Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The right to privacy and the protection of sexual orientation lie at the core of the fundamental rights guaranteed by Articles 14, 15, and 21 of the Constitution. [ 6 ] Their rights are not "so-called" but are real rights founded on sound constitutional doctrine.
The Regulations were used to intern opponents of World War II, particularly fascists (like Adrien Arcand) and Communists (including Jacob Penner, Bruce Magnuson and Tom McEwen) as well as opponents of conscription such as Quebec nationalist and Montreal mayor Camillien Houde.
The Supreme Court must decide if the right to privacy can be enforced against private entities. [29] The Indian Supreme Court with nine-judge bench under JS Khehar, ruled on 24 August 2017, that the right to privacy is a fundamental right for Indian citizens per Article 21 of the Constitution and additionally under Part III rights. Specifically ...
[11] Some decades later, in a highly cited article of his own, Melville B. Nimmer described Warren and Brandeis' essay as "perhaps the most famous and certainly the most influential law review article ever written", attributing the recognition of the common law right of privacy by some 15 state courts in the United States directly to "The Right ...
Several type of persons has right to the treatment equal to the prisoners of war, without holding this status (parliamentarians, children-combatants). [ 28 ] [ 29 ] In case of doubt, the concerned person has a right to the presumption of status of prisoner of war, [ 28 ] [ 30 ] until the exact status is established by the competent court.
Some commentators believe that the effect of Article 51 is only to preserve this right when an armed attack occurs, and that other acts of self-defence are banned by article 2(4). [4] Another view is that Article 51 acknowledges the previously existing customary international law right and then proceeds to lay down procedures for the specific ...
The First Amendment states the government cannot violate the individual's right to " freedom of speech, or of the press". [3] In the past, this amendment primarily served as a legal justification for infringement on an individual's right to privacy; as a result, the government was unable to clearly outline a protective scope of the right to speech versus the right to privacy.
This may be compared to the jurisprudence of the United States Supreme Court, which has also adopted a somewhat broad interpretation of the right to privacy. Furthermore, Article 8 sometimes comprises positive obligations: [41] whereas classical human rights are formulated as prohibiting a state from interfering with rights, and thus not to do ...