Liberalism Justified

2019 ◽  
pp. 199-219
Author(s):  
Kevin Vallier
Keyword(s):  
Social Justice ◽  
Social Trust ◽  
Sufficient Reason ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Veil Of Ignorance ◽  
Legal Rules ◽  
International Rights ◽  
Liberal Rights ◽  
The Right ◽  
Procedural Rights

This chapter argues that only broadly liberal institutions can be publicly justified. Some citizens will have sufficient reason to reject nonliberal rights schemas, as well as the constitutional and legal rules that institutionalize those schemas. But because liberal constitutional rights can be publicly justified to a diverse public, these liberal rights can sustain social trust in the right way. Thus, a society that protects liberal rights establishes moral peace and a politics that is not war. This chapter uses a thin veil of ignorance to locate specific classes of publicly justified primary rights. These rights fall into five classes: rights of agency, associational rights, jurisdictional rights, procedural rights, and international rights. The chapter ends by developing an associated conception of social justice and explains how rights should be built into a publicly justified constitution.

scholarly journals Perlindungan Hak Konstitusional untuk Bebas dari Penyiksaan di Indonesia

2018 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 565
Author(s):  
Rommy Patra
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Conceptual Approach ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Legal Proceedings ◽  
Legal Rules ◽  
Number Of Factors ◽  
Convention Against Torture ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Right

Upaya mencegah dan menghapus praktik penyiksaan di Indonesia bukanlah persoalan yang mudah. Meski sudah meratifikasi Konvensi Menentang Penyiksaan dan mengakui hak untuk bebas dari penyiksaan sebagai HAM dan hak konstitusional, namun praktik penyiksaan di Indonesia masih juga berlangsung secara massif. Permasalahan dalam penelitian ini, pertama, faktor-faktor apa saja yang menyebabkan praktik penyiksaan masih terjadi di Indonesia? Kedua, upaya apa yang harus dilakukan untuk mencegah dan menghapus praktik penyiksaan dalam memperkuat perlindungan HAM dan hak konstitusional untuk bebas dari penyiksaan di Indonesia? Pendekatan yang digunakan dalam kajian ini adalah pendekatan perundang-undangan, pendekatan kasus dan pendekatan konseptual. Hasil kajian memperlihatkan bahwa, pertama, sejumlah faktor yang menyebabkan masih terjadinya praktik penyiksaan di Indonesia: (1) tidak adanya aturan hukum yang tegas dan memberikan sanksi yang berat kepada pelaku penyiksaan; (2) terinstitusionalisasinya praktik kekerasan dan penyiksaan di jajaran penegak hukum serta permisifnya masyarakat terhadap praktik tersebut; (3) mekanisme perlindungan dan pemberian kompensasi terhadap korban penyiksaan masih belum memadai. Kedua, perbaikan yang harus dilakukan mencakup: (1) adanya komitmen yang kuat dari pemerintah dengan membuat kebijakan penghapusan tindakan penyiksaan, seperti membuat Undang-Undang khusus menentang penyiksaan; (2) penataan institusi Kepolisian, Kejaksaan, TNI, Lembaga Pemasyarakatan serta lembaga-lembaga lainnya dengan meningkatkan pengawasan, memberikan sanksi yang tegas dan dilakukannya proses hukum jika masih terdapat praktik penyiksaan yang dilakukan. Selain itu perlu diberikan pendidikan HAM bagi personil institusi-institusi tersebut; (3) meningkatkan partisipasi masyarakat agar memiliki kesadaran untuk melawan setiap praktik kekerasan dan penyiksaan; (4) mengoptimalkan peranan lembaga seperti Komnas HAM dan LPSK untuk memberikan perlindungan dan pendampingan terhadap korban. (5) harus adanya pemenuhan terhadap hak-hak korban yang menjadi korban dari praktik penyiksaan.Efforts to prevent and eliminate the practice of torture in Indonesia are not easy. Although it has ratified the Convention Against Torture and recognizes the right for freedom from torture as human rights and constitutional rights, the practice of torture in Indonesia is still massive. The problem is, what factors cause the practice of torture to still occur in Indonesia? Then what efforts should be made to prevent and eliminate the practice of torture in strengthening human rights protection and constitutional rights for freedom from torture in Indonesia? The approach used in this study is the statute approach, case approach and conceptual approach. The results of the study show a number of factors that leads to the practice of torture in Indonesia: (1) the absence of strict legal rules and severe sanctions for perpetrators of torture; (2) institutionalization of the practice of violence and torture in the ranks of law enforcement as well as the permissiveness of the community towards the practice; (3) the mechanism for protecting and providing compensation to victims of torture is still inadequate. The improvements that must be made include: (1) a strong commitment from the government by making a policy of abolishing acts of torture, such as making a special law against torture; (2) structuring of the Police, Prosecutor's Office, TNI, Correctional Institutions and other institutions by increasing supervision, providing strict sanctions and carrying out legal proceedings if there are still practices of torture carried out. In addition, it needs education of human rights for personnel of these institutions; (3) increasing community participation in order to have awareness to fight every practice of violence and torture; (4) optimizing the role of institutions such as Komnas HAM and LPSK to provide protection and assistance to victims. (5) there must be rights fulfillment to the victims who become the victims of the practice of torture.

Loosely Relational Constitutional Rights

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tom Kohavi
Keyword(s):  
Social Justice ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Legal Systems ◽  
Legal Norms ◽  
Collective Commitment ◽  
The Right

Abstract This article attends to claims that the expansionist trend in modern constitutional practices resulted in the recognition of many norms that are not real rights: they fail to guide and constrain duty-bearers and empower and protect right-holders because they are too abstract and can be limited too regularly. It claims that many constitutional rights are, indeed, ‘loosely relational’: the correlation between them and duties is flexible and affected by considerations external to the direct relations between the right-holder and the duty-bearer. However, it adds that, the assumption that rights must be ‘strictly relational’ for them to exhibit the robust normativity that gives rights their force and value is incorrect. This is important because loosely relational constitutional rights confer this robust normativity on consequentialist standards for the evaluation of legal norms and activities: a fundamental role constitutional rights play in modern liberal legal systems, reflecting a collective commitment to the realisation of social justice.

scholarly journals Access to Court as a Determinative Procedural Act for the Exercise of Justice and Protection of Rights in Civil Cases (The Beginning)

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (12) ◽  
pp. 90-108
Author(s):  
E. E. Uksusova
Keyword(s):  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Law System ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Current State ◽  
Civil Cases ◽  
Legislative Reforms ◽  
The Right ◽  
Judicial Protection ◽  
Procedural Rights ◽  
Right Of Access

The author, following the focus of the study on specialization of civil procedural law in the Russian legal system as manifested regularity of its development, relying on the inevitable dualism and interaction between material and procedural law, comprehends its current state on the example of certain basic procedural and legal institutions: the institution of the right of access to court, the institution of protection of the rights and interests of other persons, the institution of jurisdiction, etc. The analysis caried out within the framework of the study takes into account the Russian legislative reforms undertaken in recent decades. The author’s use of known and proposed legal constructions, categories and concepts in the author’s combination and (or) interpretation makes their research urgent for the purposes of understanding of the key conditionality of civil procedural law specialization in the Russian law system as providing them with the administration of justice and protection of rights in civil cases in compliance with their wide understanding when the right to judicial protection in the system of constitutional rights and freedoms constitutes a guarantee for all of them. This paper is the first in a series of three papers devoted to the problem of the right of access to court as the most important issue of dualism and interaction between material and civil procedural rights.

scholarly journals Access to Court as a Determinative Procedural Act for the Exercise of Justice and Protection of Rights in Civil Cases (Part 2)

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 99-110
Author(s):  
E. E. Uksusova
Keyword(s):  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Law System ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Current State ◽  
Administration Of Justice ◽  
Civil Cases ◽  
The Right ◽  
Judicial Protection ◽  
Procedural Rights ◽  
Right Of Access

The author, following the focus of the study on specialization of civil procedural law in the Russian legal system as manifested regularity of its development, relying on the inevitable dualism and interaction between material and procedural law, comprehends its current state on the example of certain basic procedural and legal institutions: the institution of the right of access to court, the institution of protection of the rights and interests of other persons, the institution of jurisdiction, etc The author’s use of known and proposed legal constructions, categories and concepts in the author’s combination and (or) interpretation makes their research urgent for the purposes of understanding of the key conditionality of civil procedural law specialization in the Russian law system as providing them with the administration of justice and protection of rights in civil cases in compliance with their wide understanding when the right to judicial protection in the system of constitutional rights and freedoms constitutes a guarantee for all of them. This paper is the second in a series of three papers devoted to the problem of the right of access to court as the most important issue of dualism and interaction between material and civil procedural rights.

The Case for Muslim Constitutional Interpretive Activity

1990 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 69-75
Author(s):  
Kathleen Moore
Keyword(s):  
African American ◽  
Substantial Contribution ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Religious Groups ◽  
Racial Hatred ◽  
Special Diet ◽  
Court Record ◽  
Religious Associations ◽  
Islamic Faith ◽  
The Right

Muslim Involvement: The Court Record 1.Prisoners' RightsCan we rely upon the courts to protect Islam and Muslims from discriminatory treatment? Have the courts considered Islam to be a 'religion' worthy of constitutional protection? The issue of First Amendment protection of Muslim beliefs and practices has arisen most often in cases brought by African-American Muslims who are incarcerated. In fact, the area of law to which Muslims have made their most substantial contribution to date is the area of prisoners' rights litigation. African-American Muslim inmates have been responsible for establishing prisoners' constitutional rights to worship. Cases brought by Muslims have established that prisoners have the right to assemble for religious services; to consult a cleric of their faith; to possess religious publications and to subscribe to religious literature; to wear unobstrusive religious symbols such as medallions; to have prepared a special diet required by their religion; and to correspond with their spiritual leaders. The court record demonstrates that Muslim inmates' religious liberty claims, challenging prison regulations that impinge on the free exercise of the Islamic faith, have been accepted only under certain circumstances. In brief, the responsiveness of the courts to Muslim inmates' claims has turned on a number of factors including: (1) the issue of equality of treatment of all religious groups in prison; (2) the courts' reticence to reverse the decisions of prison officials; (3) the degree to which the inmates' challenges would undermine the fundamental interests of the state (e.g. in prison security and administrative efficiency); and (4) the showing that Islam is parallel in significant ways to the conventional Protestant, Catholic, and Jewish faiths.Constitutional protection of Islamic practices in prison and elsewhere, however, has not been automatic. Many Muslim organizations, the Nation of Islam in particular, have been treated as cults, or suspect and dangerous groups, due in part to the perception that Muslims teach racial hatred, and have not been regarded in the same respect as 'mainline' religious groups. It has been argued before the courts that Muslim doctrine contains political aspirations and economic goals as well as racial prejudice and should be suppressed in the interest of society. The gist of this argument is that certain Muslim groups are primarily political and not religious associations and thus ...

The Dynamic Free Speech Clause

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy Zick
Keyword(s):  
Free Speech ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Relational Dynamics ◽  
Free Exercise ◽  
Second Amendment ◽  
The Press ◽  
The Common ◽  
Rights Discourse ◽  
The Right ◽  
Speech Clause

This book examines the relational dynamics between the U.S. Constitution’s Free Speech Clause and other constitutional rights. The free speech guarantee has intersected with a variety of other constitutional rights. Those intersections have significantly influenced the recognition, scope, and meaning of rights ranging from freedom of the press to the Second Amendment right to bear arms. They have also influenced interpretation of the Free Speech Clause itself. Free speech principles and doctrines have facilitated the recognition and effective exercise of constitutional rights, including equal protection, the right to abortion, and the free exercise of religion. They have also provided mediating principles for constructive debates about constitutional rights. At the same time, in its interactions with other constitutional rights, the Free Speech Clause has also been a complicating force. It has dominated rights discourse and subordinated or supplanted free press, assembly, petition, and free exercise rights. Currently, courts and commentators are fashioning the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms in the image of the Free Speech Clause. Borrowing the Free Speech Clause for this purpose may turn out to be detrimental for both rights. The book examines the common and distinctive dynamics that have brought free speech and other constitutional rights together. It assesses the products and consequences of these intersections, and draws important lessons from them about constitutional rights and constitutional liberty. Ultimately, the book defends a pluralistic conception of constitutional rights that seeks to leverage the power of the Free Speech Clause but also to tame its propensity to subordinate, supplant, and eclipse other constitutional rights.

Strike Ballots, Democracy, and Law

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Breen Creighton ◽  
Catrina Denvir ◽  
Richard Johnstone ◽  
Shae McCrystal ◽  
Alice Orchiston
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
The United States ◽  
International Labour Organisation ◽  
Human Right ◽  
Strike Activity ◽  
Legal Rules ◽  
Worked Example ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Democratic Rights ◽  
The Right

The purpose of the research upon which this book is based was empirically to investigate whether the ballot requirements in the Fair Work Act do indeed impose a significant obstacle to the taking of industrial action, and whether those provisions are indeed impelled by a legitimate ‘democratic imperative’. The book starts from the proposition that virtually all national legal systems, and international law, recognise the right to strike as a fundamental human right. It acknowledges, however, that in no case is this recognition without qualification. Amongst the most common qualifications is a requirement that to be lawful strike action must first be approved by a ballot of workers concerned. Often, these requirements are said to be necessary to protect the democratic rights of the workers concerned: this is the so-called ‘democratic imperative’. In order to evaluate the true purpose and effect of ballot requirements the book draws upon the detailed empirical study of the operation of the Australian legislative provisions noted above; a comparative analysis of law and practice in a broad range of countries, with special reference to Canada, South Africa, the United Kingdom and the United States; and the jurisprudence of the supervisory bodies of the International Labour Organisation. It finds that in many instances ballot requirements – especially those relating to quorum – are more concerned with curtailing strike activity than with constructively responding to the democratic imperative. Frequently, they also proceed from a distorted perception of what ‘democracy’ could and should entail in an industrial context. Paradoxically, the study also finds that in some contexts ballot requirements can provide additional bargaining leverage for unions. Overall, however, the study confirms our hypothesis that the principal purpose of ballot requirements – especially in Australia and the United Kingdom – is to curtail strike activity rather than to vindicate the democratic imperative, other than on the basis of a highly attenuated reading of that term. We believe that the end-result constitutes an important study of the practical operation of a complex set of legal rules, and one which exposes the dichotomy between the ostensible and real objectives underpinning the adoption of those rules. It also furnishes a worked example of multi-methods empirical, comparative and doctrinal legal research in law, which we hope will inspire similar approaches to other areas of labour law.

When Does a Right to Life Arise?

2019 ◽  
pp. 47-64
Author(s):  
Lynn D. Wardle
Keyword(s):  
Severe Disabilities ◽  
State Regulation ◽  
Biological Science ◽  
Human Being ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
Legal Rules ◽  
Frozen Embryos ◽  
The Right ◽  
Legal Right

The question of when a legal right to life first arises in the course of a human being’s development is pertinent to a variety of contexts, including protection of prenatal life from injury by persons other than the gestational mother, what to do with frozen embryos when the couple who created them divorces, and how to treat children born with severe disabilities, as well as the more familiar context of state regulation, restriction, or prohibition of abortion. This chapter first summarizes social and biological science findings relevant to this question, then details development of legal rules and constitutional doctrine pertaining to abortion regulation before contrasting that with protections for prenatal life in other contexts. It concludes that the most coherent answer to the question when a right to life arises is that the right to life is coextensive with the biological life of the human being, and that a legal right to remain alive arises when a human being comes into existence and continues until it ceases to be a human being—that is, when its life has ended. This might provide justification for greater restrictions on abortion, but that could depend on additional considerations.

From Property Rights to Liberty Rights: We the Corporations, A Review Essay

2021 ◽  
Vol 95 (2) ◽  
pp. 335-340
Author(s):  
Laura Phillips Sawyer
Keyword(s):  
Civil Rights ◽  
Civil Liberties ◽  
Political Process ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Bill Of Rights ◽  
State Action ◽  
Unequal Treatment ◽  
The People ◽  
The Right ◽  
We The People

A long-standing, and deeply controversial, question in constitutional law is whether or not the Constitution's protections for “persons” and “people” extend to corporations. Law professor Adam Winkler's We the Corporations chronicles the most important legal battles launched by corporations to “win their constitutional rights,” by which he means both civil rights against discriminatory state action and civil liberties enshrined in the Bill of Rights and the Constitution (p. xvii). Today, we think of the former as the right to be free from unequal treatment, often protected by statutory laws, and the latter as liberties that affect the ability to live one's life fully, such as the freedom of religion, speech, or association. The vim in Winkler's argument is that the court blurred this distinction when it applied liberty rights to nonprofit corporations and then, through a series of twentieth-century rulings, corporations were able to advance greater claims to liberty rights. Ultimately, those liberty rights have been employed to strike down significant bipartisan regulations, such as campaign finance laws, which were intended to advance democratic participation in the political process. At its core, this book asks, to what extent do “we the people” rule corporations and to what extent do they rule us?

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document