contribute to the spread of infectious diseases among the categories of prisoners, cause significant harm to the health of minors, attention is focused on the characteristics of special rules in this area. Given the fact that the emergence and spread of the COVID-19 pandemic has become a modern threat and a challenge to health of population in general, including persons deprived of their liberty, attention is paid to international acts, which set out recommendations to protect this category of persons during the pandemic. Relevant conclusions and recommendations have been made to improve the status of minors deprived of their liberty.
36
Callaghan, Harriet, und Amy Illsley. „Everything you need to know about deprivation of liberty safeguards“. British Journal of Hospital Medicine 81, Nr. 6 (02.06.2020): 1–6. http://dx.doi.org/10.12968/hmed.2020.0071.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Established as an amendment to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 , the deprivation of liberty safeguards were introduced to ensure that anyone who lacks capacity to consent to their care, and was being deprived of their liberty, has rights equivalent to those held under the Mental Health Act 1983 . These rights include someone to oversee any deprivation of liberty, the right of appeal and the guarantee of review of appeal in a timely manner. This article outlines how deprivation of liberty safeguards work, how a deprivation of liberty safeguards is applied for and obtained, what to discuss with the next of kin, and some special circumstances to consider. It also provides information about the criteria by which deprivation of liberty safeguards applications are assessed and the process by which this is done. This provides an overview for junior doctors working in secondary care, to increase their knowledge and confidence when patients require a deprivation of liberty safeguards application.
37
MANCANO, Leandro. „The Right to Liberty in European Union Law and Mutual Recognition in Criminal Matters“. Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies 18 (21.09.2016): 215–38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cel.2016.8.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
AbstractThis article analyses the interaction between the application of mutual recognition in criminal matters and the right to liberty. The main argument is that the current content of the right to liberty in EU law is unsuitable for mutual recognition procedures. As for the structure of this article, firstly, the main features of mutual recognition as a method of inter-state cooperation in criminal matters are outlined. Secondly, the approach of the European Union (especially the Court of Justice) to the right to liberty is clarified. Thirdly, four mutual recognition instruments are analysed in light of the right to liberty: namely, the Framework Decisions on the European Arrest Warrant; the Transfer of Prisoners; the Probation Measures; and the European Supervision Order (ESO). The assessment confirms that the higher level of automaticity in judicial cooperation introduced by mutual recognition requires a rethink of the existing understanding of the right to liberty in EU law.
38
Guebert, Karl. „Towards a Post-Social Right to Life, Liberty and Security of the Person Through Markets? Conceptions of Citizenship and the Implications for Health Law as Governance“. Social & Legal Studies 29, Nr. 5 (23.12.2019): 609–28. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0964663919894734.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
In the context of increased expectations of healthcare services and fiscal pressures, rights claims constitute a force pushing for privatization and thus threaten Canada’s single-tier public system. This article introduces the concept of a ‘post-social right’ to understand the current legal effort to enforce a right to healthcare derivative of section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Commonly considered as a ‘negative’ right, I suggest that the right also has positive capacity. Rather than simply protecting against unjust state intervention, section 7 claims valorize a particular mode of sustaining life, liberty and security of the person according to neo-liberal principles. A right to markets in healthcare aligns health law with the logic of prudentialism as a technology of governance. As the enforceability of the right expands and strengthens, health law as governance operates to normalize market solutions to health matters. It follows that a form of two-tier citizenship arises, dividing ‘activated’ citizens from the ‘inactive’.
39
Johansen, Julia Nordvang. „Towards a More Restrictive Interpretation of the Right to Liberty in Article 5(1) ECHR?“ Zeitschrift für europarechtliche Studien 25, Nr. 1 (2022): 89–110. http://dx.doi.org/10.5771/1435-439x-2022-1-89.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
The contribution concerns the interpretation by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) of the right to liberty in Article 5 (1) of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). It argues that the Court has interpreted the right to liberty restrictively by way of public security grounds, with the result that more room is given to interference by state authorities at the expense of individual protection, compared to earlier interpretations. This assertion is supported by the analyses of four Grand Chamber cases the author believes stands for a restrictive interpretation of Article 5 (1), either through a narrow interpretation of its scope, or a wide interpretation of its exceptions. The use of present-day conditions in the Court’s reasoning is examined to identify their role in the development towards a restrictive interpretation of the right to liberty, and it is argued that the restrictive approach is a variation of the method of ‘evolutive interpretation’. On the basis of the analyses, it is finally argued that the list of permissible detention grounds in Article 5 (1) is no longer exhaustive.
40
Andrew, Edward. „Inalienable Right, Alienable Property and Freedom of Choice: Locke, Nozick and Marx on the Alienability of Labour“. Canadian Journal of Political Science 18, Nr. 3 (September 1985): 529–50. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0008423900032443.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
AbstractThis article attempts to illuminate a contradiction at the heart of the notion of natural rights. Natural rights are commonly thought to be both inalienable and the property of individuals. As the right or the law is privatized as my rights, her rights, our rights or their rights, rights come to be viewed as personal properties. A distinction is made between personal possession and private property (which entails the title to alienate what is owned) in order to speak significantly of our possession of inalienable rights. For Locke, we possess an inalienable right to life and liberty precisely because we do not own our lives and liberties. Moreover, we can alienate our person, or our ability to labour, precisely because it is our private property. For Nozick, rights are individual properties. Thus, for Nozick as distinct from Marx, one has the right to sell anything (one's life, liberty, labour or soul) at the market price.
41
Muñoz, Vincent Phillip. „George Washington on Religious Liberty“. Review of Politics 65, Nr. 1 (2003): 11–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0034670500036512.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Despite the Supreme Court's repeated invocations of America's Founding Fathers for First Amendment religion jurisprudence, George Washington's political thought regarding religious freedom has received almost no scholarly attention. This is unfortunate, for Washington's words and actions speak to contemporary Establishment Clause and Free Exercise issues. Washington, moreover, offers an alternative to Jefferson's and Madison's approach to church-state matters. The scholarly exclusion of Washington thus has led to a narrow view of the Founders' thought on religious liberty. This article sets forth Washington's understanding of the right to religious liberty. It pays particular attention to Washington's disagreement with Madison on the propriety of government support of religion. It also draws attention to the limits Washington placed on an individual's right to religious free exercise by focusing on how Washington dealt with Quaker claims for religious exemptions from military service.Individuals entering into society, must give up a share of liberty to preserve the rest. The magnitude of the sacrifice must depend as well on situation and circumstance, as on the object to be obtained. It is at all times difficult to draw with precision the line between those rights which must be surrendered, and those which may be reserved. —G. Washington, Letter submitting the proposed constitution to the President of Congress 17 September 1787
42
Dari, Victoria. „Guarantees of governance of the right to nationality in states of continental law“. National Law Journal, Nr. 2(248) (Januar 2023): 56–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.52388/1811-0770.2022.1(247).05.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Citizenship is a fundamental right, a legal situation, a quality, a legal status. Therefore, fundamental rights are enshrined in constitutions and are determined by the legal status of the citizen, which are essential for citizens, for life, liberty and the development of their personality. These rights are essential only in relation to a company. The fundamental right - the right to citizenship, is a subjective right of citizens of a state, an essential right to life, liberty and dignity, indispensable for the development of human personality, a right established by the Constitution and guaranteed by the Constitution. The article includes the analysis of the guarantees of the right to citizenship in the legal systems analyzed comparatively: continental and Anglo-Saxon law. The authors consider it opportune to first make a brief characterization of the mentioned legal systems, highlighting the main features that bring them closer or distinguish them. The states in both legal systems under review provide in its legislation the possibility of naturalization for persons legally residing in its territories.
43
Kim, Dong-Il. „Liberty, Right, and Duty: Their Conceptual Relationship“. Journal of the New Korean Philosophical Association 105 (31.07.2021): 69–81. http://dx.doi.org/10.20433/jnkpa.2021.07.69.
Der volle Inhalt der Quelle
44
The Lancet Global Health. „Withholding liberty, not the right to health“. Lancet Global Health 10, Nr. 2 (Februar 2022): e154. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s2214-109x(22)00008-0.
Der volle Inhalt der Quelle
45
Cornish, Paul J. „Marriage, Slavery, and Natural Rights in the Political Thought of Aquinas“. Review of Politics 60, Nr. 3 (1998): 545–62. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0034670500027467.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Recent scholarship has demonstrated that the language of subjective natural rights can be found in a wide variety of medieval juristic and scholastic texts. This is part of a general trend in the study of political ideas that stresses the continuity between medieval and modern political values. However, many leading scholars of medieval political ideas maintain that no language of subjective natural rights can be found in Aquinas's political writings, based as they are on a famous objective definition of right (jus) as the object of justice (justitia). Other scholars argue that Aquinas's notion of subjective rights is peripheral to his political philosophy. The essay argues that Aquinas, while commenting on canon law texts, explicitly posits a subjective natural right to marry, based on the natural equality and natural liberty of all human beings. This can be seen by his claim that a slave may contract marriage, even without the consent of the master. This is one example of an instance in which Aquinas refers to specific legal issues in order to explicate his understanding of liberty and right. For Aquinas there are certain areas of liberty or mastery (dominium) that are exempt from all human authority, and wherein a person has rights to decide how to pursue natural human goods.
46
Gaus, Gerald F. „Property, Rights, and Freedom“. Social Philosophy and Policy 11, Nr. 2 (1994): 209–40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0265052500004490.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
William Perm summarized the Magna Carta thus: “First, It asserts Englishmen to be free; that's Liberty. Secondly, they that have free-holds, that's Property.” Since at least the seventeenth century, liberals have not only understood liberty and property to be fundamental, but to be somehow intimately related or interwoven. Here, however, consensus ends; liberals present an array of competing accounts of the relation between liberty and property. Many, for instance, defend an essentially instrumental view, typically seeing private property as justified because it is necessary to maintain or protect other, more basic, liberty rights. Important to our constitutional tradition has been the idea that “[t]he right to property is the guardian of every other right, and to deprive a people of this, is in fact to deprive them of their liberty.” Along similar lines, it has been argued that only an economic system based on private property disperses power and resources, ensuring that private people in civil society have the resources to oppose the state and give effect to basic liberties. Alternatively, it is sometimes claimed that only those with property develop the independent characters that are necessary to preserve a regime of liberty. But not only have liberals insisted that, property is a means of preserving liberty, they have often conceived of it as an embodiment of liberty, or as a type of liberty, or indeed as identical to liberty. This latter view is popular among contemporary libertarians or classical liberals. Jan Narveson, for instance, bluntly asserts that “Liberty is Property,” while John Gray insists that “[t]he connection between property and the basic liberties is constitutive and not just instrumental.”
47
Flynn, Eilionóir. „Disability, Deprivation of Liberty and Human Rights Norms: Reconciling European and International Approaches“. International Journal of Mental Health and Capacity Law 2016, Nr. 22 (23.02.2017): 76. http://dx.doi.org/10.19164/ijmhcl.v22i2.503.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
<p><span style="font-family: 'Helvetica',sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA;">Persons with disabilities are subject to unique forms of deprivation of liberty, often justified by reference to the need to protect their right to life, right to health, and to protect the human rights of others. This paper examines disability-specific forms of deprivation of liberty, particularly those authorised in mental health and capacity law, in light of their compliance with European and international human rights frameworks. It explores the apparent tension between Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which permits deprivation of liberty of ‘persons of unsound mind’ in certain circumstances, and Article 14 of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, which states that ‘the existence of a disability shall in no case justify a deprivation of liberty.’ The challenges in attempting to comply with both provisions are illustrated through reference to developments in England and Wales. This paper also seeks to offer a way forward for States Parties to both Conventions, in order to protect the rights of persons with disabilities.</span></p>
48
Abraham, David. „Liberty without Equality: The Property-Rights Connection in a “Negative Citizenship” Regime“. Law & Social Inquiry 21, Nr. 01 (1996): 1–65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-4469.1996.tb00008.x.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Why, in comparison with other liberal capitalist democracies, is the social welfare state so poorly anchored in American law and public discourse? Surely American political and social history have contributed much to the weakness of our “social state.” But law, too, has played a significant material, as well as ideological, role and has provided the terrain for much of our social development. This essay explores the particular contribution of the property-liberty nexus to the stunted development of positive liberty and social citizenship in the United States. It traces this connection from the natural rights and bourgeois Founders through several key conjunctures in American history, including Reconstruction, the New Deal, and the civil rights periods and compares some of the results with developments in Germany and the aspirations of American progressives. The essay contends that left and right alike have operated within a highly resilient and constricting framework that has made progress in the area of social citizenship both awkward and fragile. Although some possibilities for forward movement have always existed and still remain, the prospects for positive-liberty social-state law are not abundant: The master's house is not about to be taken down with his own tools.
49
Morris, Christopher W. „NATURAL RIGHTS AND POLITICAL LEGITIMACY“. Social Philosophy and Policy 22, Nr. 1 (Januar 2005): 314–29. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0265052505041129.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
If we have a natural right to liberty, it is hard to see how a state could be legitimate without first obtaining the (genuine) consent of the governed. I consider the threat natural rights pose to state legitimacy. I distinguish minimal from full legitimacy and explore different understandings of the nature of our natural rights. Even though I conclude that natural rights do threaten the full legitimacy of states, I suggest that understanding our natural right to liberty to be grounded in our interests in a certain way might not commit us to requiring consent for minimal legitimacy. Thus, even if natural rights effectively block the full legitimacy of states - on the assumption that rarely, if ever, the requisite consent will be forthcoming - they may allow minimal state legitimacy.
50
RILEY, JONATHAN. „Liberal Rights in a Pareto-optimal Code“. Utilitas 18, Nr. 1 (16.02.2006): 61–79. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0953820805001834.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
A Millian response is presented to Sen's celebrated Paretian liberal impossibility theorem. It is argued that Millian Paretian liberalism is possible, if the application of Paretian norms is restricted to the selection of an optimal code of liberal justice and rights, as well as to individual choices made in compliance with the rules of the code. Key steps in outlining the Millian response include suitably modifying Sen's social choice formulation of the idea of claim-right to personal liberty, and incorporating within social choice theory the distinction between a right and its direction of exercise. The Millian response is illustrated in the context of Sen's original example of the ‘prude’ and the ‘lewd’. If the argument is successful, coherent and appealing liberal versions of Pareto-inclusive philosophies such as utilitarianism, contractualism and neo-republicanism are feasible in principle.