PLF enforces these state bans in court when they are undermined or challenged. City of San Jose. Equality Before the Law Every person should be treated equally before the law. Featured Equality Before the Law Cases. Creighton Meland Jr. Shirley N. Connecticut Parents Union v. It is usual for such characteristics to have a compounding effect. For example, an Indigenous female with a disability is more likely to have experienced greater discrimination and disadvantage than a non-Indigenous female without a disability.
Certain scenarios can activate unconscious attitudes and beliefs. For example, biases may be more prevalent when multi-tasking or working under time pressure. The demeanour and appearance of a witness is an aspect of the judicial decision making process of assessing credibility. The application of the rule of law does not accommodate unconscious biases which, by definition, unknowingly, and irrelevantly, affect cognitive processes and decisions.
The rule of law assumes, rather, a forensic process, leading to an impartial decision, in which all concerned have recourse to known and impersonal objective standards and criteria for the application of the law and for the decision of a case. In recent years, there has been significant research into how mental short cuts, known as heuristics, affect the way decisions are made.
Researchers have considered how implicit bias sometimes called unconscious or unintended bias can affect decision-making. Seminal research by psychologists, Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky, identify two systems of thinking intuitive or fast thinking; and conscious or slow thinking and examine the biases or systematic errors of intuitive thinking. Intuitive thinking suppresses doubt and ambiguity in order to quickly assemble coherent interpretations.
Conscious thinking, on the other hand, accommodates doubt and incompatible possibilities in the process of deliberation. It is important to note that biases, conscious or unconscious, are not limited to ethnicity and race.
Though racial bias and discrimination is well documented, biases may exist toward any social group. All of the above means that judicial officers cannot treat everyone the same way if they wish to ensure equality before the law, as to do so could lead to a perception of unfairness and in some cases a legally wrong outcome. The types of different approaches that might be required range from the more obvious to the less obvious.
Knowing and then using appropriate terminology so as not to cause either offence or the perception of discrimination. Being able to understand and where appropriate take account of the differing circumstances and needs of people with religious affiliations, people with child care responsibilities, children and young people, or people who have a particular type or form of disability — in relation to such matters as the timing and length of court appearances.
The right to equality before the law as part of the right to a fair trial is enshrined in Article 7 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. All persons shall be equal before the courts and tribunals. In the determination of any criminal charge against him, or of his rights and obligations in a suit at law, everyone shall be entitled to a fair and public hearing by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal established by law.
The press and the public may be excluded from all or part of a trial for reasons of morals, public order ordre public or national security in a democratic society, or when the interest of the private lives of the parties so requires, or to the extent strictly necessary in the opinion of the court in special circumstances where publicity would prejudice the interests of justice; but any judgement rendered in a criminal case or in a suit at law shall be made public except where the interest of juvenile persons otherwise requires or the proceedings concern matrimonial disputes or the guardianship of children.
Everyone charged with a criminal offence shall have the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law. In the case of juvenile persons, the procedure shall be such as will take account of their age and the desirability of promoting their rehabilitation.
Everyone convicted of a crime shall have the right to his conviction and sentence being reviewed by a higher tribunal according to law. When a person has by a final decision been convicted of a criminal offence and when subsequently his conviction has been reversed or he has been pardoned on the ground that a new or newly discovered fact shows conclusively that there has been a miscarriage of justice, the person who has suffered punishment as a result of such conviction shall be compensated according to law, unless it is proved that the non-disclosure of the unknown fact in time is wholly or partly attributable to him.
No one shall be liable to be tried or punished again for an offence for which he has already been finally convicted or acquitted in accordance with the law and penal procedure of each country. It is contained in Articles 12, 37 and 40 in the Convention on the Rights of the Child :. Article 12 1. States Parties shall assure to the child who is capable of forming his or her own views the right to express those views freely in all matters affecting the child, the views of the child being given due weight in accordance with the age and maturity of the child.
For this purpose, the child shall in particular be provided the opportunity to be heard in any judicial and administrative proceedings affecting the child, either directly, or through a representative or an appropriate body, in a manner consistent with the procedural rules of national law.
Article 37 States Parties shall ensure that: a No child shall be subjected to torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Neither capital punishment nor life imprisonment without possibility of release shall be imposed for offences committed by persons below eighteen years of age; b No child shall be deprived of his or her liberty unlawfully or arbitrarily.
The arrest, detention or imprisonment of a child shall be in conformity with the law and shall be used only as a measure of last resort and for the shortest appropriate period of time; c Every child deprived of liberty shall be treated with humanity and respect for the inherent dignity of the human person, and in a manner which takes into account the needs of persons of his or her age.
In particular, every child deprived of liberty shall be separated from adults unless it is considered in the child's best interest not to do so and shall have the right to maintain contact with his or her family through correspondence and visits, save in exceptional circumstances; d Every child deprived of his or her liberty shall have the right to prompt access to legal and other appropriate assistance, as well as the right to challenge the legality of the deprivation of his or her liberty before a court or other competent, independent and impartial authority, and to a prompt decision on any such action.
0コメント