Article 3.

 
Everyone has the right to life, liberty and
security of person.

Is this rule widespread in the world

and are there cases of violation?

Yurii and Nikita

THE RIGHT TO LIFE is an inalienable human right, meaning that no one can arbitrarily take a
person's life. This norm is enshrined in all international legal acts on human rights.

The right to life presupposes the conduct by the state of a peaceful foreign policy, excluding
war and conflicts. The state should not only prohibit murder, but should organize an effective
fight against crime and especially against terrorist acts. In some countries, there is a ban on
abortion, i.e., protection of human life even before his birth.

FREEDOM AND INVALIDITY OF THE PERSON follows from the principle of recognizing a
person as free. No one has the right to force or threaten a person to take any action, subject him
to torture, search, or harm his health. A person has the right to dispose of his own destiny and
choose his own way of life. The strongest guarantees of the individual's inviolability and
security are in the form of a criminal-legal prohibition of any reverse actions of citizens and
officials. Restriction of this freedom is allowed only on the basis of the law and in legal forms,
all measures of coercion must be under judicial control.
Global status of compliance
 United nations
The right to security of the person is guaranteed by Article 3 of the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights. In this article, it is combined with the right to life and liberty. In full, the article reads,
"Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person." The United Nations treaty, the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966), also recognizes a right to security of
person. Article 3 states that "Everyone has the right to liberty and security of person," and the
section prohibits "arbitrary arrest or detention." The section continues, "No one shall be deprived of
his liberty except on such grounds and in accordance with such procedure as are established by law."
 Europe

The right to security of the person is mentioned in Article 5 of the European Convention on
Human Rights under the heading Right to liberty and security ("Everyone has the right to liberty
and security of person. No one shall be deprived of his liberty save in the following cases and in
accordance with a procedure prescribed by law") and in Article 6 of the Charter of Fundamental
Rights of the European Union ("Everyone has the right to liberty and security of person")
 South Africa

In 1996 the government of South Africa adopted a constitutional Bill of Rights which recognized
a right to security of the person in section 12. Here, it was combined with a "right to freedom."
Section 12 went on to define security of the person and the right to freedom more thoroughly,
including within it bodily control and reproductive control, freedom from torture and cruel and
unusual punishment and a right to trial. In full, section 12 reads.
1. Everyone has the right to freedom and security of the person, which includes the right

a) not to be deprived of freedom arbitrarily or without just cause;

b) not to be detained without trial;
c) to be free from all forms of violence from either public or private sources;
d) not to be tortured in any way; and(e) not to be treated or punished in a cruel, inhuman or degrading
way.

2. Everyone has the right to bodily and psychological integrity, which includes the right

a) to make decisions concerning reproduction;

b) to security in and control over their body;
c) not to be subjected to medical or scientific experiments without their informed consent
 Turkey
The Constitution of Turkey guarantees security of person, along with the right to liberty, in Article
19, enacted in 1982 and amended in 2001. The article spells out limits to these rights in the form
of rulings of courts under the law, allowing for mental institutions and institutions for addicts,
extradition, etc. The article also limits arrest and detention to cases in which a judge allows it,
where there is not enough time for this, or the person is seen being responsible for a crime. A
person will then be told why they have been arrested, and their next of kin will also be told of the
arrest. Finally, the article allows for government compensation if these rights are violated.
Compliance of this rule in
particular country
 Canada
The right to security of the person was recognized in Canada in the Canadian Bill of Rights in 1960. Section
1(a) of this law recognized "the right of the individual to life, liberty, security of the person and enjoyment of
property, and the right not to be deprived thereof except by due process of law." However, the Bill of Rights
was a statute and not part of the Constitution. In 1982, a right to security of the person was added to the
Constitution. It was included in section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which stipulates that
"Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except
in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice." Security of the person in section 7 consists of rights
to privacy of the body and its health and of the right protecting the "psychological integrity" of an individual.
That is, the right protects against significant government-inflicted harm (stress) to the mental state of the
individual. (Blencoe v. B.C. (Human Rights Commission), 2000) This right has generated significant case law,
as abortion in Canada was legalized in R. v. Morgentaler (1988) after the Supreme Court found the Therapeutic
Abortion Committees breached women's security of person by threatening their health. Some judges also felt
control of the body was a right within security of the person, breached by the abortion law. In Operation
Dismantle v. The Queen (1985) cruise missile testing was unsuccessfully challenged as violating security of the
person for risking nuclear war. In Chaoulli v. Quebec (Attorney General) (2005), some Supreme Court justices
even considered Quebec's ban on private health care to breach security of the person, since delays in medical
treatment could have physical and stressful consequences.
 Real store about violation of human rights
Case, which provoked a sharp reaction from the Russian Foreign Ministry, is related to the arrest in 2001 in the
Pakistani city of Faisalabad of Russian Ravil Mingazov and his subsequent transfer to an American special
prison for prisoners of war located at the Cuban US Navy base Guantanamo. According to the Pentagon,
Mingazov underwent training in Afghanistan as a bomber, and then as a specialist in toxic substances.
Subsequently, after the start of American military operations against the Taliban regime, he allegedly tried to
hide in Pakistan.

Together with Mingazov, seven more Russians, also suspected of involvement in the Taliban and Al-Qaeda,
were then detained, but after a long consideration of their cases, they were deported to their homeland in
February 2004. Mingazov is still in the notorious POW camp, although even American human rights activists
believe that he got there by mistake. According to them, Mingazov had never been a member of terrorist
organizations, did not participate in hostilities, and left for Afghanistan with his family only because he was
persecuted in his homeland because of his religion.
In turn, Konstantin Dolgov, plenipotentiary of the Russian Foreign Ministry on human rights, democracy and
the rule of law, pointed out in January this year that the situation with Mingazov and other Guantanamo
prisoners, who had been held for years without trial, was unacceptable. According to him, the very existence of
this isolation ward, through which 779 prisoners who did not receive the status of prisoners of war passed at
that time in ten years of existence, contradicts fundamental international agreements on the protection of human
rights.
Illustration
•Это правило обязательное почти во всех Государствах б хотя не исключены и его нарушения
• 
•Это правило широко распространено во всем мире и находится в Конституция почти всех государств.
•Хотя это правило очень важное и обязательное, находятся случаи его невыполнения.
•Поэтому
Thanks for your attention

Спасибо за внимание

Gracias para atención