In platform "Arzte fur das leben" v. Austria, a group of doctors demonstrated against the legalization of abortion and their demonstration was disrupted by counter-demonstrators.
The European court of Human rights held that demonstrators had to be able "to hold the demonstration without having to fear that they would be subject to physical violence by their opponents.
From the philosophy of J.S. Mills and Plato, please critique the finding of the European court of Human rights that the Government had to take some positive action to ensure that conditions of internal and external security exist in which the parties may exercise their human rights.
Would either philosophy require that the government has to ensure the meeting could take place? Why? Or why not?
The response addresses the queries posted in 1472 words with references.
//Human rights are said to protect the well being of all human. For this purpose, the government is required to take necessary actions to protect their interest. In this regard, this paper will help in understanding the opinion of philosophers, J.S. Mills and Plato. It will also shed light on one controversial ruling of European Court. //
Human rights are the rights and freedom given to all the human beings. It is the entitlement given to protect oneself against the wrong happenings. The demonstrations are supported by the fact that every individual has the right to act in the manner he wants until and unless it does not harm others. The demonstrations are carried out in the democratic setup to influence the general public and government to take the direct action, so that the desired changes can be carried out. Demonstrations are commonly seen in a democratic set up as democracy believes that individuals have that right to express themselves. A case has been examined where a controversial ruling was given by the European Court of Human Right. In support of this argument, the studies of J.S. Mill and Plato are compared with the conventions of European court of Human right. These studies will help in understanding that the government must take some actions to protect the interest of individuals as a part of their human rights, so that they can feel safe and secure while carrying expressing themselves.
// In the above section, introduction is provided to support this paper and now, the "Arzte fur das leben" v. Austria Case and other case of European Court of Human right has been discussed//
This case was placed in the European Court Of Human Rights, for the protection of human rights and fundamental freedom. The case was lodged against Austria, by Plattform association ""Arzte fur das leben". It was judged by the Chamber of seven judges. The number of case was 5/1987/128/179. The Plattform association is the group of doctors who were demonstrating against abortion and they were interrupted by the counter demonstrators. So, for the purpose to protect their rights, they needed Austrian government's support (European Court of Human Rights).
Further, in this case it was seen that the demonstration was carried out as planned with the support of police protection, but it was difficult for the police to protect them against the attack of counter demonstrator, whose main aim ...
The expert examines Arzte fur das leban versus Austria. The European court of Human rights held at demonstrators are determined. The response addresses the queries posted in 1472 words with references.