Jurisprudence and Freedom in UK Assignment Sample

Introduction Of Jurisprudence and Freedom in UK Assignment

Set Case Relates to the Liberal Principles

About the Set Case

In the month of September of the year 2017, Chris Cole, Nora Ziegler, Henrietta Cullinan, and Jo Frew, citizens of London, came to protest on the road near the Excel Centre in East London. While on this day there was an opening of a symposium on the arms fair of Defence and Security International. As the busy roadways were jammed and became an obstacle to public communication, it became a matter of offence that is in the hands of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom.

Get free written samples from subject experts and Assignment Help UK.

Freedom of Individual

In accordance with the individual rights of the citizen in the United Kingdom, each and every person has the right to liberty, privacy, and freedom of expression, as well as conscience and the freedom to set up any kind of association and assembly (Griffiths, 2020).

Freedom of Expression

Each and every native of the United Kingdom is given the right of expression that frees them to hold on to any concepts, express any kind of opinion on any matter and get down to any kind of information, as well as imparting it without tampering with the public authority (Arnell and Davies, 2020). Hence, the citizen of the United Kingdom can voice their views on any situation. So in this case, the people whose names are mentioned came to the road to just express their words, which is within the righteousness of conveying their vision according to Article 10 that the country provides them.

Freedom of Assembly

The government of the United Kingdom comes up with Article 11 for their citizen. According to Article 11 of the British Constitution, each and every person in the United Kingdom has the right to meet and foregather in private as well as in public without harming others by marking up the other about the concerned matter. It includes that they can create a rally too to make any kind of protest (Dietz, et al. 2020). Therefore, article number 11 also goes with the protestors who were lying on the road of East London.

How Notions of Autonomy and Rights relate to the Parties’ arguments in general

Notion of Autonomy

Actually, in one line, autonomy means the propensity of the individual to go ahead in accordance with his or her own interests and values. Modern political thoughts as well as bioethics respect it and try to promote it in every field of society (Moskovko, et al. 2019). Here, in the field of the mentioned case above, a group of people was arrested by the London Police personnel on account of putting up a fight in the middle of the road in the Excel Centre. According to the ethics of autonomy, a person can move with his or her own thoughts; therefore, the situation is on the right way, as the demonstrators, who are actually a group of common people living in London, were expressing their views that may be against the determination of high-level authority but they are in good order, as they are able to make any kind of decision in accordance with their individual thoughts.

Rights

Disagreement and speaking out against any situation is known as protesting. Such protesting is above the board in the United Kingdom (Jones and Kawalek, 2019). The British Constitution protects the right to protest under the European Convention on Human Rights. So when Ziegler and his group had come to show protest against the authority on the road of East London, the concerned case was not a matter of disrespect for the constitution of the country.

Courts Consideration

The court takes care of the constitution of the concerned country's breaches by the other branch of the government. Along with this, the court also looks after the rights of an individual in opposition to the normative as well as any type of governmental oppression. That’s why in this matter, the Supreme Court was with the common persons who appeared as protestors on the road owing to the arrest, flying in the face of the legal rights that are provided by the country to its citizens according to Article 10 and Article 11 consequently (Kawalek, 2020). As the strikers were not in the wrong of a felonious offence, the court was behaving on their side in spite of the prosecution. In the matter of the people who wanted to attend the arms fair held by Defence and Security International, the court went with the thought that in spite of the protestors blocking the road using lockboxes, they did not harm anyone and therefore the matter to resist them would be unconstitutional. In this case, the court had not found any kind of fair balance that knocked these cases between the rights of the individual to protest and the matter of the general interest of the social community.

About individual freedom and conscience, religion, and the freedom to speak and assemble for the purpose of protesting against any issue.

From the case of Director of Public Prosecutions v. Ziegler and others, it is clear that individual freedom is the fundamental right that each and every citizen has in the matter of belief, thoughts, and having a specific political opinion, as well as the right to choose to either fulfil or not fulfil the needs of their respective chosen religion, along with the right to protest, which means they are independent to voice their own views. All the citizens are free to speak their words in accordance with their own thoughts as well as their own interests (Simeon, 2019). Without damaging any public property and harming the common people, the citizen can form any kind of association as well as an assembly without arms to show objection against the decision of the higher authority. To maintain a proper democracy in a country, the governing authority is responsible for establishing such a kind of supportive practice to enhance the trustworthiness among the common mass for the constitutional body of the country.

Importance of these considerations

The freedom of the individual, the freedom of expression and the freedom of assembly are noteworthy and key features of a democratic country. The main reason to install such kinds of rules and regulations in society is liberty is a natural requirement of human beings. From the eve of birth each and every individual person has the potential to administer his or her own actions; if not, then at least have the aim to seek autonomy to be up to having control over the individual behaviour. If there is no freedom to make an assembly, then there will be a very narrow scope to point out the missing loopholes of the welfare governance.

Reference

Journal

Arnell, P. and Davies, G., 2020. The forum bar in UK extradition law: an unnecessary failure. The Journal of Criminal Law, 84(2), pp.142-162.

Arnell, P., 2019, September. Extradition and mental health in UK law. In Criminal law forum (Vol. 30, No. 3, pp. 339-372). Springer Netherlands.

Dietz, C., Travis, M. and Thomson, M. eds., 2020. A Jurisprudence of the Body. Palgrave Macmillan.

Griffiths, C., 2020. The honest cheat: a timely history of cheating and fraud following Ivey v Genting Casinos (UK) Ltd t/a Crockfords [2017] UKSC 67. Legal Studies, 40(2), pp.252-268.

Jones, E. and Kawalek, A., 2019. Dissolving the stiff upper lip: Opportunities and challenges for the mainstreaming of therapeutic jurisprudence in the United Kingdom. International journal of law and psychiatry, 63, pp.76-84.

Kawalek, A., 2020. A tool for measuring therapeutic jurisprudence values during empirical research. International Journal of law and Psychiatry, 71, p.101581.

Moskovko, M., Ástvaldsson, A. and Hallonsten, O., 2019. Who is ERIC? The politics and jurisprudence of a governance tool for collaborative European research infrastructures. Journal of Contemporary European Research, 15(3), pp.249-268.

Simeon, J.C., 2019. The evolving Common Law jurisprudence combatting the threat of terrorism in the United Kingdom, United States, and Canada. Laws, 8(1), p.5.