IPO Forum - Human Rights

[Delfos]

Article 1 - obligation to respect human rights
Any signatory party is bound to secure the rights under the other Articles of this Human Rights Charter.

Article 2 - right to Life
This right means that nobody can take anyone else's life away without justification. This justification can only be applied by national constitutional laws.

Article 3 - right to Dignity
From the moment you are born to the moment you die, you have the right to live in dignity. Every human must respect someone else's dignity, because if we are disgraced by someone else, that someone is taking our right to be a respectful human being.

Article 4 - right for Food and Water.
As basic properties of survival. A government or collective cannot hide or remove such resources from their population, this prohibits the illicit property of natural goods.

Article 5 - right for a Fair Trial
Every human has the right for a fair trial, including the right to a public hearing before an independent and impartial tribunal within reasonable time, the presumption of innocence, and other minimum rights for those charged in a criminal case.

Article 6 - prohibition of torture
This prohibits torture, and "inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment". There are no exceptions or limitations on this right.
This provision usually applies, apart from torture, to cases of severe police violence and poor conditions in detention.

Article 7 - prohibition of slavery
This prohibits slavery and forced labour, but excepted from this prohibitions are conscription, national service, prison labour, service exacted in cases of emergency or calamity, and "normal civic obligations".

Article 8 - no punishment without law
Prohibits the retrospective criminalisation of acts and omissions. No person may be punished for an act that was not a criminal offence at the time of its commission. The article states that a criminal offence is one under either national or international law, which would permit a party to prosecute someone for a crime which was not illegal under their domestic law at the time, so long as it was prohibited by (possibly customary) international law. This also prohibits a heavier penalty being imposed than was applicable at the time when the criminal act was committed.

Article 9 - right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion
This provides a right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. This includes the freedom to change a religion or belief, and to manifest a religion or belief in worship, teaching, practice and observance, subject to certain restrictions that are in accordance with law and necessary in a civilized society.

Article 10 - prohibition of discrimination
This prohibition is broad in some ways, and narrow in others. On the one hand, the article protects against discrimination based on any of a wide range of grounds. The article provides a list of such grounds, including sex, race, colour, language, religion and several other criteria, and most significantly providing that this list is non-exhaustive.

Article 11 - prohibition of abuse of rights
No one may use the rights guaranteed by the Human Rights Charter to seek the abolition or limitation of rights guaranteed in the Charter. This addresses instances where states seek to restrict a human right in the name of another human right, or where individuals rely on a human right to undermine other human rights.

Any concerns? Any protocols? anything?

[Delfos]

Protocol 1 - A2 (for Article 2) - Moratorium for Death Penalty
To both justify the justification of ending a human life, and to prevent the abuse of justification, a moratorium must be presented.

ooc: i need to finish this, found out i got no time, please comment

[Capconia]

Protocol 1 - A2 (for Article 2) - Moratorium for Death Penalty
To both justify the justification of ending a human life, and to prevent the abuse of justification, a moratorium must be presented.

Agreed.  If the death penalty is to be a part of the law, there should be a clear cut definition of criminal acts that are worthy of death, with concise explanations of what specific actions constitute that type of criminal act.  Likewise, if one of those offenses are committed, it should not automatically be considered a 'death penalty only' case.  Each case should be handled on an individual basis, with several things taken into consideration including, but not limited to, past criminal history, the aftermath of what happened (e.g. excessive loss of life, large amount of damage to property, etc.) mental health, and so forth.  In addition, the death penalty should not be mandatory in situations like this.  Life imprisonment should also be considered as an alternative punishment.

[Delfos]

Of course! Now we should think of more protocols before I push this into international community for discussion and further ratification.

[Cantr]

Protocol 1 - A2 (for Article 2) - Moratorium for Death Penalty
To both justify the justification of ending a human life, and to prevent the abuse of justification, a moratorium must be presented.

Agreed.  If the death penalty is to be a part of the law, there should be a clear cut definition of criminal acts that are worthy of death, with concise explanations of what specific actions constitute that type of criminal act.  Likewise, if one of those offenses are committed, it should not automatically be considered a 'death penalty only' case.  Each case should be handled on an individual basis, with several things taken into consideration including, but not limited to, past criminal history, the aftermath of what happened (e.g. excessive loss of life, large amount of damage to property, etc.) mental health, and so forth.  In addition, the death penalty should not be mandatory in situations like this.  Life imprisonment should also be considered as an alternative punishment.

And don't forget exile.

We have to use all those islands out near Feniexia for something.

[Delfos]

and 200 stoning.

[Delfos]

What's wrong with the human rights charter? Why isn't everyone signing it? Why people that support death penalty aren't signing it, are they afraid to write a moratorium? Why would national law not support our Human Rights charter?

[Pachamama]

ooc Uhm did I miss something? Was this deleted or moved. I could swear i already signed this.
Ah no matter.

[Delfos]

this is another topic, this is IPO discussion about human rights, I'm trying to figure why people think it's a bad charter if it even arranges their messy constitutions. Apart from Myroria being racist, any other of those who posted on the topic could have signed it, the charter is so general. What's wrong with it?