Anda di halaman 1dari 7

due process of law n. a fundamental principle of fairness in all legal matters, both civil and criminal, especially in the courts. All legal procedures set by statute and court practice, including notice of rights, must be followed for each individual so that no prejudicial or unequal treatment will result. While somewhat indefinite the term can be gauged by

its aim to safeguard both private and public rights against unfairness. The universal guarantee of due process is in the Fifth Amendment to the U. S.

The American Constitution which provides "No person shall

...

be deprived

of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law," and applied to all

states by the 14th Amendment. From this basic principle flow many legal decisions determining both procedural and substantive rights.

equal protection of the law n. the right of all persons to have the same access to the law and courts, and to be treated equally by the law

and courts, both in procedures and in the substance of the law. It is akin to the right to due process of law, but in particular applies to equal treatment as an element of fundamental fairness. The most famous case on the subject is Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (1954) in which Chief Justice Earl Warren, for a unanimous Supreme Court, ruled that "separate but equal" educational facilities for blacks was inherently unequal and unconstitutional since the segregated school system did not give all students equal rights under the law. It will also apply to other inequalities such as differentials in pay for the same work or unequal taxation. The principle is stated in the 14th Amendment to the Constitution: "No State

shall

deny

to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the

No

1

right to privacy - right to be free of unsanctioned intrusion

un

.

human right - (law) any basic right or freedom to which all human beings are entitle in whose exercise a government may not interfere (including rights to life and liberty well as freedom of thought and expression and equality before the law)

Freedom of speech is the political right to communicate one's opinions and ideas. The term freedom of expression is sometimes used synonymously, but includes any act of seeking, receiving and imparting information or ideas, regardless of the medium used. In practice, the right to freedom of speech is not absolute in any country and the right is commonly subject to limitations, as with libel, slander, obscenity, [ citation needed ] sedition (including, for example inciting ethnic hatred), copyright violation, revelation of information that is classified or otherwise restrained under gag agreement, and incitement to commit a crime.

Freedom of religion is a principle that supports the freedom of an individual or community, in public or private, to manifest religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship, and observance; the concept is generally recognized also to include the freedom to change religion or not to follow any religion.[1] The freedom to leave or discontinue membership in a religion or religious group in religious terms called "apostasy" is also a fundamental part of religious freedom, covered by Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.[2]

Freedom of religion is considered by many people and nations to be a fundamental human right.[3][4] In a country with a state religion, freedom of religion is generally considered to mean that the government permits religious practices of other sects besides the state religion, and does not persecute believers in other faiths.

Freedom of religion is a principle that supports the <a href=freedom of an individual or communit y , in public or private, to manifest religion or belief in teaching , practice, worship , and observance; the concept is g enerally reco g nized also to include the freedom to change religion or not to follow any religion . [1] The freedom to leave or discontinue membership in a religion or religious group — in religious terms called " apostasy " — is also a fundamental part of religious freedom, covered by Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights . [2] Freedom of reli g ion is considered by many people and nations to be a fundamental human right . [3][4] In a country with a state religion , freedom of religion is generally considered to mean that the government permits reli g ious practices of other sects besides the state religion, and does not persecute believers in other faiths. " id="pdf-obj-1-55" src="pdf-obj-1-55.jpg">
Freedom of religion is a principle that supports the <a href=freedom of an individual or communit y , in public or private, to manifest religion or belief in teaching , practice, worship , and observance; the concept is g enerally reco g nized also to include the freedom to change religion or not to follow any religion . [1] The freedom to leave or discontinue membership in a religion or religious group — in religious terms called " apostasy " — is also a fundamental part of religious freedom, covered by Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights . [2] Freedom of reli g ion is considered by many people and nations to be a fundamental human right . [3][4] In a country with a state religion , freedom of religion is generally considered to mean that the government permits reli g ious practices of other sects besides the state religion, and does not persecute believers in other faiths. " id="pdf-obj-1-57" src="pdf-obj-1-57.jpg">
Habeas corpus ( English pronunciation: <a href=/ ˌ he ɪ b ɪə s ˈ k ɔ rp ə s/ ; Latin : "you must present the person in court") [1] is a writ (legal action) which requires a person under arrest to be brought before a judge or into court. [2][3] This ensures that a prisoner can be released from unlawful detention , in other words, detention lacking sufficient cause or evidence. The remedy can be sought by the prisoner or by another person coming to the prisoner's aid. The legal right to apply for a habeas corpus is also called by the same name. This right originated in the English legal system, and is now available in many nations. It has historically been an important legal instrument safeguarding individual freedom against arbitrary state action. A writ of habeas corpus , also known as the Great Writ, is a summons with the force of a court order ; it is addressed to the custodian (a prison official for example) and demands that a prisoner be taken before the court, and that the custodian present proof of authority, allowing the court to determine whether the custodian has lawful authority to detain the person. If the custodian does not have authority to detain the prisoner, then they must be released from custody. The prisoner, or another person acting on " id="pdf-obj-2-2" src="pdf-obj-2-2.jpg">

Habeas corpus (English pronunciation: /ˌheɪbɪəs ˈkɔrpəs/; Latin: "you must present the person in court")[1] is a writ (legal action) which requires a person under arrest to be brought before a judge or into court.[2][3] This ensures that a prisoner can be released from unlawful detention, in other words, detention lacking sufficient cause or evidence. The remedy can be sought by the prisoner or by another person coming to the prisoner's aid. The legal right to apply for a habeas corpus is also called by the same name. This right originated in the English legal system, and is now available in many nations. It has historically been an important legal instrument safeguarding individual freedom against arbitrary state action.

A writ of habeas corpus, also known as the Great Writ, is a summons with the force of a court order; it is addressed to the custodian (a prison official for example) and demands that a prisoner be taken before the court, and that the custodian present proof of authority, allowing the court to determine whether the custodian has lawful authority to detain the person. If the custodian does not have authority to detain the prisoner, then they must be released from custody. The prisoner, or another person acting on

his or her behalf, may petition the court, or a judge, for a writ of habeas corpus. One reason for the writ to be sought by a person other than the prisoner is that the detainee might be held incommunicado. Most civil law jurisdictions provide a similar remedy for those unlawfully detained, but this is not always called "habeas corpus".[4] For example, in some Spanish- speaking nations, the equivalent remedy for unlawful imprisonment is the amparo de libertad ('protection of freedom').

Release of an arrested or imprisoned accused when a specified amount of security is deposited or pledged (as cash or property) to ensure the accused's appearance in court when ordered. In civil cases, an accused has a right to be released on bail before the trial. In criminal cases, bail is allowed only on the discretion of the court. The court will deny bail if it is satisfied there are substantial grounds for believing that the accused, if released, would abscond, commit an offence, or interfere with evidence or witnesses

Miranda rights are specific rights that any person who is taken into police custody is entitled to. Law enforcement officers are required to inform a suspect in custody of their Miranda rights. Miranda warnings are often given verbally upon arrest and on paper before a written confession is taken. Failure to adequately provide a Miranda warning can make any statements made by that suspect inadmissible in court.In the landmark decision MIRANDA V. ARIZONA, the U.S. Supreme Court set standards for law enforcement officers to follow when attempting to interrogate suspects whom they hold in custody.Suspects who are subject to custodial interrogation must be notified that they have the following Miranda rights:

1) they have the right to remain silent; 2) any statements that they make may be used as evidence against them; 3) they have the right to an attorney; and 4)if they cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for them prior to any questioning, if they so desire. Under Miranda, unless those warnings are given, no evidence obtained during the interrogation may be used against the accused. Confessions and other information that a suspect provides to the law enforcement will not be admissible or usable in court unless the suspect has been made aware of his/her "Miranda rights". Miranda warnings were mandated by the 1966 United States Supreme Court decision in the case of Miranda v. Arizona in order to protect a criminal suspect's Fifth Amendment right to avoid self-incrimination during police interrogation

Right to a Speedy Trial

The right to a speedy trial is among the most important rights of the accused. Its Intent is to prevent unnecessary and oppressive pretrial incarceration, and to preserve the ability to prepare and present a defense for the accused. The right commences when criminal prosecution begins and extends only to those people that have been accused of a crime. The idea is that the criminally accused cannot be confined in a jail cell indefinitely, and must be brought before a magistrate in a timely manner.

In order to assess whether the accused has been deprived of his right to a speedy trial, four factors are usually considered: the length of the delay,

the reason behind it, the defendant’s assertion of his right, and the

prejudice to the defendant. If a judge finds that a defendant has been deprived of his right to a speedy trial, the result can be dismissal of the charges or even the reversal of a conviction.

The public at large also has an interest in maintaining the right to a speedy trial. Not only do people in jail have to be supported at the public’s expense – through taxes but a delay often diminishes any rehabilitative effects that the criminal justice system is intended to have.

Double jeopardy is a procedural defence that forbids a defendant from being tried again on the same (or similar) charges following a legitimate acquittal or conviction. In common law countries, a defendant may enter a peremptory plea of autrefois acquit or autrefois convict (autrefois means "previously" in French), meaning the defendant has been acquitted or convicted of the same offence.[1]

Definition: The legal term ex post facto ("after the fact") generally refers to laws or other mandates that are passed to restrict behavior that was, when practiced, entirely legal.

A search warrant is a judicial document that authorizes police officers to search a person or place to obtain evidence for presentation in criminal prosecutions. Police officers obtain search warrants by submitting affidavits and other evidence to a judge or magistrate to establish Probable Cause to believe that a search will yield evidence related to a crime. If satisfied that the officers have established probable cause, the judge or magistrate will issue the warrant.

arrest warrant (warrant of arrest) n. a judge's order to law

enforcement officers to arrest and bring to jail a person charged with a crime. The warrant is issued upon a sworn declaration by the district attorney, a police officer or an alleged victim that the accused person committed a crime.

Probable cause is a level of reasonable belief, based on facts that can be articulated, that is required to sue a person in civil court or to arrest and prosecute a person in criminal court. Before a person can be sued or arrested and prosecuted, the civil plaintiff or police and prosecutor must possess enough facts that would lead a reasonable person to believe that the claim or charge is true.

BILL OF ATTAINDER, legislation, punishment. An act of the legislature by which one or more persons are declared to be attainted, and their property confiscated.

ex post facto adj. Latin for "after the fact," which refers to laws adopted after an act is committed making it illegal although it was legal when done, or increases the penalty for a crime after it is committed.

no one can be imprisoned simply because of a debt.

very; the condition of an individual who works for another individual against his or her will as a result of force, coercion, or imprisonment, regardless of whether the individual is paid for the labor.

The term involuntary servitude is used in reference to any type of slavery, peonage, or compulsory labor for the satisfaction of debts. Two essential elements of involuntary servitude are involuntariness, which is compulsion to act against one's will, and servitude, which is some form of labor for another. Imprisonment without forced labor is not involuntary servitude, nor is unpleasant labor when the only direct penalty for not performing it is the withholding of money or the loss of a job.

Giving testimony in a trial or other legal proceeding that could subject one to criminal prosecution.

The right against self-incrimination forbids the government from compelling any person to give testimonial evidence that would likely incriminate him during a subsequent criminal case. This right enables a defendant to refuse to testify at a criminal trial and "privileges him not to answer official

questions put to him in any other proceeding, civil or criminal, formal or informal, where the answers might incriminate him in future criminal proceedings"

Such punishment as would amount to torture or barbarity, any cruel and degrading punishment not known to the Common Law, or any fine, penalty, confinement, or treatment that is so disproportionate to the offense as to shock the moral sense of the community.

questions put to him in any other proceeding, civil or criminal, formal or informal, where theCommon Law , or any fine, penalty, confinement, or treatment that is so disproportionate to the offense as to shock the moral sense of the community. " id="pdf-obj-6-9" src="pdf-obj-6-9.jpg">