scholarly journals Group Asylum, Sovereignty, and the Ethics of Care

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (8) ◽  
pp. 142
Author(s):  
Luis Xavier López-Farjeat ◽  
Cecilia Coronado-Angulo

It is assumed that the states have the right to control their borders and decide whom they want to exclude, isolate, ban, or impose restrictions on. Although it seems that the problematic notion of “sovereignty” gives the state the right to make these kinds of decisions, there are situations where ethical duties to other human beings supersede sovereignty and where, in fact, those ethical duties limit sovereignty. This would be the case of group asylum situations. In this paper, we propose Axel Honneth’s ethics of recognition as a complement to the liberal notion of solidarity. By introducing a derivation of the ethics of recognition, namely, the “ethics of care,” we argue that our connection to others and the ethical duties we have with them impose some limits on the idea of sovereignty.

2021 ◽  
Vol 66 (05) ◽  
pp. 145-148
Author(s):  
Ниджат Рафаэль оглу Джафаров ◽  

It can be accepted that the classification of human rights, its division, types, and groups, is of particular importance. The syllogism for human rights can be taken as follows: law belongs to man; human beings are the highest beings on earth like living beings. Therefore, the regulation prevails. The right to freedom is conditional. Man is free. Consequently, human rights are dependent. Morality is the limit of the law. Morality is the limit and content of human actions. Therefore, the law is the limit of human activities. Morality is related to law. Law is the norm of human behavior. Thereby, human behavior and direction are related to morality. The people create the state. The state has the right. Therefore, the right of the state is the right of the people. The state is an institution made up of citizens. Citizens have the privilege. Such blessings as Dignity, honor, conscience, zeal, honor, etc., and values are a part of morality and spiritual life. Morality is united with law. Therefore, moral values are part of the law. Everyone has the right to freedom of thought and conscience. Space is about the law. Therefore, everyone has the right to opinion and conscience. Key words: human rights, freedom of conscience, conceptuality, citizenship


2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 902
Author(s):  
Rhenal Cokronegoro ◽  
Mulati .

Children are gifts from God Almighty that we must guard and that we must protect, because children are also human beings who have rights and dignity as human beings. One of the rights of the child is the right to enjoy the wealth of his parents, including inheritance. Many children whose parents experience problems, such as divorce or one or both parents die. In order for a child to do a legal act, he needs a guardian in carrying out legal actions. Guardians here have a function to represent all children's needs in carrying out legal actions. In guardianship, there is a guardian’s overseer whose function is to oversee the guardian in terms of managing the assets of the child, in this case is the Heritage Hall. The Heritage Hall has two functions, namely as guardians of supervisors in charge of guarding guardians, as well as temporary guardians. The problem here is that the Heritage Hall is not cared for by the community, so not all guardianship verdicts use the trustees in it. whereas the Law clearly stipulates that the Heritage Hall must be the trustee in every trusteeship order ordered in the State of Indonesia.


2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 175
Author(s):  
Lily Faradina ◽  
Kadek Wiwik Indrayanti

The rights of prisoners have been explicitly regulated in Act No.12 of 1995 on Corrections. The law therein outlines 13 (thirteen) rights reserved for a prisoner while in a Penitentiary. The right to get a wage or premium for the work done is a right that is often neglected in practice in the correctional institution located in our country. This happens because of the stigma of the people who still tend to assume that a prisoner is a party that deserves to be treated arbitrarily because of the crime he has committed. It is this kind of thinking that ultimately also affects officials or prison officers who end up treating incendiary people like humans who are unfit to accept the rights that have been provided by the state. Many inmates are employed in penitentiaries who are not paid for by their employers. If this continues to be done then the purpose of punishment will actually violate human rights inherent in the Prisoners as human beings. However, prisoners must also be protected by their rights as human beings.


Author(s):  
Abzahir Khan ◽  
Muhammad Ayub

State is the basic requisite of any coordinated and civilized nation. The state must exist for maintaining harmony, adherence to law and mutual relationship within a nation. Each and every nation has undergone diverse experiences with respect to the state. However, the approach of a welfare state is found is the present day era. The approach of such a welfare state guarantees all the individual and collective rights of a nation. The main focus of a welfare state is human and humanities. All its potentials have to ensure the survival, safety of human beings and safeguarding his life, property and honor.         A welfare state holds various institutions which for the good and welfare of the masses. in order to run various administrator bodies, it requires competent and skilled persons. These persons and individuals should be equipped with integrity, power to work, moderations, competence, skill and experience in the concern faculty, so that they may put the institutions on the right direction and the people could benefit always.  In the perspective of the related article the standard of selecting office bearers in a welfare state has been dealt with.


2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 93
Author(s):  
Erfa Ernawati

The purpose of national education is to develop the potential of learners to become human beings who believe and cautious to God Almighty, have noble character, healthy, knowledgeable, capable, creative, independent, and become citizens of a democratic and responsible. In fact, although the number of educated people is increasing, there is still a lot of criminality, immorality, violation of law and other issues as if eliminating the identity of a nation that berpencasila. This is where the importance of morals, the role of morals in life is often beyond the role of science, for science without morality encourages people to the kebiadapan ". So it becomes a necessity for all educators, the public as well as the state to focus on matters of morality, by realizing that children's time is the right time to instill morals. An effective method is needed to instill morals to the children, and in this case we are referring to Abdullah Nasih Ulwan who has made the formula for the education of morals for children in accordance with the rules of the current education. Departing from the background mentioned above, In order for research to have direction, base and meaning, it is necessary writer to formulate the purpose of this research, namely: first, to know urgency of moral education in children according to Abdullah Nasih Ulwan, second to know the method and application of moral education on according to Abdullah Nasih Ulwan, the third to know its relevance to the current conditions.


2018 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 283-289 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paulo André Stein Messetti ◽  
Dalmo De Abreu Dallari

Introduction: Human dignity, as coined by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR / 1948), is an expression social solidarity, which should cement the relations between people. Human dignity is the foundation of all rights, such as freedom, equality, justice and peace in the world, and in Brazil, human dignity was deemed a fundamental pillar of the country’s post-1988 constitutional order. Objective: This article seeks to a deeper investigation about the social nature of human dignity and its definition over time.     Methods: This is an exploratory research meant to unpack the concepts of "human dignity", "bioethics", "human rights" and "constitution". After describing the conceptual evolution of human dignity and the facts relevant to its conceptual formation in world history - as a normative standard and a legal rule -, we address the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR/1948), the Declaration of Helsinki (DH/1964), the Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights (UDBHR/2005), and the definition adopted in the Constitution of the Federative Republic of Brazil (CFRB/1988). The study was carried out without temporal limitation, and included a review of referenced books, legal doctrines, as well as articles and books in the SciELO database. Results and discussion: The findings ratify that human dignity is the foundation of all rights, including those of freedom, equality, justice and peace in the world, and must also guide the rights and duties of social regulation. Human dignity has changed from a criterion of power attributed to the social position of individuals to a value of the right to freedom, which now goes beyond the right of freedom and is the basis of modern constitutional democracy, which makes possible the realization of solidarity, as well as the duty and purpose of the state and the community. The will of the subject, of society, of the science and of the state, as well as the rules of domination and regulation, must have a limit on human dignity, and human dignity is not just fundamental right, in the sense of the Constitution, and must prevail over the exclusive will of science, the State and society. Therefore, in the making of power decisions and in realization of possible innovations of science involving human beings, human dignity demands the explicit consideration of respect and promotion of it. Conclusion: Human dignity is enshrined in Brazilian constitutional law, as well as in bioethics and in human rights, and it constitutes all the fundamental rights of the human person. It is not merely a rule of autonomy and liberty, and it is an obligatory and non-derogable precept in the making of power decisions, a true main foundation of constitutional democracies.  


Author(s):  
Joyce Gotlib

This chapter examines and compares the legitimised objects linked to the right to land of black rural communities associated with the reparation policies in Brazil and South Africa. In the Brazilian case, legal recognition of landownership of areas occupied by reminiscences of quilombos (descendants of the slave population) is part of the affirmative action policies adopted by the federal government to combat racial discrimination since the proclamation of the constitution of 1988. In South Africa, the land restitution programme is aimed at the reparation of injustices committed during the apartheid. The chapter shows how the state legitimises ‘orders of grandeur’ of land that differ from its Western conception — which understands it only as an economic good — and converts them into state legibility. It also considers the different ways in which ancestral land rights are justified by the state in these research contexts, in which ancestors, saints and graves have agency as do human beings.


POLITEA ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 37
Author(s):  
Alam Subuh Fernando

<p>Data accumulation literature is the method used in this research, in this article it will describe women’s political rights and opened up framework that always considered women marginalized. And indoctrinating the false paradigm of woman.  In the presence convention ratification of the political rights of women, that means the state has an obligation to ensure and aluminate the right of woman on the political rights. CEDAW, UDHR and DUHAM states that the rights and freedoms need to be owned by everyone without discrimination. Therefore with positive legal regulations and Islamic law the state should ensure and protect of HAM, UDHR and DHAM tend to anthropocentralize the meaning of human beings as objects in its assertion, while HAM in Islamic law is more the centralized meaning Qur’an and Hadith as its object.</p><p> </p>


1970 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-68
Author(s):  
Uday Shankar ◽  
Saurabh Bindal

Pollution free environment is indispensible for the inhabitants of this planet. The Supreme Court of India taking cognizance of the same in its judicial creativity has accorded the right to live in a pollution free environment the status of a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. At the same time, right to development places human beings at the centre of development casting an obligation on the state to ensure the benefits of development to the citizenry. Interestingly, both right to environment and right to development draw their genesis from Article 21 of the Constitution. Such affirmation of rights necessarily presents a question of compliance by the state. This paper traces the origin of right to environment and right to development in the larger context of the fundamental rights. It critically examines the usefulness of declaration of these rights under the scheme of the Constitution. It argues that the judiciary in its judicial creativity has made unreasonable interference into the matters reserved for the executive which is not in accordance with the basic structure of the Constitution. The paper calls for maintenance of harmony between the two organs of the state.


Author(s):  
Luis Ernesto Chiesa Aponte

In this article it is argued that in two controversial homicide cases——severing conjoined twins and downing a hijacked commercial plane headed toward a heavily populated area——it is permissible to kill innocent human beings without having to establish the existence of a claim of justification such as selfdefense or choice of evils. Even though criminal law scholars consider that unjustified conduct is always wrongful, the position defended in the article is that there is a normative gap between an absence of justification and a finding of wrongdoing. This "normative gap defense," which negates wrongdoing without justifying the conduct, is the best way to deal with the troubling homicide cases described above. The normative gap defense is grounded on what is called a "reasons" theory of wrongdoing. According to this theory, the state cannot legitimately prohibit conduct when, in light of the fact that there are powerful utilitarian reasons in favor of performing the act and commanding deontological reasons against performing it, we are in a state of equipoise in which it is impossible for us to determine which course of action is "the right thing to do" (i.e., justified). Under these circumstances, the conduct should be regarded as non——wrongful even though it is unjustified.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document