Dilemma of health rights of vulnerable citizens: a narrative review

Vulnerable populations have traditionally faced non availability of health services. Enforcement of constitutional protections to vulnerable citizens is essential to secure them their health rights. Hence current narrative review in perspective of rights laws was conducted with the objective to review and highlight provisions of the constitution of different countries and World Health Organization (WHO) and the on ground situation prevailing in Pakistan. This study has immense significance, since this can invoke debate, inspire research and recognition of the enabling articles/ provisions for health care guaranteed in the Constitution. For this purpose data was searched for publications related to constitution and health of countries including Pakistan, United States, United Kingdom, China, Saudi Arabia and India using search engines, data bases and different websites. 170 reports, publications & articles were downloaded out of which 30 English, full text articles, publications and reports were utilized for the current research. Keywords: Vulnerable population,

The Employee's Right to Freedom of Religion versus the Employer's Workplace Needs: An Ongoing Battle: TDF Network Africa (Pty) Ltd v Faris 2019 40 ILJ 326 (LAC)

The right to religion is well protected in the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 (the Constitution) as well as attendant legislation. Section 15(1) of the Constitution provides that all persons have the right to freedom of religion. Section 31(1) of the Constitution then goes on to state that persons who belong to a religious community, amongst others, may not be denied the right to practise their religion with other members of that community. Section 9(3) of the Constitution prohibits the state from unfairly discriminating against any person directly or indirectly on several grounds, which include the ground of religion. Section 9(4) of the Constitution on the other hand prohibits any person from unfairly discriminating against any other person on the ground of religion, amongst others. These constitutional protections resonate in both the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995 and the Employment Equity Act 55 of 1998. Despite these protections, the right to freedom of religion is still a contested subject in the workplace, inter alia. The contestation intensifies when the right to freedom of religion results in an employee not being able to comply with one or more of the employer's workplace needs. Employers' who do not understand the balance that has to be struck between the employee's right to freedom of religion and its workplace needs will often find themselves on the wrong side of our labour laws if they dismiss an employee without having due regard to the employee's religion. This is what transpired in TDF Network Africa (Pty) Ltd v Faris 2019 40 ILJ 326 (LAC).

Texas, Abortion, and State Action

The Texas Legislature recently passed what the Supreme Court describes as an “unprecedented” statutory scheme. Texas’s new law allows private, everyday citizens to sue anyone who assists a woman in obtaining an abortion after her sixth week of pregnancy. It’s clear that Texas chose this unusual enforcement mechanism to try to circumvent the Constitution’s “state action” requirement. Before a plaintiff can challenge a policy or action on constitutional grounds, they must show that the government somehow had a hand in causing their harm. But this Texas law strips the government of its enforcement power and instead gives it to everyday citizens, thereby allowing the law’s defenders to argue that the law does not trigger constitutional protections. This short article argues that the courts should have little trouble concluding that this law and its unusual enforcement mechanism amount to state action, meaning this law is subject to normal constitutional scrutiny. The Supreme Court’s decisions in Shelley v. Kraemer, Edmonson v. Leesville Concrete Co., and Terry v. Adams make clear that private parties can be considered state actors, especially when they are working with the express approval of the government and when the courts are required to hand down rulings that seemingly infringe on well-settled constitutional protections. These decisions, among others, show that the private-citizen plaintiffs deputized under this new Texas law must be treated as state actors who are subject to constitutional limitations.

How Libel Law Applies to Automated Journalism

Automated journalism—the use of algorithms to translate data into narrative news content—is enabling all manner of outlets to increase efficiency while scaling up their reporting in areas as diverse as financial earnings and professional baseball. With these technological advancements, however, come serious risks. Algorithms are not good at interpreting or contextualizing complex information, and they are subject to biases and errors that ultimately could produce content that is misleading or false, even libelous. It is imperative, then, to examine how libel law might apply to automated news content that harms the reputation of a person or an organization. Conducting that examination from the perspective of U.S. law, because of its uniquely expansive constitutional protections in the area of libel, it appears that the First Amendment would cover algorithmic speech—meaning that the First Amendment’s full supply of tools and principles, and presumptions would apply to determine if particular automated news content would be protected. In the area of libel, the most significant issues come under the plaintiff’s burden to prove that the libelous content was published by the defendant (with a focus on whether automated journalism would qualify for immunity available to providers of interactive computer services) and that the content was published through the defendant’s fault (with a focus on whether an algorithm could behave with the actual malice or negligence usually required to satisfy this inquiry). There is also a significant issue under the opinion defense, which provides broad constitutional protection for statements of opinion (with a focus on whether an algorithm itself is capable of having beliefs or ideas, which generally inform an opinion).

Engaging Respectfully with Indigenous Knowledges Copyright, Customary Law, and Cultural Memory Institutions in Canada

This paper contributes to building respectful relationships between Indigenous (First Nations, Métis, and Inuit) peoples and Canada's cultural memory institutions, such as libraries, archives and museums, and applies to knowledge repositories that hold tangible and intangible traditional knowledge. The central goal of the paper is to advance understandings to allow cultural memory institutions to respect, affirm, and recognize Indigenous ownership of their traditional and living Indigenous knowledges and to respect the protocols for their use. This paper honours the spirit of reconciliation through the joint authorship of people from Indigenous, immigrant, and Canadian heritages. The authors outline the traditional and living importance of Indigenous knowledges; describe the legal framework in Canada, both as it establishes a system of enforceable copyright and as it recognizes Indigenous rights, self-determination, and the constitutional protections accorded to Indigenous peoples; and recommend an approach for cultural memory institutions to adopt and recognize Indigenous ownership of their knowledges, languages, cultures, and histories by developing protocols with each unique Indigenous nation.

Engaging Respectfully with Indigenous Knowledges Copyright, Customary Law, and Cultural Memory Institutions in Canada

This paper contributes to building respectful relationships between Indigenous (First Nations, Métis, and Inuit) peoples and Canada's cultural memory institutions, such as libraries, archives and museums, and applies to knowledge repositories that hold tangible and intangible traditional knowledge. The central goal of the paper is to advance understandings to allow cultural memory institutions to respect, affirm, and recognize Indigenous ownership of their traditional and living Indigenous knowledges and to respect the protocols for their use. This paper honours the spirit of reconciliation through the joint authorship of people from Indigenous, immigrant, and Canadian heritages. The authors outline the traditional and living importance of Indigenous knowledges; describe the legal framework in Canada, both as it establishes a system of enforceable copyright and as it recognizes Indigenous rights, self-determination, and the constitutional protections accorded to Indigenous peoples; and recommend an approach for cultural memory institutions to adopt and recognize Indigenous ownership of their knowledges, languages, cultures, and histories by developing protocols with each unique Indigenous nation.

Opposition and Legislative Minorities: Constitutional Roles, Rights and Recognition

This Primer examines the recognition, roles and rights of the opposition and the legislative minority in democratic constitutions. Opposition parties operating in democracies rely upon a wide range of constitutional protections, such as the freedoms of association, assembly and expression, backed by an independent judiciary and an impartial civil service. These protections ensure that opponents of the government continue to enjoy equal rights and are not criminalized, harassed or disadvantaged. However, many constitutions go further, formally recognizing the role, powers and responsibilities of the opposition or legislative minority in democratic politics.

Engaging Respectfully with Indigenous Knowledges

This paper contributes to building respectful relationships between Indigenous (First Nations, Métis, and Inuit) peoples and Canada's cultural memory institutions, such as libraries, archives and museums, and applies to knowledge repositories that hold tangible and intangible traditional knowledge. The central goal of the paper is to advance understandings to allow cultural memory institutions to respect, affirm, and recognize Indigenous ownership of their traditional and living Indigenous knowledges and to respect the protocols for their use. This paper honours the spirit of reconciliation through the joint authorship of people from Indigenous, immigrant, and Canadian heritages. The authors outline the traditional and living importance of Indigenous knowledges; describe the legal framework in Canada, both as it establishes a system of enforceable copyright and as it recognizes Indigenous rights, self-determination, and the constitutional protections accorded to Indigenous peoples; and recommend an approach for cultural memory institutions to adopt and recognize Indigenous ownership of their knowledges, languages, cultures, and histories by developing protocols with each unique Indigenous nation.

SAME-SEX RELATIONS AND LEGAL TRADITIONS IN CAMEROON AND SOUTH AFRICA

This essay revisits the debates and legal contests that grew in Cameroon at the turn of the millennium but failed to bring justice for members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) community. Several members of sexual minorities were tried in Cameroon courts and sentenced to serve jail time. In order to reflect on the state of legal limbo for LGBTQ people in Cameroon, I also revisit the South African case Minister of Home Affairs and the Director General of Home Affairs versus Marie Adrianna Fourie and Cecelia Johanna Bonthuys, which led to legalization of same-sex relationships and marriage in South Africa. In the first and longer part of the essay, I discuss the situation in Cameroon and South Africa. In the second part, I briefly discuss the different legal outcomes in the two countries. I conclude with a brief discussion of signs of hope in the critical dialogue on justice in the debate on same-sex relations in Africa. My goal in this essay is not to offer expert opinion on the legal entanglements on the question of same-sex relations, but to demonstrate that legal and constitutional protections offer the best chance for gaining the rights of LGBTQ people in Africa.

Egypt’s Plasticine Constitution

On 26 March 2018, Egyptians overwhelmingly voted to elect incumbent Abdel Fattah El-Sisi to another term as their President in an election where the outcome was known in advance. Any genuine competition was eliminated from the pool of candidates through arrests, media attacks, and intimidation. This chapter examines how Egypt has reached point, the implications for its future, and the role that guaranteed electoral processes of the 2014 Egyptian Constitution played in diminishing the democratic quality of elections. The chapter paper takes a three-part approach to analysing the role of the constitution in the decline of democratic principles in the 2018 Egyptian Presidential elections. Firstly, it examines the constitutional protections of eligibility criteria that exist to support the presence of multi-party candidates in presidential elections, exploring how these were abused by the Sisi administration in the run-up to the elections. Secondly, the chapter analyses the creation of election governance bodies, notably the National Elections Committee (NEC), and its malleability in support of Sisi. Finally, the chapter examines the abuse of existing state machinery in the run-up to the elections and highlights how this has undermined authentic, free elections. The chapter links the 2018 elections to subsequent developments, including the 2019 constitutional referendum which broadened even further the Sisi administration’s control over the country at the expense of constitutional protections.