’n Christelike teorie van menseregte

For centuries, the protection of fundamental human rights has been part of the historical conceptual and constitutional legacy of the peoples on both sides of the Atlantic. Great thinkers from all nations have contributed towards the generation of human and fundamental rights. Nowadays these rights (or at least their substance) are universally recognised, beyond the continents of Europe and America. Virtually all the UN nations recognise them at least verbally. The fact that they are not put into effect, let alone observed, everywhere, does not alter their claim to validity. Practice and theory operate at different speeds, and politics carries the duty to change this.^ The academic world is only able to send out reminders and to encourage progress. The General Assembly of the UN adopted a "Universal Declaration of Human Rights" on 10 December 1948. Following on from the origin of their spiritual forefathers, it was rooted in the European and American declarations of human rights, and embodied human dignity, protection of personality, individual rights to freedom, equality under the law, basic judicial rights and rights to political codetermination. However, these traditional rights were extended to include more recent legal rights, which had become manifestly threatened through experiences in the Thirties and Forties, namely bans on torture and deportation, the right of asylum and the right to citizenship. Certain social, economic and cultural rights were also added. However, it must be noted that the Declaration has not acquired the status of a binding international legal rule, despite the fact that a minimum standard (irrespective of how this may be circumscribed), has by now become a constituent of customary international law. Further markers en route to an international Charter of Human Rights have included numerous special declarations and conventions, and in particular the International Covenants on Civil and Political Rights and on Economic and Social and

Freedom of expression is one of the fundamental human rights guaranteed in various international legal instruments. The development of information and communication technology, especially social media, has opened up new spaces for people to express their opinions. This research aims to analyze the protection of the right to freedom of opinion through social media from a human rights perspective. This research uses normative legal research methods with a qualitative approach. Research data was obtained through literature studies of various statutory regulations, books, scientific journals and other legal sources. The data that has been collected is then analyzed in three stages, namely data reduction, data presentation and drawing conclusions. The research results show that the protection of freedom of expression on social media is regulated in various policies including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), and the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR). Meanwhile, in Indonesia it is regulated in the 1945 Law, the Human Rights Law, and Law Number 19 of 2016. The right to freedom of opinion through social media is a fundamental human right that needs to be protected. This right is considered a fundamental right that cannot be reduced or limited by anyone or the state, this emphasizes the need for strong fulfillment and protection of this right. However, this right also needs to be balanced with the responsibility to use it wisely and responsibly.

It is a truism that the protection of human rights is vital for human security. The pursuit of the right to development and its consequent benefits are anchored to the protection of fundamental human rights. Jeremy Philips and Alison Firth have noted that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) would appear to depend on intellectual property for the realization of some of its objectives and call attention to the right to privacy, to property and to making a living.

Subject of the research. The article considers two levels in the mechanism of protection of human rights and freedoms: national and supranational. National includes both judicial and non-judicial methods of protection. The supranational level is represented by universal (global) and regional ways. The purpose of the research is to identify an effective mechanism for the protection of human rights that can replace the mechanism of protection provided by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 1950, which has ceased to be valid for citizens of the Russian Federation. Research methods are the formal-legal method, analysis, synthesis, formallogical method.The main results. Theoretically, a particular citizen can use any of the national and supranational mechanisms for the protection of human rights. However, the nature of their action and the procedure for gaining access to these mechanisms are different, which affects their effectiveness and the readiness of a person to turn to one or another method of protection. Among supranational mechanisms, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948 has a unique status: on the one hand, this document is “a symbol of the moral consensus of all states, the starting point for the creation of a modern human rights regime”; on the other hand, it is an act-declaration, the application of which in specific legal relations and the protection of human rights with its help are problematic. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 12/16/1966 provides for the establishment of a Human Rights Committee that exercises control over the provisions of the Covenant through a system of reports. Reports on measures taken to implement the rights provided for by the Covenant, as well as on non-fulfillment of their obligations under the Covenant by other States Parties, are submitted by States Parties. The mechanism of reports, however, is not reliable enough - there are states that ignore it.Regional Conventions are rightly considered the most effective means of protecting human rights. The implementation of the provisions of the Conventions is ensured by the activities of supranational judicial bodies, to which the applicant can file a complaint. The conditions for applying to such a court, its territorial proximity, the possibility of executing court decisions make this method of protection as accessible as possible. Among the national remedies, first of all, it should be noted the activity of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation to protect the constitutional rights of citizens. The provisions of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and the Constitution of the Russian Federation in the section on human rights are almost identical, often written in the same phrases. But, despite the number of coincidences in the designation of human rights and freedoms, the main thing is not the designation (this is a declaration) of a specific right or freedom, but how they are applied and what is the practice of their protection (interpretation) by the Constitutional Court at the national level and the Convention on the supranational. It is here that the understanding of “identical” formulations can differ, and the question of who is better: a national or supranational body protects a particular human right, becomes debatable. It should also be remembered about the very meaning of supranational protection as an opportunity to receive protection from one's own state, albeit a subsidiary one. Therefore, it would be wrong to assume that in the absence of the possibility of applying to the ECHR, a citizen will be able to receive protection in the Constitutional Court without prejudice to the outcome of such protection.Considering that the protection of human rights is, first of all, the activity of national courts of first instance, consideration by the courts of administrative, civil and criminal cases, in cases where it is carried out in full compliance with the norms of procedural legislation, is able to fully ensure the protection of the rights and human freedoms. To do this, the courts have all the necessary tools, you just need the ability and desire to use them.Among the internal structures for monitoring the observance of human rights, a number of state and public bodies can be distinguished - the Commissioner for Human Rights in the Russian Federation, the Council under the President of the Russian Federation for the Development of Civil Society and Human Rights, the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation, the police, the prosecutor's office and others. However, it is not possible to attribute them to the effective bodies for the protection of human rights.Conclusions. The existing national and supranational mechanisms for the protection of human rights, in their effectiveness, are not able to fully compensate for the loss of the opportunity for citizens of the Russian Federation to file a complaint with the European Court of Human Rights.

The ratification and domestication of international human rights instruments are used as indices to determine a state's commitment to the promotion and protection of human rights. The judge as part of the judiciary is one of the stakeholders to fulfil this task. According to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948 and the UN Declaration on Human Rights Defenders, everyone has a role to play in the realisation of human rights. Everyone should respect the role of those who work for the protection of human rights, through an independent judiciary, who are impartial, neutral, and independent in the promotion and protection of human rights. Article 37(3) of the Cameroonian constitution of 1996 as amended provides for the independence of the judge which constitutes part of the judiciary. This is to the effect that the President of the Republic shall guarantee the independence of the Judiciary. He shall appoint members of the bench and the legal department. Nevertheless, judges are partially independent in their role in the promotion and protection of human rights. This raises issues such as contradiction, inconsistency, and difficulties for the judges to play in the promotion and protection of human rights. This article is based on the hypothetical premise that the role of the judges in the promotion and protection of human rights in Cameroon is ineffective. It seeks to examine the effectiveness of the role of judges in the promotion and protection of human rights. Adopting the Doctrinal and comparative research method, the paper concludes that under article 37(3) of the constitution, judges are partially independent in their role in the promotion and protection of human rights. It is submitted that the provision of Article 37(3) should be revisited to ensure the independence of the judiciary and judges in particular in the promotion and protection of human rights. In addition, the judiciary must undergo a paradigm shift from complacent and disturbing judicial inertia to judicial activism.

The notion of a properly functioning human nature as a moral standard is a tenet of Western culture and is at the core Western humanism, Christian moral teaching, and natural law theory. Although these traditions recognize that the virtue of justice is exercised by giving one’s neighbor his due, they did not explore a person’s legitimate claims to goods in a modern theory of human rights. Enlightenment thinkers, as materialists and atheists, theorized that human rights are not related to God or human nature but are privileges granted by government. Jacques Maritain (1882–1973) developed theories of natural law and human rights. Maritain’s theory of human rights, employing a Thomistic methodology and founded on God and nature, is applicable to contemporary disputes, such as claims to a right to “same-sex” marriage.

It is indicated that proper protection of fundamental human rights is a key criterion for the existence of a true legal state. Coverage of the functioning of the European Court of Human Rights is becoming increasingly widespread in the information space. The significance of this institution not only does not decrease over time, but also increases. Today, the ECHR has become an effective mechanism of legal protection for those citizens who have exhausted the possibilities of achieving justice within the national legal system. The article examines the impact of the ECtHR decisions on the protection of human rights through the prism of modern challenges and threats. It is noted that the imperfection of the national judicial system is an obvious fact. At the same time, Ukraine is among the five countries with the largest number of applications to the European Court of Human Rights. It is emphasized that the fact that more and more people are applying to the European Court of Human Rights indicates that it is an effective mechanism for protecting their rights and freedoms. However, the ECtHR is a supranational mechanism for the protection of human rights: its capabilities are limited by its powers, the breadth of which is determined taking into account respect for the sovereignty of the member states that have voluntarily undertaken to implement the decisions of the Court to which they are parties. The effectiveness of the legal protection mechanism established by the European Convention on Human Rights depends not only on the efficiency of the Court’s work, but also on how conscientiously states implement its decisions. And only the combination of these two factors has the effect of ensuring human rights and fundamental freedoms stipulated by the Convention. It is concluded that in the context of adapting Ukrainian legislation to EU legislation, ensuring social human rights (the right to a decent standard of living and social development), political rights (compliance with international electoral standards, the right to association), and protecting human rights are the key to stable partnership relations with EU member states. Ukraine needs to continue to make considerable efforts to ensure the effectiveness of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, to create new effective national remedies for its violations, and to adapt national legislation to European standards. That is, the most effective and direct protection of human rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Convention should be ensured at the national level.

The urgency of the study is stipulated by the necessity to cover the process of project preparation and adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which will allow a comprehensive study of the nature of human rights, to understand their universal nature. The choice of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as an object of the study is determined by the special nature of this international soft law act. It is emphasized that the process of adopting this international act remains somewhat unclear among lawyers. The preparation and adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is hardly covered in the legal literature, which does not contribute to a comprehensive understanding of the Western human rights concept and relativism in the interpretation of human rights as a phenomenon within various legal cultures. Some aspects of project preparation and adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights are described. The activities of the Human Rights Commission, which consisted of 18 members representing various political, cultural and religious groups, are noted. It is emphesized that starting with Art.1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights from the words “All people are born free and equal…”, the developers of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights reproduced the idea of the universality of human rights, their global nature, that is not limited to a state or even a region. It is summed up that representatives of various groups of the population were involved in the work on the text of the document, creating an international act that was to consolidate human rights, to embody the ideas of equality of human rights, and their universal character. However, while adopting the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, not all states voted in its favor. Eight states have refrained from supporting it which is stipulated by a number of religious and political factors. At the same time, different interpretations of human rights by various states do not deny their universal nature. Covering the issue of human rights, it is advisable to disclose the process of preparation and adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which will allow systematically and clearly understand the nature of human rights, differences in the activities of various states concerning human rights ensuring.

“Everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration can be fully realized.”Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948, Article 28

South Africa’s democracy turned 30 years old in 2024. At the same time, its constitutional order and jurisprudence marked three decades since the Interim Constitution and its successor, the 1996 Constitution, came into operation. Coincidentally, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) turned 75 years old in the previous year, 2023. The confluence of these facts is quite poignant in the context of a constitutional text that is often lauded for its commitment to the protection of human rights and the eradication of the injustices of the past, which were firmly entrenched by the segregationist policies of the apartheid regime. At the centre of this hype about South African constitutional jurisprudence is the centrality of international law to the interpretation of the Bill of Rights as well as the development of the common law, customary law, and statutory law. With the UDHR being such a central pillar in the human rights sector, this study set out to determine the extent to which the Constitutional Court of South Africa relied on the UDHR and other international instruments in carrying out the mandate set out above. The study analysed cases delivered by the Court in two separate years, spaced ten years apart. The study did not necessarily attempt to determine a correlation, but simply to use descriptive statistics to determine how often, in those two years, the Court relied on international law in general, and on the UDHR in particular, in its interpretive and legal development mandate.

INTRODUCTION. Forced migration is one of the most difficult global problems. There is a clear interdependence between the problem of refugees and the issue of human rights, since human rights violations are one of the main reasons for the mass exodus of people from their countries of origin. It is also clear that counties that provide asylum have a sustainable practice of respecting the human dignity. Forced migrants have rights that must be respected during all stages of the exodus. We are talking about the fundamental rights and freedoms proclaimed in international and regional human rights treaties, primarily the protection of human dignity and the restoration of the minimum rights of people who left their countries of origin. This article discusses the problems of realization of the minimum rights of forced migrants, that is, those rights that guarantee survival and an adequate standard of living. The authors conduct a detailed study of national legislation in the field of forced migration of such European countries as Italy and Spain. In particular, this article analyzes recent legislative changes adopted in this countries in the field of asylum and the consequences for the realization of fundamental rights of refugees and asylum seekers. MATERIALS AND METHODS. This research is based on the analysis of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights of 1966, the Geneva Convention relating to the Status of Refugees of 1951, the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 1950, European Social Charter of 1961, European Union Charter of Fundamental Rights of 2000, UNHCR standards for receiving asylum seekers, and also an in-depth analysis of the national legislation of Italy and Spain in the field of forced migration. The methodological basis of the research consists of both general scientific (comparative historical and statistical methods, methods of generalization and systems analysis, case-study approach) and specific scientific (formal legal and comparative legal methods, method of interpretation of legal norms) research methods. RESULTS OF RESEARCH. On the basis of the analysis of international treaties, European and national legislation, judicial practice of states, as well as doctrinal studies of different researches, the authors formulate some conclusions related to the main problems of legislative regulation and the implementation of minimum rights of forced migrants in such EU member states as Italy and Spain. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. Despite the existence of international and, in particular, European standards in the field of human rights, practically those rights that are necessary for survival and maintenance of an adequate standard of living of people who have applied for asylum are not always fully respected. The experience of the Italian Republic and the Kingdom of Spain shows that fundamental rights of refugees can be often violated both during the examination of asylum applications and after their satisfaction. The absence of a unified legislative base, the tendency to pursue a more restrictive policy in the field of forced migration and unresolved problems of asylum legislation entail significant impediments for the realization in these countries of the basic rights of one of the most vulnerable category of people as forced migrants.

In this paper I argue that the discourse theoretic account of human rights defended by Jürgen Habermas contains a fruitful tension that is obscured by its dominant tendency to identify rights with legal claims. This weakness in Habermas's account becomes manifest when we examine how sweatshops diminish the secure enjoyment of subsistence, which Habermas himself (in recognition of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)) recognizes as a human right. Discourse theories of human rights are unique in tying the legitimacy of human rights to democratic deliberation and consensus. So construed, their specific meaning and force is the outcome of historical political struggle. However, unlike other legal rights, they possess universal moral validity. In this paper I argue that this tension between the legal and moral aspects of human rights can be resolved if and only if human rights are conceived as moral aspirations and not simply as legal claims. In particular, I shall argue that there are two reasons why human rights must be understood as moral aspirations that function non-juridically: First, the basic human goods to which human rights provide secure access are determinable only in relation to basic human capabilities that are progressively revealed in the course of an indefinite (fully inclusive and universal) process of collective learning; second, the institutional impediments to enjoying human rights are cultural in nature and cannot be remedied by means of legal coercion.

Us Counterterrorism and the Denial of Fundamental Rights from Torture to Fair Trial

The activity of the European Court of Human Rights is investigated and the significance of the relevant practice of the European Court for the judicial practice of Ukraine is determined. It is emphasized, that a constitutional complaint serves as an effective means of protecting fundamental human rights, strengthening the rule of law and building democracy, which has already been tested in many countries around the world. The article notes that the institution of constitutional complaint significantly expands the possibilities of protecting citizens. In general, this institution is a kind of constitutional appeal, which should be understood as a written petition, submitted to the Court to review the constitutionality of the law of Ukraine (its constitutional provisions), which is used in the final court decision in the case of the subject of a constitutional rights complaint. The author also draws attention to the issues of advantages and disadvantages of a constitutional complaint and a constitutional appeal separately. Thus, one of the advantages of having a constitutional complaint is that the grounds for filing a constitutional complaint are a violation of fundamental human and civil rights. The advantages also include the fact that, unlike a constitutional appeal, which is a mechanism solely for interpreting a certain provision of the law, which excludes the possibility for individuals to apply to a constitutional justice body to declare regulations unconstitutional, a complaint directly provides such a right. However, at the same time, the model of the constitutional complaint, introduced in Ukraine on the subject, is an incomplete normative constitutional complaint, which is related to the consideration of a specific case. After all, according to it, only one type of normative legal act is subject to appeal, a law, and only the one that was applied during the trial of the person. It is stated, that ensuring the possibility of a person to take an active part in the control over the activities of higher state authorities, which is implemented in the relevant legal forms, provides grounds for recognizing a constitutional complaint as one of the modern institutions of democracy. In fact, a constitutional complaint is an effective procedural means to protect the fundamental rights and freedoms of citizens

This commentary reflects on the legacy of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights on its 70th anniversary, in terms of the protection of human rights within Australia. I reflect on Australia’s failure to implement domestically the terms of the two founding Covenants, and the resulting piecemeal protections that exist for human rights. I finish by considering the growing complexities in understanding human rights, responsibilities, and limits.