About: FEDERAL vs. Commissioner (South Island Prisons), 06-1982 CC   Sponge Permalink

An Entity of Type : owl:Thing, within Data Space : 134.155.108.49:8890 associated with source dataset(s)

Appeal by SIP from the Supreme Court. FEDERAL sued South Island Prisons for alleged inhumane treatment of inmates at its Lovetown National Penitentiary facility. Although SIP did not deny the specifics of the treatment, it contested that its treatment of inmates was well within the law, and argued that the "Right to Life" enshrined in the Constitution (Chap. 2 Sec. 1) applied only to not killing or attempting to kill. The Supreme Court found in favor of FEDERAL and ordered SIP policies changed. SIP appealed to the Constitutional Court, which decided that the right does not only encompass not being killed by others or the government, but also bodily integrity and the ability to live without duress. The Court recognized that a "right to dignity" is also considered as part of this right. The

AttributesValues
rdfs:label
  • FEDERAL vs. Commissioner (South Island Prisons), 06-1982 CC
rdfs:comment
  • Appeal by SIP from the Supreme Court. FEDERAL sued South Island Prisons for alleged inhumane treatment of inmates at its Lovetown National Penitentiary facility. Although SIP did not deny the specifics of the treatment, it contested that its treatment of inmates was well within the law, and argued that the "Right to Life" enshrined in the Constitution (Chap. 2 Sec. 1) applied only to not killing or attempting to kill. The Supreme Court found in favor of FEDERAL and ordered SIP policies changed. SIP appealed to the Constitutional Court, which decided that the right does not only encompass not being killed by others or the government, but also bodily integrity and the ability to live without duress. The Court recognized that a "right to dignity" is also considered as part of this right. The
dcterms:subject
abstract
  • Appeal by SIP from the Supreme Court. FEDERAL sued South Island Prisons for alleged inhumane treatment of inmates at its Lovetown National Penitentiary facility. Although SIP did not deny the specifics of the treatment, it contested that its treatment of inmates was well within the law, and argued that the "Right to Life" enshrined in the Constitution (Chap. 2 Sec. 1) applied only to not killing or attempting to kill. The Supreme Court found in favor of FEDERAL and ordered SIP policies changed. SIP appealed to the Constitutional Court, which decided that the right does not only encompass not being killed by others or the government, but also bodily integrity and the ability to live without duress. The Court recognized that a "right to dignity" is also considered as part of this right. The appeal was thus dismissed, however, the Court added that SIP be forced to pay millions in damages to several inmates upon their release.
Alternative Linked Data Views: ODE     Raw Data in: CXML | CSV | RDF ( N-Triples N3/Turtle JSON XML ) | OData ( Atom JSON ) | Microdata ( JSON HTML) | JSON-LD    About   
This material is Open Knowledge   W3C Semantic Web Technology [RDF Data] Valid XHTML + RDFa
OpenLink Virtuoso version 07.20.3217, on Linux (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu), Standard Edition
Data on this page belongs to its respective rights holders.
Virtuoso Faceted Browser Copyright © 2009-2012 OpenLink Software