Part 4 Intersection of Freedom of Religion or Belief with Other Human Rights, 4.3 Prohibition on Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bielefeldt Heiner, Prof ◽  
Ghanea Nazila, Dr ◽  
Wiener Michael, Dr
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Community ◽  
Prisoners Of War ◽  
Freedom Of Religion ◽  
Degrading Treatment ◽  
The Government ◽  
Jus Cogens ◽  
The Right

This chapter addresses three aspects of torture in relation to the right to freedom of religion or belief. First, torture and other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment on the grounds of religion or belief. The prohibition of torture is recognized as forming part of jus cogens and entailing an erga omnes obligation of States towards the international community as a whole. Second, torture and other inhuman treatment may also arise from understandings of what particular religious scriptures or traditions allegedly require. They may be carried out by individuals animated by religious hatred, may enjoy the complicity of the Government, or may even be carried out by the authorities themselves. As discussed, human rights can never consider such actions a legitimate exercise of freedom of religion or belief. Finally, the religious sensitivities of detainees or prisoners of war (irrespective of the reasons for their incarceration) may be exploited in order to subject them to torture and other inhuman treatment, in other words utilizing the religion of detainees in order to subject them to tailored torture or inhuman treatment.

scholarly journals THE POSSIBILITY OF THE RIGHT TO RELIGION EMERGING AS A JUS COGENS NORM (PART 2)

Obiter ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 37 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
David Abrahams ◽  
Tayla Dye
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Community ◽  
Previous Article ◽  
Republic Of Korea ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
Jus Cogens ◽  
The Right ◽  
Near Future

This article follows a previous article published in Obiter Vol 2 of 2016. In that article the concept of jus cogens and its role in the international community, together with the nature of the right to religion, were discussed. In Part Two, the seriousness of such human rights violations needs to be appreciated by the international community at large. To this end, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea will serve as a case study, examining the extent of the DPRK’s compliance of its obligations vis-à-vis the right to religion. This should ultimately lead to an understanding as to why the right to religion emerging as a jus cogens norm will not solve the problem of enforcement, and even if it could, due to the uncertainty surrounding the formation of jus cogens it is unlikely that other human rights will be added to the list in the near future.

Responses to Offensive Speech

2021 ◽  
pp. 55-78
Author(s):  
Nicholas Hatzis
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Religious Freedom ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Freedom Of Religion ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Right ◽  
Offensive Speech

This chapter discusses whether there is a non-religious justification for limiting religiously offensive speech. The most commonly used argument is that the right to freedom of religion includes a more specific right to be protected from offence to one’s religious sensibilities. If this is correct, it provides a non-religious reason for censorship: even those who are hostile to religion can accept that religious freedom is an important right and that the government is justified in giving effect to rights. The European Court of Human Rights has repeatedly upheld restrictions on expression which insults religious feelings, reasoning that religious freedom, as guaranteed by the European Convention on Human Rights, protects the religious sensibilities of believers from offence. I suggest that this interpretation is mistaken. After exploring how rights give rise to claims, I argue that there is no right-based claim to be protected from the unpleasant feelings caused by religious insults. Therefore, it is unpersuasive to describe cases of religious offence as involving the conflict of two fundamental rights—speech and religion—which require a balancing exercise to decide which one will prevail each time.

scholarly journals The Interpretation of Freedom of Religion and Believe: How Do University Understand This to Society?

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 15-28
Author(s):  
Rurin Sisilia Prasetyani ◽  
Shally Saniyya Novina
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Human Freedom ◽  
Freedom Of Religion ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
Basic Rights ◽  
Protestant Christians ◽  
Religion And Ethnicity ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Right

This paper is based on the condition of freedom of religion and belief and people's understanding of the meaning of freedom of religion and belief which is still wrong and ambiguous. In fact, as dignified beings, humans have a number of basic rights that must be protected, such as the right to life, the right to political rights, the right to assemble, as well as the right to religion and belief. Human rights values ​​teach that these basic human rights are protected and respected. Human rights teach the principle of equality and human freedom so that there can be no discrimination, exploitation and violence against humans in any form and also there should not be any restrictions and restrictions on basic human freedoms, including the right to freedom of religion. The Indonesian nation is a pluralistic nation. There are various kinds of ethnicity, race, religion, and ethnicity that cause diversity in Indonesia. Although the majority of Indonesian people are followers of Islam, however, in Indonesia there are also several other official religions recognized by the government, namely, Catholic Christians, Protestant Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, and Confucians. Therefore, every person has the right to freedom of religion or belief, that means no one may be subject to coercion that would interfere with his freedom to adhere to or embrace a religion or belief of his own choice.

scholarly journals Blasphemy Law as a Structural Violence: A Challenge for Maintaining Sustainable Peace

2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Cekli Setya Pratiwi ◽  
Sidik Sunaryo
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Structural Violence ◽  
International Community ◽  
Peace Studies ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Legal Standards ◽  
Muslim Countries ◽  
Sustainable Peace ◽  
The Right

Abstract Blasphemy law (BL) has become a central issue for the international community in various parts of the world in the last three decades. In almost every case involving the BL, especially in Muslim countries, such as Pakistan, Malaysia, and Indonesia, they are always responded with violence or threats of attack that cause many victims, loss of homes, damage to places of worship, evictions, stigma of being heretical, severe punishments, or extra-judicial killings. When international human rights law (IHLR) and declaration of the right to peace are adopted by the international community, at the same time, the number of violence related to the application of BL continues to increase. This paper aims to examine the ambiguity of the concept of the BL in Pakistan, Indonesia, and Malaysia, and how its lead to the weak of enforcement that creates social injustice and inequality. Then, referring to Galtung’s theory of structural violence and other experts of peace studies, this paper argues that blasphemy law should be included as a form of structural violence. Therefore its challenges these States to reform their BL in which its provisions accommodate the state’s neutrality and content high legal standards. Thus, through guarantee the fully enjoyment of human rights for everyone may support the States to achieve sustainable peace.

L'azione dell'Unione europea contro le discriminazioni basate sulla religione: l'impatto della giurisprudenza della Corte europea dei diritti umani

2012 ◽  
pp. 475-511
Author(s):  
Federico Casolari
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
General Framework ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Equal Treatment ◽  
Freedom Of Religion ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Eu

Law Although EU law has established a general framework concerning the fight against discriminations on the grounds of religion (namely as far as equal treatment in employment and occupation is concerned), the related ECJ case law is not very rich. This article tracks and evaluates the impact of the ECHR case law devoted to the freedom of religion on the interpretation and application of EU law concerning religion discriminations. It argues that the ECHR case law may contribute to identify the notion of ‘religion' which is relevant for EU law, while several arguments may be put forward against the application of the Strasbourg approach to the balancing between the right to quality based on religion and others human rights into the EU legal order.

The ICCPR as a ‘Living Instrument’: The Death Penalty as Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment

2004 ◽  
Vol 68 (6) ◽  
pp. 507-519 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amrita Mukherjee
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
Degrading Treatment ◽  
The Right

This article examines the recent views of the UN Human Rights Committee on the issues related to the death penalty. Obligations under Articles 6 (the right to life) and 7 (the right not to be subjected to torture or other, cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment) are correlated. Despite widely divergent opinions within the Committee on the issue, this human rights body is moving towards strengthening the obligations of abolitionist states and, in so doing, restricting the availability of the sanction for retentionist states. This is consistent with the object and purposes approach and the nature of the ICCPR as a living instrument.

scholarly journals THE IMPLEMENTATION OF INDONESIA’S PUBLIC POLICY TO IMMIGRATION SELECTIVE POLICY BASED ON LAW NO. 6 OF 2011

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 169-178
Author(s):  
Muhammad Azzam Alfarizi
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Service Needs ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
The Third ◽  
The Core ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The Right ◽  
Service Standards

The inherent right of the individual is an affirmation that human beings must be treated properly and civilized and must be respected, as the sounding of the second precept is: "Just and Civilized Humanity". Human rights are manifestations of the third principle, namely: "Indonesian Unity". If all rights are fulfilled, reciprocally the unity and integrity will be created. Rights are also protected and upheld as is the agreement of the fourth precepts that reads: "Democracy Led by Wisdom in Consultation / Representation". Human Rights also recognizes the right of every person for the honor and protection of human dignity and dignity, which is in accordance with the fifth precepts which read: "Social Justice for All Indonesian People" PASTI Values ​​which are the core values ​​of the Ministry of Law and Human Rights which is an acronym of Professional, Accountable, Synergistic, Transparent and Innovative is an expression of the performance of the immigration apparatus in providing human rights based services. If these values ​​are in line with the values ​​contained in Pancasila, the criteria for evaluating human rights-based public services are based on the accessibility and availability of facilities; the availability of alert officers and compliance of officials, employees, and implementers of Service Standards for each service area will be easily achieved. It is fitting that immigration personnel in providing services must be in accordance with the principles of human rights-based services and in harmony with the Pancasila philosophy. This is as an endeavor in fulfilling service needs in accordance with the mandate of the 1945 Constitution, provisions of applicable laws and human rights principles for every citizen and population for services provided by the government in this case Immigration.  

scholarly journals The legal meaning of the terms "torture", "inhuman treatment or punishment", "degrading treatment or punishment" and their distinction in the decisions of the European commission of human rights and the European court of human rights

2021 ◽  
pp. 26-33
Author(s):  
Khrystyna YAMELSKA
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
European Commission ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
European Convention ◽  
European Court ◽  
Convention Against Torture ◽  
Degrading Treatment ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Jus Cogens ◽  
Legal Meaning

The paper reveals the legal meaning of the terms "torture", "inhuman treatment or punishment", "treatment or punishment that degrades human dignity". A distinction between these concepts is made on the examples of court decisions of European courts, taking into account the individual circumstances of each case. The genesis of the origin of the above concepts is investigated through a prism of the decisions of the European Commission of Human Rights and the European Court of Human Rights. The paper reveals the absolute nature of the "jus cogens" norm of Article 3 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. The author proposes to modernize the Ukrainian criminal legislation on the reception of the position of the European Court of Human Rights on the delimitation of these concepts. In contrast to the European convention regulation of ill-treatment, torture, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, the author notes that the Ukrainian legislation regulates this issue quite succinctly. The Article 127 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine provides a definition only of torture, which in essence coincides with the definition of the United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and the position of the European Court of Human Rights. The paper notes that the practice of Ukrainian courts shows that a distinction (similar to that provided by the European Court of Human Rights) is not implemented.

scholarly journals Overview Of The Rights Of Person With Disabilities: A Human Rights Approach

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (IV) ◽  
pp. 34-42
Author(s):  
Dr. Ram Charan Meena,
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Social Approach ◽  
Persons With Disabilities ◽  
Psychological Barriers ◽  
Contemporary Situation ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Government ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Right

Persons with disabilities have the right to enjoy the human rights to life, liberty, equality, security and dignity as human beings. However, due to social apathy, psychological barriers, a limited definition of “disability” entitled to the protection of the law and lack of proper data, persons with disabilities in India remain an invisible category. Although many laws set out to ensure their full and effective participation in society, they remain inadequate as they are based primarily on the discretion of the government. Also, the judiciary acts as the real protector of persons with disabilities whenever an opportunity arises, but it is not possible to approach the judiciary for every request. Unless the foundation of the law is strengthened, persons with disabilities cannot fully exercise their rights. The present research paper mentions the contemporary situation of people with disabilities with the current laws and concepts, and also the researcher believes that it is not only the law that will provide a solution to this problem, it is the change in the outlook of the society which may provide a solution to this problem. Thus, the horizons of the law should be expanded to provide a “human friendly environment” for all persons with disabilities to remove the barriers that impede their development. With timely implementation the time has come for effective legislation to protect their interests and empower their capabilities which are based on “rights–based approach” rather than charity, medical or social approach.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document