In this essay, I will therefore first examine the limitations which Article 15 itself imposes on States - with reference to certain other international requirements which also apply in this regard. I will then briefly describe the way in which the European Court of Human Rights (hereafter: the Court) assesses cases under Article 15. 2. Limitations on State action at times of war or public emergencies contained in the text of Article 15 Article 15 ECHR, clearly allows States that are Party to the Convention to derogate from their normal obligations "in time of war or other public emergency threatening the life of the nation".
Good conclusions usually refer back to the question or title and address it directly - for example by using key words from the title.
How well do you think these conclusions address the title or question? Answering these questions should help you find out.
Do they use key words from the title or question?
Do they answer the question directly?
Can you work out the question or title just by reading the conclusion?
Every individual is different and so, by definition, common standards will treat people differently. Examples have been seen with regard to both the gender and background divides, where the law and rights have tried to eradicate discrimination, failing at every turn. Human rights have been the most significant attempt at creating worldwide common standards and, in this way, can be seen as the biggest failure. Human rights privilege their male creators in the western world, penalising women and the poor, most tragically those in the developing world.
The only way we can maintain our living standards in the west is through the damnation of the rest of the world, emphasising our differences rather than embracing them: this will never change."
Although the right to silence is not abolished completely, the right and the privilege against self-incrimination were significantly undermined and curtailed under the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 alongside with other statutory provisions penalising silence. Moreover, according to the European Court of Human Rights, the right to silence is not an absolute right. Therefore, it can be said that they continue to be part of the English criminal legal system only to a rather small extent."
"The competing nature of the laws, together with the nature of their wording, have created a lack of certitude among many who are subject to them. As shown by the Campbell case, there is no clear dividing line between the rights of privacy and those of freedom of expression. It is hard to justify the statement that Human Rights ensure basic rights and freedoms as they currently stand. Although they can arguably have enhanced the ability to defend ones rights within the courts, the competing nature of conflicting rights and the large areas of uncertainty that currently exist would suggest that the legislation falls far short of ensuring them. In Conclusion although the individual has freedom of expression and rights to privacy these come under conflict under certain circumstances."
Marked by a teacher
This document has been marked by one of our great teachers. You can read
the full teachers notes when you download the document.
This document has been reviewed by one of our specialist student essay
reviewing squad. Read the full review on the document page.
This document has been reviewed by one of our specialist student document
reviewing squad. Read the full review under the document preview on this page.