Personal Freedom As The Right To Act Under Its Own Decisions

Personal freedom as the right to act under its own decisions

Introduction

Freedom is the ability of every person to act according to their own beliefs. It is a right that belongs to us from our birth and that endures throughout our lives. It is perhaps one of the most sacred rights with which we have. Freedom constitutes and base us as independent and capable of developing in our environment. It allows us to make decisions and choose how to lead our personal, social and cultural life.

If the human being is not free, he is not a person, he is not a citizen. Without freedom the figure of man is mimicked. Already in previous times we observed a world in which slavery governed naturally and even gave hierarchy to people. A world that was part of destruction as people and the predomination of the material. Without freedom, the life of a man becomes a circle in which the principles of equality and justice, which must be prioritized in every constitution, are non -existent.

While we have had advances in what forms to protect people’s freedom, there is still much to do, especially in the personal world and social relationships.

It must be remembered that to be free, you have to follow laws too, because our freedom ends when that of others begins.

The law is like a mother. Protects and protects each of their children without distinction. This is the case with each citizen, no matter the condition in which he is always has the shelter of the law.

And such as a mother, the law is responsible for granting just punishment to correct and become citizens of good.

Here comes a fundamental role as personal freedom as a concept because it is what in the legal world concerns us. This is because this is the exact name given to freedom in our law society.

For its part, personal freedom is a right that every individual has and allows him to claim the protection of his physical integrity and his freedom of movement in case of being illegally attacked by the State.

In our country there have been a large number of cases in which men transgress the freedom of others, either with or without the presence of reasons. That is why the concern to create a law, for consolidating a series of articles that protect people who are being subjected to some trial for their action or condition.

It could be thought that a criminal would have no right to his freedom, even more if he has been found in fragrant crime, but the truth is that everyone must go through a very well justified process before reaching any resolution. While finding the benefit of the doubt, every person is innocent until the opposite is demonstrated.

As said above, freedom is something that is linked to the freedom of others. You cannot be free based on others. This is why in article 7 of the Inter -American Court of Human Rights clarifies so that it is typical of our understanding.

The Inter -American Court of Human Rights tells us that you are free to live quietly and you have the right to protect your freedom, but you should never violate the right of the other.

In this essay, the issue of personal freedom will be addressed based on the articles that have been constituted by the Inter -American Court of Human Rights (IDH Court) in the respective period from 2010 to 2017.

It will proceed through the analysis of each of the sub -themes that cover and complement this right, as well as the justification of our thesis based on the examples presented by the reference text.

Developing

Scope of the right to personal freedom

“The physical freedom of individuals such as personal security must be safeguarding, in a context in which the absence of guarantees can result in the subversion of the law of law and deprivation to detainees of the minimum forms of protection.”(IDH)

In this first part there is talk of the freedom that people have to act lawfully or not and constitute their life based on a law. Also your right to live calm without fear or ties.

Article 7 also addresses the issue of physical security in which no one can deprive their liberty without a court order.

There have already been many cases in which a number of people who end up not always well because they are forced to live with fear and seek political asylums such as Maritza Urrutia, which after a long kidnapping was forced, was forced to live, was forced as a political prisoner, which was forcedto raise false statements to safeguard your life and end up looking for asylum in the United States.

On other occasions they also take away their right to live, as is the case of Humberto Sánchez that was killed without any measure. And other times they are also inexplicably accused of strange judgments and un demonstrated positions such as Wilson García. And so a lot of more cases.

An arbitrary arrest cannot happen if there is no legal justification that authorizes it. The law is clear at the time of specifying how the detention process should be carried out in these cases.

The alleged detainee must always be informed about the reason why he is captured, in a clear and simple way. This has the right to remain silent and cannot be forced to give previous statements. You also have the right to see your defense lawyer and make a call. Another right is respect for the period of provisional freedom allowed and the realization of a concise and adequate investigation.

"The forced disappearance of people constitutes a multiple violation that begins with a deprivation of liberty, whatever its form" (HDI)

Here the law covers issues that have been closed to hide from public hearing such as the kidnapping of minors. One of the cases is that of Macarena Gelman, a girl born in captivity and whose right of freedom is omitted and non -existent.

There is also the theme of the extradition of Chinese Wong Hong Wong who was sentenced to death but did not have to be arrested while taking a resolution of his case. However, it was put into illegal custody and subsequently assigned to house arrest.

"Subsection 2 of article 7 of the Convention refers to the" causes "and" the conditions "established in the" political constitutions "or" the laws dictated according to them "to determine the legality of a" deprivation of physical liberty ". Therefore, as the Court has already referred, "if the internal regulations, both in the material and formal aspect, is not observed when depriving a person of their freedom, such deprivation will be illegal and contrary to the American Convention" (HDI)

There is also talk of preventive freedom because there must always be justification for any deprivation of liberty.

"Article 7.3 of the American Convention establishes "No one can be subjected to arbitrary detention or imprisonment". The Inter -American Court of Human Rights has developed that it understands arbitrariness and has applied it to the analysis of contentious cases. Particularly, this concept has applied to cases of preventive detention, when it is not justified in reasonable parameters.”(IDH)

Arbitrariness in the deprivation of liberty (cases)

Asok Gangaram was deprived of his freedom for an alleged investigation that ended up killing him. Obviously his arrest was arbitrary. In Guatemala several people were arbitrarily arrested and subjected to torture. Five died from murder and their bodies were exhibited in the city.

In 1995 in Tegucigalpa after trying to control a military disturbance they took a group of young prisoners, beaten and killed.

"The legislation establishes the causes of restriction of personal freedom must be dictated in accordance with the principles that govern the Convention, and be conducive to the effective observance of the guarantees in it provided" (IDH)

Something that allows them to determine whether an arrest is legal or not that the collection dates and the issuance of the same, as well as the time late in the investigation are incoherent.

Another case is Bayarri. He was accused of kidnappings and was captured, managed and carried in a arbitrary car.

Arbitrariness in the extension of preventive detention

"For the purposes of article 7.2 of the Convention, an arrest, whether for a short period, or a “delay”, whether with mere identification purposes, constitute forms of deprivation to the physical liberty of the person and, therefore, as a limitation to the sameIt must strictly adjust to what the American Convention and internal legislation establish for the purpose, as long as it is compatible with the Convention ”(IDH)

Jesús Vélez Loor is a case of an Ecuadorian who was arrested in Panama due to papers problems, taken to prison and finally deported. He confessed of the torments he lived in that prison.

Fleury is a human rights defender who was captured in his own home, accused of robbery, subject to hunger and forced labor. Fear led him to seek refuge in the United States and the culprits never paid their faults.

For a legal arrest, a date, time, reason and person who gives the arrest warrant must be clarified in a timely manner. It must be respected and not tortured to the captured. Even if there is no court order, the necessary data must be written the names of the executors.

Jorge and Benito Barrios are another police victim subjected and tortured culminating everything in death for Benito.

One of the most serious cases is perhaps the one committed by the Duncote that after an alleged identification of terrorists raided a house where only one lady was. His assets were taken and she took to captivity, locked up, battered and raped. Undipated sexual acts are also denounced by Gladys Espinosa.

The Inter -American Court of Human Rights prohibits any deprivation of liberty either for a short or prolonged time.

Another case is that of Rubiano Galvis who was accused of a supposedly flagrant crime that has not been given any evidence. His arrest was almost secret and denied and his family never knew about the same.

The blows, physical, psychological and sexual abuse are not justified even when the victims are in a challenging and disturbance attitude. If the case will be given and aggravated, you must follow a completely legal retention and non -arbitrary process.

Arbitrariness and personal freedom

“The Court has established in its jurisprudence that the decisions taken by the internal organs that may affect human rights, such as the right to personal freedom, that are not properly based on personal rights are arbitrary.”(IDH)

The law also prohibits any act in which someone is captured with probable, but not tested hypotheses. As much as it seems that someone is guilty the processes must be fulfilled to the letter.

"There must be sufficient indications that allow reasonably to assume the guilt of the person undergo

Here we are going to specify some of the requirements that are taken into account to decide when it comes to capture and that is legal. We will cite since they are articles.

“’ I) that the purpose of the measures that deprive or restrict freedom is legitimate. It is worth noting that this Court has recognized as legitimate purposes to ensure that the defendant will not prevent the development of the procedure nor will the action of justice avoid;ii) that the measures adopted are the ideal to comply with the purpose pursued;iii) that they are necessary, in the sense that they are absolutely indispensable to achieve the desired purpose and that there is no less taxed measure with respect to the intervened law among all those that have the same suitability to achieve the proposed objective. For this reason, the Court has indicated that the right to personal freedom assumes that any limitation to it should be exceptional49, and iv) that are measures that are strictly proportional5050, so that the sacrifice inherent in the restriction of the right to freedomIt is not exaggerated or excessive against the advantages obtained by such a restriction and compliance with the purpose pursued. Any restriction to freedom that does not contain sufficient motivation that allows to evaluate whether it fits the conditions indicated will be arbitrary and, therefore, will violate article 7. of the Convention.”(IDH)

A case that caused scandal is that of the 20 Argentine military accused of fraud and crimes against the State. They were kept in pretrial detention and after investigations they acquitted one and the sentences of the 19 were reduced. The violation was present at the time of bad investigation of the facts.

Something interesting is that the Inter -American Court of Human Rights does not have exact aspects to determine personal freedom since everything regulates it with investigation.

This is analyzed through the migration cade in which it is believed that a preventive detention can help control illegal immigration but it is also considered that many of these could be unnecessary and that is why the Inter -American Court of Human Rights tries to be more objective andtry not to generalize cases.

Characteristics that have a preventive detention or imprisonment measure:

1. It must be legal and based on reasoning. You cannot anticipate a punishment or pretext prevention.
2. The evidence must be proven and have enough content to verify it.
3. If a case does not become tested in a timely manner, its adoption should not be motivated. The authorities must assess the precautionary judgments and see if a case should be continued or not.

We must also understand that not any act that is conceived in the law is with a punitive purpose but that it can also be preventive as this type of retention called provisional so we must not assume that why a person this detained is alreadyguilty and therefore our correction acts and treatment are lawful and reasonable.

It is not allowed to accept assessments of military or police or rely on their testimonies to realize a fact. A decision is not susceptible to personal appreciations.

Personal freedom cannot be violated in moments of internal or external conflict. It is an ICORROMPIBLE RIGHT.

"The concept of" arbitrariness "should not be equated with the" opposite. In relation to the foregoing, the Court notes that there are no precise criteria to set the amount of the real bond or personal bond, however, comparative law offers guidance guidelines that, without completely eliminating the margin of discretion of the competent competent authority, allow to establish certain parameters with claim of objectivity. Among these criteria, the following stand out: a) Personal circumstances, profession, family and social situation of the processing;b) the characteristics of the fact, and the quantum of the penalty in expectation (the greater the is, the more the bond must be since there will be greater interest of the process in avoiding the action of justice);c) the background of the processing;d) If the processing has a known address or place of residence;e) If it has pending or parallel processes, and f) if you were a fugitive or if you register rebellions among others to law ”, but must be interpreted more broadly in order to include elements of incorrectness, injustice and unpredictability” (IDH)

Another guideline is the fact that something that apparently is, but whose investigations and facts are not entirely reasoned, refuted and corrected should not be considered legal.

Here with all the points copied and clarified we are closing the cases, tieding ends and verifying that all the aforementioned case are unjustified and without illegal.

The particular forms of detention are: abuse of power, kidnappings, forced disappearances, collective and planned detention.

The abuse of power

We will exemplify this with the case of the Enrique Guzmán National University in 1991. It was developed through a curfew and everyone’s homes were paved to capture students and a teacher.

This is a clear abuse of power since they were arbitrarily taken without apparent reason and is not taken to any judicial case.

In a segment we talked about if freedom applied to those deprived of liberty and if. Indeed, the State is responsible for ensuring that they fulfill their penalty without any arbitrary and abrupt irruption.

In collective and programmed arrests, personal freedom should not be violated either. It would be believed that perhaps conflicts could be avoided when the people of whom it is suspected, to avoid crimes, are captured collectively and programmingly. But this is not allowed, this right is respected above all.

Deprivation of liberty, states. Emergency and suspension of guarantees.

CADH is responsible for protecting rights in these emergency cases. Above all, it protects the right to habeas corpus and exceptional guarantees.

The cases that arise more are those in which it is related to terrorism. It is obvious that a prompt action should be taken in this danger but it is also obvious that you should not ignore the unwavering rights of the individual. You have to proceed cautiously and tests.

” When the guarantees being suspended, some of the legal limits of the public power action may be different from those in force under normal conditions, but should not be considered non -existent or, consequently, understand that the government is invested with absolute powers beyondof the conditions in which such exceptional legality is authorized.’’ (IDH)

Information prior to detention

We had already clarified the fact that before making captures, the respective dimensions must be made and explained in their language and clearly the accused, the reasons for his detention.

A detained person must be informed and taken before a judge who conducts the respective investigation. This immediately under the mantle of his defender. And once the process is finished and in case of being acquitted, its freedom is guaranteed and its assured tranquility, without the opportunity to open a case about again.

Habeas corpus must be guaranteed in any case. Every person has the opportunity to defend themselves before an accusation.

Regarding children and mines deprived of liberty.

After a case that existed where two of these children, when they reached their adult period, were sentenced to life imprisonment for crimes they committed when boys. There is also the case of the young man who receiving a serious injury in his eye did not receive timely medical help, suffering irremediable injuries.

Thus, the Inter -American Court of Human Rights seeks to make this issue more delicate and a little specialized for these minors that many of the time do not run with the fate of belonging to functional families.

The studies that are done in the cases of children must be exhaustive, but their children’s rights should always be prioritized.

Conclusions

After having read the corresponding text and the examples of each case we reach some conclusions.

Freedom is a right that we must all respect. Over time many violations have been given and have been unpunished over time. My questions are how and why? Despite being aware of this reality in any Latin American country, he firmly dealt with the requirements to be a leader of equal and justice.

Of course, perhaps this is due because more interest is given to material things and power along with the hierarchy. And this hierarchy.

When we stop seeing our spiritual and human side. That side that makes us the same and we begin to look at the differences that exist between us by the minimum resources and anything that occurs to us.

The Inter -American Court of Human Rights has demonstrated its concern for us and raised a Law on Person

Knowing our rights is essential to be able to demand them at the time we are violated.

No one must interrupt the physical or personal freedom of another person. We all have the right to have a quiet life without fears and without complexes. Live where we want in the country we want and the city we love as long as it is all by lawful means.

No one can torment a person for their own interests or a specific community. People are governed under a law, but a law that encourages respect for the rights of others. But not a law that is used for the benefit of few.

The conscience that we must promote is the deep respect for the differences of people and love between us. The law will always exist as long as we are not aware. The law was created from a need to control man’s actions since he shares this world with his fellow men.

For all it is as long as we are not beings of conscience that is almost utopian you must live without harming anyone and try to make this world a more bearable place for everyone.

Personal freedom is important in the legal and social world. Personal freedom confirms, broad, transports

Bibliography

• llhttp: // www.Encyclopedia-Juridica.Biz14.com/d/freedom-person/freedom-.htm i’ll