scholarly journals The Right to a Fair Trial and the Military Justice System in Pakistan

2016 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 330-362 ◽  
Author(s):  
Niaz A Shah
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Military Justice ◽  
British Military ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Military

This article analyses the military justice system of Pakistan to determine to what extent it is compatible with fair trial standards recognised by human rights law and the constitution of Pakistan. It sets out the fair trial tests and apply them to the military justice system of Pakistan. The analysis reveals that the military justice system blatantly violates fair trial standards: it is part of the Executive and is neither independent nor impartial. It runs as a detached parallel departmental justice system to the national justice system. The author also argues that the majority judgement in the 2015 Military Courts Case did not apply the correct legal tests and wrongly held that the military justice system meets the fair trial standards. It is per in curiam. The author offers recommendations for reforming the military justice system proposing that Pakistan might learn from the successful reformation of the British military justice system.

5. Deprivations of life and liberty

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Clapham
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
Legal Restrictions ◽  
The Right ◽  
Association Property

‘Deprivations of life and liberty’ considers the rights to life and liberty, which may be limited through legal restrictions designed to protect a defined legitimate objective. The human rights approach starts from a presumption that we all have rights to liberty, freedom of expression, belief, assembly, association, property, and fair trial. Any restriction on these rights has to be justified as proportionate to the aims pursued by the restriction according to a four-stage schema developed in human rights law. Is the right to life absolute? When is the detention of an individual lawful?

scholarly journals Non-lethal weapons

2017 ◽  
Vol 38 (2) ◽  
pp. 831-853
Author(s):  
Elisabeth Hoffberger
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Right To Health ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
Geneva Conventions ◽  
Military Objective ◽  
Principle Of Proportionality ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Military

If thinking about weapons, one generally thinks about lethal technology. However, an abundance of so-called non-lethal weapons, a technology not aimed at killing but merely incapacitating the human target or military objective, is also being deployed both within and outside the ambit of armed conflict. Since non-lethal weapons do not necessarily implicate a zero chance of mortality, but often lead to severe wounds and tremendous suffering, the use and deployment of such weapons raise strong humanitarian and human rights concerns. The prohibition to cause superfluous injuries and unnecessary suffering, as well as the prohibition of indiscriminate attacks are, amongst others, one of the most relevant provisions potentially having an influence on the deployment of nonlethal technology in armed conflict. However, the invocation of the principle of proportionality may lead to the justification of the use of non-lethal weapons on the grounds that the military advantage anticipated was greater than the human suffering caused. Insofar, one must ask whether there is a “red-line”; where the almost inflationary invocation of the principle of proportionality may defeat the object and purpose of the Geneva Conventions and therefore render the deployment and use of non-lethal technology illegal. Apart from the battlefield, non-lethal weapons are also being deployed in lawenforcement scenarios, where human rights law plays a pivotal role. In this regard, one must not look merely at the prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading suffering and the right to life but also at the right to health, a presumably underestimated principle curbing and shaping the use of non-lethal technology outside the ambit of armed conflict.

6 Right to be Tried without Undue Delay

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clooney Amal ◽  
Webb Philippa
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
Time Limit ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Proceeding ◽  
International Human ◽  
The Right

This chapter examines the right to be tried without undue delay. The speed of a trial is integral to its overall fairness. The longer a trial takes, the longer that the defendant, still presumed innocent, is in legal jeopardy; the longer that they may be kept in pre-trial detention; and the greater the risk that witnesses may forget details or evidence may disappear. However, despite the importance of efficiency in criminal justice, chronic delays in trials in domestic jurisdictions have been widely reported. In fact, the right to be tried without undue delay is one of the most litigated aspects of the right to a fair trial. Unlike some violations, delayed proceedings are relatively easy to prove; the question is what constitutes a delay that is ‘undue’ under international human rights law. There is no global time limit for a criminal proceeding and each case must be assessed on its facts, taking into account its complexity; the conduct of the defendant, the prosecution, and other state authorities; and—for most international bodies—the prejudice caused to the defendant by the delay.

scholarly journals Seeking Compatibility in Preventing Crime with Artificial Intelligence and Ensuring a Fair Trial

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-52
Author(s):  
Kelly Blount
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Justice System ◽  
New Technologies ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Presumption Of Innocence ◽  
Direct Effects ◽  
The Right

The justice system is increasingly reliant on new technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI). In the field of criminal law this also extends to the methods utilized by police for preventing crime. Though policing is not explicitly covered by Article 6 of the European Convention of Human Rights, this article will demonstrate that there can be adverse effects of policing on fair trial rights and make the analogy to criminal investigations as a recognized pre-trial process. Specifically, it will argue that policing that relies on AI to predict crime has direct effects on fair trial processes such as the equality of arms, the presumption of innocence, and the right to confront the evidence produced against a defendant. It will conclude by challenging the notion that AI is always an appropriate tool for legal processes.

Reflections from Former Masters of the Rolls on Managing Civil Justice

2020 ◽  
pp. 91-104
Author(s):  
Kate O’Regan
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
National Security ◽  
Justice System ◽  
September 11 ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
Judicial Discretion ◽  
Civil Justice ◽  
Post September 11 ◽  
The Right ◽  
Civil Justice System

This edited conversation between Professor Kate O’Regan of the Bonavero Institute of Human Rights and Lord Neuberger and Lord Dyson reflects on their Lordships’ time as judges and Masters of the Rolls managing the civil justice system in England & Wales. Subjects include: the value of the overriding objective; whether procedural rules should be prescriptive or allow for judicial discretion; the costs and funding crisis facing the justice system, especially for those of limited means, including how legal disputes should be funded and who should be funding them; and how to balance the right to a fair trial with national security interests in a post-September 11 world.

13. Detention and trial

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sangeeta Shah
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Criminal Offence ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Extreme Form ◽  
International Human ◽  
Court Proceedings ◽  
The Right

This chapter discusses the protections afforded by international human rights law to the right to liberty and security of the person and the right to a fair trial. The right to liberty regulates powers of detention and provides safeguards against ill-treatment of detainees. An extreme form of arbitrary detention is enforced disappearance. The right to a fair trial sets out how court proceedings should be conducted and court systems organized. In addition, there are specific protections for those who are suspected of having committed a criminal offence.

Standardy należytego uzasadnienia w świetle orzecznictwa Trybunału Konstytucyjnego i Europejskiego Trybunału Praw Człowieka

2014 ◽  
pp. 33-48
Author(s):  
Przemysław Florjanowicz-Błachut
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Due Process ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
European Court ◽  
Judicial Reasoning ◽  
The Right

The core function of the judiciary is the administration of justice through delivering judgments and other decisions. The crucial role for its acceptance and legitimization by not only lawyers, but also individulas (parties) and the hole society plays judicial reasoning. It should reflect on judge’s independence within the exercise of his office and show also judicial self-restraint or activism. The axiology and the standards of proper judicial reasoning are anchored both in constitutional and supranational law and case-law. Polish Constitutional Tribunal derives a duty to give reasoning from the right to a fair trial – right to be heard and bring own submissions before the court (Article 45 § 1 of the Constitution), the right to appeal against judgments and decisions made at first stage (Article 78), the rule of two stages of the court proceedings (Article 176) and rule of law clause (Article 2), that comprises inter alia right to due process of law and the rule of legitimate expactation / the protection of trust (Vertrauensschutz). European Court of Human Rights derives this duty to give reasons from the guarantees of the right to a fair trial enshrined in Article 6 § 1 of European Convention of Human Rights. In its case-law the ECtHR, taking into account the margin of appreciation concept, formulated a number of positive and negative requirements, that should be met in case of proper reasoning. The obligation for courts to give sufficient reasons for their decisions is also anchored in European Union law. European Court of Justice derives this duty from the right to fair trial enshrined in Articles 6 and 13 of the ECHR and Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. Standards of the courts reasoning developed by Polish constitutional court an the European courts (ECJ and ECtHR) are in fact convergent and coherent. National judges should take them into consideration in every case, to legitimize its outcome and enhance justice delivery.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document