As mentioned as above, under rule of law everyone shall be fair and equal in front of law. One of the important element In Raz’s principle is the independence of judiciary has to be guaranteed. This showing the judicial independence is the fundamental structure of the idea rule of law. In case M v Home office, it implies that even though the individuals representing the executive, the courts still have power to grant remedies against a minister in his office capacity. The courts are armed with coercive powers exercisable in proceedings for contempt of
Introduction In the English legal system, ‘human rights’ can be defined as ‘rights and freedom to which every human being is entitled’ (Law and Martin (ed.) 2013, p. 269). ‘Human rights’ are rights and freedoms that belong to all individuals regardless of their nationality and citizenship. They are fundamentally important in maintaining a fair and civilised society (Ministry of Justice 2006). The protection of the rights and freedoms of citizens and others within their jurisdiction is a fundamental duty of the state (Barnett 2011, p. 394).
A system of checks and balances obviously involves one agency encroaching on the preserves of another. For instance, prior to the Human Right Act 1998, the judiciary branch acted as a powerful, though strictly limited, check upon the executive branch, through the availability of judicial review. Under the traditional heads of judicial review, the judiciary branch ensures that Ministers and other public authorities do not act outside the powers lawfully given to them by Acts of Parliament, or by the accepted government prerogatives; that they do not misuse powers given for one objective for another; that decisions are taken in a way which is procedurally equal and proper; and that their decisions are not grossly unreasonable. All this is for the purpose of safeguarding liberty. For example, if the legislative part really supposes that a particular bill ought to become a law, they can overturn the president’s veto.
Every individual is equally entitled to their own human rights without discrimination. According to F.Nel and J.Bezuidenhout (1997) human rights are those rights which human beings are perceived to have by virtue of their humanity and inherent dignity and not by virtue of human laws and customs. Human rights may be regarded as a method of attaining the aim of human dignity. Universal human rights are often expressed and guaranteed by law in the form of treaties, customary international law, general principles and other sources of international law. International rights law lays down the obligations of governments to act in a certain way and to refrain from certain acts to protect human right and fundamental freedoms of individual or groups.
I. INTRODUCTION In International Law, jurisdiction is related to the concept of sovereignty and territory. In order to become a state, it must have territory and when a state has territory it is sovereign; and sovereign means it has supreme authority within its territory and is politically and legally independent with power to affect people, property and circumstances within its territory. Jurisdiction on people and property is an important and crucial part of state sovereignty. According to Shaw, jurisdiction is concerning about the power of state under international law to regulate or otherwise impact upon people, property and circumstances and reflects the basic principles of state sovereignty, equality of states and non-interference in
This universal nature is supposed to transcend and apply regardless of whom we are- since we are all human . Using that rationale, the universal nature of human rights is unquestionable . Forged after the disastrous Second World War, the instrument was designed to ensure that such evils would not see light again. Humanity of all people all over the world was to be respected by all nations without any special exceptions . “with no distinction given to their race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other
It laid down that “The right to privacy is implicit in the right to life and liberty guaranteed to the citizens of this country by Article 21. It is a “right to be let alone”.” In the 2011 case of Ram Jethmalani v. Union of India, (2011) 8 SCC 1, the Supreme Court held that “Right to privacy is an integral part of life. This is a cherished constitutional value, and is important that human beings be allowed domains of freedom that are free of public scrutiny unless they act in an unlawful manner”. The article has been interpreted in a way that the term ‘life’ includes all those aspects of life which make a man’s life meaningful, worth-living and complete. Agreed that right to privacy is not an absolute right.
The Member States themselves, through their national courts ensure the protection of fundamental rights, the European Court of Justice has developped a big number of case-laws assuring the fundamental rights. It is the Court together with the European Convention on Human Rights that filled the intial lack of fundamental rights’ protection in the EU which is now enshrined into the Treaty with several articles stipulating fundamental rights. Article 2 of the TEU reads that ‘the Union is based on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities’. The protection of these fundamental rights is, thus, at the very heart of the Union itself, without the fundamental rights and their protection the EU would have been thrown back into the dark ages and would have nothing to do with the modern society it represents today. For many centuries people defended with their lives the fundamental rights, be it “Liberte, egality, fraternite” of the French revolution, or the freedom of expression in “Charlie” of 21st century.
In creating law or adopting the law, government should see first is it suitable with its country norms and believe or not. According to realism, as a controller (Leviatan) state must take control every aspect including human rights, so producing new human rights law can be justified. However there are consideration in making human rights law or adopting it, violation of sovereignty principle are possible to
Human rights is the fundamental of civilisation and freedom to every human being existed in Malaysia. Before digging deeper in the concepts of human right, we have to comprehend the basic understanding of human rights. As mention from Equity and Human Rights Commission, believe that human rights are the basic rights and freedoms that belong to every person in the world, from birth until death. They apply regardless of where you are from, what you believe or how you choose to live your life. They can never be taken away, although they can sometimes be restricted – for example if a person breaks the law, or in the interests of national security.