Constitutional Protection of Bahraini Women

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 197-208
2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-44
Author(s):  
Jeffrey S. Adler

On May 11, 1938, two New Orleans policemen entered the Astoria Restaurant, marched to the kitchen, and approached Loyd D. T. Washington, a 41-year-old African American cook. They informed Washington that they would be taking him to the First Precinct station for questioning, although they assured the cook that he need not change his clothes and “should be right back” to the “Negro restaurant,” where he had worked for 3 years. Immediately after arriving at the station house, police officers “surrounded” Washington, showed him a photograph of a man, and announced that he had killed a white man in Yazoo City, Mississippi, 20 years earlier. When Washington insisted that he did not know the man in the photograph, that he had never been to (or even heard of) Yazoo City, and that he had been in the army at the time of the murder, the law enforcers confined him in a cell, although they had no warrant for his arrest and did not charge him with any crime. The following day, a detective brought him to the “show-up room” in the precinct house, where he continued the interrogation and, according to Washington, “tried to make me sign papers stating that I had killed a white man” in Mississippi. As every African American New Orleanian knew, the show-up (or line-up) room was the setting where detectives tortured suspects and extracted confessions. “You know you killed him, Nigger,” the detective roared. Washington, however, refused to confess, and the detective began punching him in the face, knocking out five of his teeth. After Washington crumbled to the floor, the detective repeatedly kicked him and broke one of his ribs. The beating continued for an hour, until other policemen restrained the detective, saying “give him a chance to confess and if he doesn't you may start again.” But Washington did not confess, and the violent interrogation began anew. A short time later, another police officer interrupted the detective, telling him “do not kill this man in here, after all he is wanted in Yazoo City.” Bloodied and writhing in pain, Washington asked to contact his family, but the request was ignored. Because he had not been formally charged with a crime, New Orleans law enforcers believed that Washington had no constitutional protection again self-incrimination or coercive interrogation and no right to an arraignment or bail, and they had no obligation to contact his relatives or to provide medical care for him.


2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (100) ◽  
pp. 1099
Author(s):  
Alberto Oehling de los Reyes

Resumen:El artículo 53 de la Constitución española recoge tres cuestiones básicas: en primer lugar, determina que los derechos y libertades vinculan a todo el poder público; en segundo lugar, determina la protección constitucional y judicial de los derechos y libertades y de los derechos fundamentales; en tercer lugar, reconoce los principios rectores de la política social y económica. En este artículo se analizan estos preceptos y conceptos constitucionales, pero también se estudia su desarrollo legislativo desde 1978 y la realidad práctica hasta el día de hoy. En el artículo también se hace análisis de algunas incoherencias de la jurisprudencia del Tribunal Constitucional en materias fundamentales del artículo 53 de la Constitución española de 1978. La intención es dar una visión de conjunto del artículo 53 de la Constitución desde 1978 hasta hoy.Summary:1. Introduction. 2. The structure of the practical realization of the article 53. 3. Preconditions of the legislation of the rights and freedoms and fundamental rights: 3.1 The principle of subjection and legally binding of all public authorities. 3.2 The principle of legal reserve. 3.3 The core content of the rights and freedoms. 4. The preferred procedure and ordinary summary of the article 53: 4.1 Outline of evolution and situation of the preferred procedure and summary inthe jurisdictional divisions. 4.2 About the protection of fundamental rights with procedural nature. 5. The remedy of amparo in the context of the article 53.2. 6. Approximation to the practical sense of the principles recognized in Chapter III Title I.Abstract:The article 53 of the Spanish Constitution specifies three basic issues: First, determines that the rights and liberties link all the public authorities; Secondly, determines the judicial and constitutional protection of the rights and freedoms and fundamental rights in Spain; Thirdly, recognizes the guiding principles of the social and economic policy. In this article are analysed these constitutional provisions and concepts, but also is studied their legislative development since 1978 and the practical reality until the present day. In the article are also analysed some inconsistencies in the jurisprudence of the SpanishConstitutional Court on fundamental issues about the article 53 of the Spanish Constitution of 1978. The intention is to give an overview of the article 53 of the Constitution from 1978 until today.


Author(s):  
Адріан Яворський

In the Polish civil law, and in the civil procedure behind it, we are dealing with increased protection of farms, in particular farms run by individual farmers. Factors justifying this special protection of an agricultural holding are the variable economic situation on the agricultural market, conducting agricultural activity in specific conditions independent of the farmer (e.g. type of soils, climatic conditions), as well as the most important, constitutional protection of individual agricultural holdings. The basis of the agricultural system of the state is a family farm (Article 22 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland), the legislator must adjust lower-ranking provisions to this constitutional primacy, hence the above restrictions have been introduced to the code of civil procedure. Key words: court, enforcement bodies, Enforcement of a farm by a bailiff, civil procedure.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document