What rights should a constitution protect?

Status
Not open for further replies.

iapetus

Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2003
Messages
614
Location
UK
My country may be getting its first writen constitution soon. Well, not "Its" as such, but we'll probably be signing up to the EU constitution soon.

If you want to see a draft of it, look here (all 191 pages of it!):
http://www.fco.gov.uk/Files/kfile/SecondCommandPaper_DraftEUConstitutionalTreaty,0.pdf

(The Charter of Fundamental Rights starts at page 33 of the Constitution, or p35 of the document).


I've been wondering what rights a constitution should guarantee, and would like to hear your opinions.



My thoughts at the moment being:

Should be based on the US Bill of Rights, possibly with some adjustments to the wording but not the meaning, and on Amendments 13, 14 section 1, and all the others regarding voting rights.

The "adjustments" to the Bill of Rights I'm thinking of would be to make the last line of the 5th Amendment (about property rights) into a separate Amendment, as I think its sufficiently different (and important) an issue to be addressed in its own right.

(Regarding the other Amendments that I haven't listed: I think most are a Good Thing, but they're about organising the government rather than Inalienable Rights, and that's what I'm concerned with at the moment).


Also make it absolutely clear that all the Rights and the Law apply to everyone, equally.


Anyway, what are your thoughts on the matter. Anything else to go in? Or come out? Or clarify?

Iapetus
 
I've been wondering what rights a constitution should guarantee, and would like to hear your opinions.
Well, I have come to the conclusion that the US Bill of Rights is entirely too long. It should have stopped with the first five words of the First Amendment:

"Congress shall make no law."
 
The right to own property should definitely be explicitly listed, along with it's companion, the right of self-ownership.
 
Well, that certainly clears it up. Would that be your "all of them" list or mine?

Despite rock jock's flip dismissal, he's got a valid point. Libertarians would define rights differently than socialists do. I'll never recognize the (ahem) right be given money/food/care via welfare, but socialist do see welfare as an extension of the right to remain alive. From a socialist's viewpoint, the 9th Amendment protects welfare.

I guess it needs to start with the society having a good understanding of the difference between rights and entitlements, and from the little I've seen of the EU constitution, that understanding doesn't exist in Europe (not that it exists much in the U.S.).

OTOH, the idea behind the 9th is very important, and every constitution should have such an article no matter the different interpretation of "rights."
 
I've been wondering what rights a constitution should guarantee

IMHO, it should guarantee the intrinsic rights of a sentient being, life, liberty, you know the shpeel.

Sort of a framework for laying down liberties that would exist in the absence of any government.
 
Okay, maybe I didn't make myself quite clear. I'll re-phrase myself:


If a country without an official "Bill of Rights", or one that had one but has forgotten it, is drafting a new one, what should it say?
 
The [insert name of governing body here] shall make no law that infringes, abridges, violates, revokes, or nullifies any individual's natural right to life, liberty, or property.

The [insert name of governing body here] shall in no event deprive a person of their life, liberty, or property without that person's freely-given consent.

In the event that the [insert name of governing body here] violates this Bill of Rights, each member thereof will be individually held accountable the the victim in a respectable court of the land.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top