This article provides a conceptual analysis of the right to life based on historical and contemporary relevant research. The right to life is one of the fundamental rights of the individual, recognised by international and national standards and treaties. This right has an intrinsic value of human life and requires its protection and respect. At the present stage, the right to life faces many provocations caused by various socio-political and ethical-technological factors.
Keywords: right to life, protection of human rights, violation of the right to life, death penalty, euthanasia, abortion.
The idea of a concept such as the right to life has a complex and multifaceted nature that stems from all kinds of philosophical, legal, and ethical-moral traditions. Many concepts of the right to life stand out in legal philosophy, such as natural law, human rights, and the human rights doctrine. Different legal systems also give modified meaning to the right to life in their constitutions and laws.
Academic literature offers a wide range of views on the content of the right to life. Some authors[1] and[2] see it as an inalienable right that should be protected at all stages of human life, from conception to natural death. Other approaches focus on the protection of life in certain contexts, such as the fight against terrorism or the death penalty.
Locke's Two Treatises of Government, which develops a theory of natural rights and the right to property, states that «man has a right to his own life, and no one can take that right away from him without his consent» [1]. Locke's thoughts formed the basis of liberal democracy, which was the central theme of the sunset of the 17th century.
For example, Immanuel Kant held that «the right to life is the first of all intrinsic human rights» [2]. For him, the right to life meant not only the absence of a threat to man's physical existence, but also the possibility for the development of his capabilities and freedom.
In contemporary philosophy of law, life is also connected to the concept of human dignity, which is the basis for all human rights. For example, Hans Jonas writes in his book [3] that 'the right to life is the first of all human rights because it is the most basic of all human dignities'.
The right to life is now a constitutional right of the individual and citizen, guaranteed by many states[3].
One of the key international documents regulating the right to life is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights [4]. Article 3 of this Declaration states that everyone has the right to life, liberty, and security of person [4]. It has informed international and national laws and conventions such as the American Convention on Human Rights, the European Convention on Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and others.
It should be borne in mind that the right to life not only requires the state to refrain from deliberately taking a person's life, but also obliges the state to take active measures to protect human life from all threats and dangers. Furthermore, the right to life entails ensuring the basic conditions for a dignified existence, such as access to food, health care, education, and other necessary benefits.
Based on moral and ethical thinking, the right to life is seen as an ethical principle reflecting the value and inviolability of human life. The right to life expresses recognition and respect for everyone as a unique individual with his or her own meaning and purpose. In addition, this right entails individual and collective responsibility for one's own life and the lives of others.
Despite the widespread recognition and protection of the right to life at a cross-national level, it is constantly exposed to numerous threats and violations in contemporary society. There are various factors that undermine or limit the enjoyment of the right to life, for example.
- Armed conflicts and wars that result in the loss of many citizens' lives and the violation of the right to life as a direct consequence of hostilities.
- Terrorism and extremist activities endanger lives, thereby violating the right to life and causing fear and uncertainty.
- The death penalty is a form of punishment which provides for the application of the death penalty to a person found guilty of particularly serious crimes. However, the death penalty raises many ethical and legal issues.
The primary argument against the death penalty is that it violates everyone's right to life. Whenever a state punishes an offender with death, it takes away the opportunity to continue living, depriving them of their fundamental right to life without the possibility of returning to their former state. Furthermore, the death penalty is subject to the problem of irreparable error. Errors may occur in the judicial process, resulting in the wrongful conviction and wrongful imposition of the death penalty on an innocent person. This is an irreparable error that cannot be corrected and is contrary to the principle of the right to life.
Considering these arguments, many countries[4] and international organisations have rejected or limited the use of the death penalty. They have recognised that protection of the right to life requires states to establish alternative sanctions and support rehabilitation of offenders rather than the death penalty.
- Euthanasia is a complex and counterintuitive topic related to the right to life. It epitomises the moral, ethical, and legal dilemmas surrounding the end of life and a person's right to decide on their life. Euthanasia, or assisted dying, is an act in which medical professionals, through active action or abstinence from treatment, provide a lethal dose of drugs or other means to end a patient's life with his or her consent.
There are two main forms of euthanasia: passive euthanasia, where one refrains from continuing treatment or maintaining life, and active euthanasia — direct action is taken to end life.
One of the challenges associated with euthanasia is the balancing of the human right to self-determination and the right to life. Advocates of euthanasia argue that everyone should have the right to choose a dignified and painless death, especially in cases of incurable and serious illness. They argue that euthanasia can be an act of compassion and respect for the autonomy of the patient.
However, euthanasia also raises serious ethical and practical questions. One of the main arguments against euthanasia is the potential danger of abuse or errors in determining the futility of treatment. The concern is the possibility of misdiagnosis or inadequate access to quality palliative care that may alleviate patients' suffering.
The development of legislation regarding euthanasia varies from country to country. Some allow[5] certain forms of euthanasia or assisted dying under certain conditions and procedures. In others, euthanasia is prohibited[6] and is considered a crime.
The euthanasia debate continues both nationally and internationally. This includes debates about the boundaries of the right to life, ethical principles, the obligations of the medical community and the availability of alternative forms of care for terminally ill patients.
- Abortion is a medical procedure for terminating a pregnancy, which results in the termination of the development of the embryo or foetus and therefore deprives potentially incipient life.
There is a wide range of views on abortion. Pro-choice (pro-abortion) advocates argue that women have the right to make decisions about their bodies and reproductive rights, including the right to terminate a pregnancy. They stress the importance of the availability of safe and legal abortion to protect women's health and autonomy and to prevent unwanted or unsafe pregnancies.
Opponents of abortion (the anti-abortion position) believe that the foetus has a right to life and that abortion contradicts this right. They argue that the foetus represents a distinct human being, even in its early stages of development, and its life should be protected. Some opponents of abortion also hold religious beliefs that consider it undesirable or sinful to terminate a pregnancy.
Attitudes towards and legal regulation of abortion vary from country to country. In some countries abortion is fully legalised and available at the woman's request, in other countries abortion is allowed[7] only under certain conditions, such as threat to the life of the mother or in cases of rape, and in some countries, abortion is prohibited[8] or severely restricted.
Discussions about abortion in society often generate emotional and contentious debates. Issues related to the protection of foetal life, women's reproductive rights, medical ethics and religious beliefs require a balancing of different interests and a deliberate approach in developing legislation and policy in this area.
- Violations of human rights, including the right to life, can take the form of violence, discrimination, harassment, and violations of minority rights, resulting in the threat and deprivation of life.
Thus, the author found that the right to life is a universal and natural right of every human being, which should not be abrogated or restricted by any power or society. However, in reality we are confronted with a multitude of threats and violations of this right, linked to socio-political, economic and cultural and ethical factors.
As a result of the analysis, the author has concluded that it is necessary to constantly fight for the recognition, protection, and realisation of the right to life as a foundation of human dignity.
The author offers the following recommendations to improve the situation:
— Strengthen international cooperation and dialogue on human rights, including the right to life, considering cultural and ethical differences.
— Develop and ratify international human rights instruments and conventions, including the right to life, and ensure their effective implementation and monitoring.
— Strengthening national systems for the protection of human rights, including the right to life, and enhancing State accountability for violations of this right.
— Promote education and awareness of human rights, including the right to life, to raise awareness and respect for this right in society.
— Support the work of civil society, non-governmental organisations, the media and other actors in the protection and promotion of human rights, including the right to life.
— Combating poverty, inequality, discrimination, and other factors that may negatively affect the realisation of the right to life.
— Conservation and restoration of the environment, biodiversity, and natural resources to ensure the right to life.
By implementing these recommendations, society will be able to promote protection of and respect for the right to life in the world.
References:
- Locke J. Two treatises on government. M: Thought, 1973. 206 p.
- Kant, Immanuel. Critique of Pure Reason. Translated from the German. V. F. Askoldov. Moscow: Mysl, 1994. — 591 p.
- The principle of responsibility. The Experience of Ethics for a Technological Civilisation. / Translation from German, foreword, notes by I. I. Makhankov. — Moscow: Iris-Press, 2004. — 480 p.
- Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the UN General Assembly on 10.12.1948 // Rossiyskaya Gazeta. — 1998.
[1] John Locke: seventeenth-century English philosopher known for his works on political philosophy, including Two Treatises of Government.
Immanuel Kant: 18th-century German philosopher, author of works on ethics and metaphysics, including his major work Critique of Pure Reason.
Authors of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948): The committee that drafted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights included figures such as Eleanor Roosevelt, Jean Penderast, René Cassin, P. S. Cheung and others.
[2] Amnesty International: an international human rights organisation active in advocacy and defence of the right to life.
Human Rights Watch: A non-governmental organisation dedicated to monitoring and defending human rights around the world, including the right to life.
[3] For example, in Russia this right is enshrined in Article 20(1) of the Constitution; in the US it is mentioned in the Declaration of Independence (1776) and in the 5th Amendment to the US Constitution; in France it is stated in Articles 1-2 of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen (1789); in China it is established in Article 33 of the PRC Constitution.
[4] Several countries that have completely banned the death penalty: Albania, Argentina, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Cyprus, Estonia, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Poland, Serbia, Sweden, UK, etc.
Countries that allow the death penalty: USA, China, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Egypt etc.
[5] The Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, Canada, the USA (Washington state and Oregon have passed a "mercykilling" law that allows certain categories of patients to receive medical care to end their lives).
[6] Germany, Australia, Great Britain, Russia, etc.
[7] Canada (no time limit), Netherlands (authorised up to 24 weeks of pregnancy), Belgium (authorised up to 12 weeks of pregnancy, with possibility of extension up to 24 weeks in case of medical indication), Sweden (authorised up to 18 weeks of pregnancy, with possibility of extension in special circumstances), etc.
[8] Ireland (abortion was banned until 2018, but now abortion is allowed in cases of life-threatening or serious medical conditions), Chile (banned until 2017, but now allowed in cases of life-threatening mother, fetal abnormalities or rape), Poland (In 2020, a strict "abortion" law was introduced, allowing abortion only in cases of life-threatening mother or serious fetal abnormalities).
