Civil Liberties and Rights - Article Example

Civil Liberties and Rights These refers to the rights and freedoms accorded to specific persons, guaranteeing them the freedom from vices such as forced labor, slavery and freedom from torture and death (stephenson,turner,brestler, 9). There are certain rights related to this, such as the right to a fair trial, right to privacy and the right to personal defense. This is an interesting topic, in that it presents the fundamentals of human freedom and rights that are necessary for their survival, even in the hostility of an environment that may not naturally favor them. For example, consider an alien living in a land where there is not any of his tribe, race or religious affiliation. It would be difficult for such an individual to survive in that environment, since the other tribes, races or religious groups may want to interfere with the minority’s lifestyle. Without such fundamental rights, an individual could be forced to slavery, forced labor or torture and death. However, with such freedoms granted to the individual, then he can enjoy his religious beliefs without any interference. In case such rights are interfered with, then the individual is accorded the right to defense through the courts and also accorded a fair trial. Most fundamental are the rights to own property, freedom of speech, assembly and association as well as the right to marry and have a family (Alan, 15). With such freedoms and rights, all human beings are guaranteed of a life worth living, where a person can express their freedoms without the fear of victimization. The right to a fair trial is one of the paramount rights in the 21st century, where the laws are so diversified to the extent that exercising individual rights and committing a crime have a very thin line between them (stephenson,turner,brestler, 23). However, such limitations are addressed by the fundamental rights such as the Habeas corpus, which requires that an individual should be released from unlawful detention, in case sufficient evidence lacks to the effect that an individual committed such offenses (Alan, 23). The remedy can either be sought by the accused themselves or any other party who comes to their aid. Though this principle started in England, it is now adopted in many other countries, though under different laws and clauses. This provision is a vital tool towards ensuring the freedom and the rights of individuals, mostly against state actions such as arbitrary arrests (Alan, 46). Where a country would arrest and imprison people or groups for indulgence in demonstrations, strikes and mass protests against the government authorities or agencies who are failing in their duties, the provision is then applied to release such people. This provision gives the affected individuals the right to be presented before a judge and have their cases heard. This provision is a guarantee to the individuals that they are protected against the unlawful detention. However, the limitation associated with this provision is that it does not guarantee an individual a fair trial (stephenson,turner,brestler, 34). Therefore, in the events that there are provisions of the law that allows detentions without trial, for example the patriot act of the United States of America, then an individual finds such a provision less useful. I believe that such a right is important though, to guarantee individuals rights to face the state after an arbitrary arrest and detention. Such rights provided by the Habeas corpus clause are however limited by counter legal provisions such as the Bill of Attainder. Under this law, a criminal sentenced for serious crimes is denied his fundamental rights to property and their transfer at will. These serious crimes include felony or treason. This is a provision of the laws of England, which provides for the reversal of such properties owned by the individual to the state (Alan, 71). However, such a law is detrimental to the fundamental rights and freedoms of an individual, since it violates the right of persons to own and transfer property. Furthermore, the law is not appropriate as it can be used by the state to confiscate the property of individuals they consider a threat to their political viewpoint, even when the individuals have not been rightfully judged (Alan, 18). Such law was applied in 1798, where some individuals who opposed the then King Edward were charged and consequently had their properties confiscated, though there was no evidence at all (Alan, 125). I believe that such laws are detrimental to the fundamental rights of persons. Every individual should be accorded a right to own and transfer property, even when they have been accused and convicted. Not only does such a provision of the law deny individuals the right to own property but also the right to a fair trial. The freedom of conscious is yet another fundamental freedom of the individuals in modern day that enhances the freedom fair trial, owing to the association of some religions with extremist ideologies and terrorism. The freedom of religion is addressed under the Free Exercise clause of the US constitution, which provides that no laws will be made for respecting an established religion or prohibiting the free exercise of a religion (stephenson,turner,brestler, 59). As such, any individual is accorded the right to belong to any religious affiliation of their choice and freely assemble and associate with members of such congregations. The freedom extends even to the limits of not forcing any individual to work on a day they consider their religious or Sabbath day. The freedom of religion has been a controversial issue for centuries, having some religions that considered themselves superior undermine the other religions and even persecute the members of such religious affiliations. However, the freedom notwithstanding, there are some occurrences where the freedom of religion has been undermined and individuals victimized for belonging to such religious affiliations. There are some laws that serve to counter the freedoms guaranteed by the provisions. For example, the patriot act of the US serves to undermine the religious freedom, by making provisions such as those ones requiring the monitoring of the religious group activities for the sake of terror investigations. I believe that the freedom of religion, association and assembly is paramount for human existence. The freedom for assembly and association is the basis of the Womens suffrage that allowed for women to run for leadership roles and vote in public elections. Prior to this, women were not allowed to run for office or participate in any voting in public elections (Alan, 89). This movement allowed for women to associate freely and seek for support that allowed them to eventually gain the support to enable them engage in voting and run for public offices. The movement was elicited by the traditional roles that women were relegated to in society. Women were not initially allowed to have education, and even those who had, were required to remain at home and undertake the domestic duties (Stephenson, turner, brestler, 67). Through the freedom of assembly and association, women and other supporting men associations engaged in petition for the repeals of laws to allow them have the right to education, voting and run for public offices. This movement was not only a social but also a political movement that allowed women to petition the government and have it eventually allow for the women changes. The voting rights for women were eventually incorporated into international law, by the United Nations Human Rights commission. Thus according to this provision, anybody has the right to contribute to the government of his country through selecting their representatives (Alan, 114). I believe that the freedom of assembly and association is a core of human freedom that should be accorded to any individual. In conclusion, the right to a fair trial is a fundamental right of man. However, this right is not easily obtained and accorded to the individuals. When an individual is denied the right to fair trial, they may end up being sentenced for offenses they did not commit. This is a violation of the human rights, since the state can take an advantage of such a provision to punish those individuals who have diversionary issues and viewpoints to those of the governments. Further, there are laws that has been established by countries that undermine this freedom. The patriot act of the US is one such example of a legislation undermining this freedom. The act provides for the apprehension, prosecution and sentencing of individuals believed to be terror suspects without according them an opportunity to undergo a fair trial. By extension, the act denies the suspects an opportunity to have a legal defense or even an opportunity to confront witnesses. The Bill of Attainder is one such legislation that also denies individuals their right to a fair trial. This is because, once the individuals are accused of having committed serious crimes such as treason or felony, they are sentenced without a prior trial to verify the evidence. The right to a fair trial is enhanced by such legislation clauses as the Habeas corpus. The clause allows individuals to be released from unlawful detention once they are found to have not been guilty of any such alleged offenses. Works Cited Alan, Dershowitz. Preserving Civil Liberties: Reflections on the Fractured Landscape: Chronicle of Higher Education. Chronicle Review, 2001. 12-160. Print. Stephenson, Jr., Bressler, Friedrich, and Karlesky, Turner. Introduction to American government, 5th edition. Paperback publishers, (2009). 8-75. Print. Read More