Freedom is a basic human right which means all of us deserving but it is not a sheer right. Simply put, it has to be limited in order to protect the legitimate purpose behind it. Then, what is the principle of the purpose? It is regarding others: the human right of us. To illustrate, you cannot spread the harmful information which leading to society being unstable. In 2003, the age of SARS in Hong Kong, there was a piece of fake news that the Hong Kong government would list Hong Kong as an epidemic area by referencing the related law. Finally, a 14 years old teenager was arrested for spreading this fake new. Clearly, this kind of fake news might result in the panic of the general public. It is an example to introduce that freedom of speech can be restricted.
Also, in some situations, leading to the loss of life can be legitimate because the right to life is not absolute. For example, we can commit self-defense when we are facing the threat of life from others. Self-defense is the legitimate act to kill the root of the threat; otherwise, you would be murdered by the threat. Regarding the limitations on individual freedom and the state using the military force, there is three proportionality rule that is mentioned in the reading resource.
Save your time!
We can take care of your essay
- Proper editing and formatting
- Free revision, title page, and bibliography
- Flexible prices and money-back guarantee
First, individual freedom is restricted as there is a weight we give in order to limit the misuse of individual freedom. For instance, the freedom of speech is restricted in society: you cannot say something which is religious or racial hatred as this is not a moral behavior that the general public do not accept it. And the reason why it is unacceptable is the fundamental value, which is respecting each other because of equality, restricts our behavior: what can we do or not.
Then, the use of the military force is restricted by the UN Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials. These principles provide a standard to international society and its members that there are some situations in which the state can resort to the military force and how the state uses the military force properly. According to these principles state that only in self-defense, saving other’s life, facing a dangerous person, then the officials can use the fatal attack in order to protect life. Moreover, every government should be monitored that the civilian damage has to be proportionate to the military advantage. If the collateral damage becomes disproportionate to the military advantage and hence illegal. Those who violate this rule will be treated as war criminals. To illustrate, renowned academics among over 3,700 supporting the petition by global academics against police brutality in Hong Kong shows that the Hong Kong Police Force might misuse its military advantage and therefore it becomes disproportionate to the collateral damage.
Also, in a state or region, the role of the government is to determine whether the interference with a human right represents a legitimate limitation on the right concerned. The three-stage process is the way for the obliged decision-maker to adopt: 1. It is a must to have a legitimate aim of interference. 2. The law must prescribe the interference clearly and in an accessible manner. 3. The interference must be proportionate to the identified legitimate aim. To demonstrate, the Roman government kept a secret file of a Romanian man. It seems that it is a violation and interference to his right to privacy. But, this kind of interference can be necessary and proportionate to the aim of national security. Then, we cannot say that this kind of interference is a violation of human rights when this kind of interference is under the legal safeguards and appropriate judicial supervision. Therefore, the government cannot violate human rights without a reasonable and acceptable explanation because of the rule of law: In a democratic society, the government needs to justify its interference and that justification must be in accordance with the rule of law. The rule of law can ensure the protection of human rights.
In addition, detention is a concerned issue that is there any violation when detention occurs. Some governments are misusing detentions as a means to tackle those who have different politic views or express their opinions. This will cause the appearance of the prisoners of conscience and political prisoners. Their detentions have come to be related to those regimes which generally disregard basic freedom. They are arrested because of expressing political opinions or claiming democratic rights. Their trials are often sorely lacking in the basic elements of a fair trial: the presumption of innocence, access to the lawyer of one’s choice, the opportunity to challenge the evidence before an independent judge. Take the prisoners of conscience in China as an example, Liu Xiaobo is the one of them that the Amnesty International recognized. Prisoners of conscience include dissidents in prison, human rights defenders, and believers who have been defined by the authorities as illegal religions. However, these prisoners of conscience may be sentenced by the authorities to 'instigate, incite, or induce others to commit crimes' due to their statements as 'anti-government', and therefore be sentenced to imprisonment for civil strife or treason. In 2008, Liu Xiaobo initiated and participated in the drafting of Charter 08, which mainly called for freedom of speech, human rights, and free elections. After the drafting of Charter 08, Liu Xiaobo was detained on December 8, 2008, for 'suspected incitement to subvert state power'. On 23rd June 2009, Liu Xiaobo was arrested on suspicion of inciting subversion of state power with the approval of the Chinese procuratorate. He is sentenced to 11 years in prison and two years of deprivation of political rights. On 8th October 2010, Norwegian Nobel Commissioner announced that they decided to present Liu Xiaobo with the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize because of Struggling for basic human rights in China by the way of non-violence.
To conclude, the nature of human rights is to recognize the worth of an individual human being. The restrictions on freedom must be legitimate that interferences with individual liberty only be undertaken in accordance with properly constituted legal proceedings. However, some regimes do not offer a fair trial to some prisoners. Therefore, their human rights are not protected owing to the defective law. Theoretically, an individual’s freedom is not extinguished on arrest or conviction, the freedom is restricted to the extent that this is necessary such as the right to a safe environment. The essential aim of prison systems should have the functions of reformation and social rehabilitation rather than the functions of political suppression tools.
Stuck on your essay?
