The Right to life is a phrase that describes the belief that a human being has an essential right to life particularly that a human being has the right not to be killed by another human being.
The concept of a right to life is central to debates on the issues
of capital punishment, euthanasia, self-defense and war.
In 1776, the United States
Declaration of Independence declared that “life” is one of the inalienable
rights, implying that all persons have the right to live and/or exist and a
government has the obligation to secure the inalienable rights of its people.
In 1948, the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the
United Nations General
Assembly declared in article three: “Everyone has the right to life, liberty
and security of person”.
In
1950, the European Convention on Human Rights was adopted by the Council of
Europe, declaring a protected human right to life in Article 2. There are
exceptions such as Lawful executions and self-defense, arresting a fleeing
suspect and suppressing riots and insurrections.
In
this article, you should be able to define and explain the term Right to Life,
identify the various Laws both International and Domestic Laws that govern
Right to Life and distinguish between.
Definition of Right to Life
The right to life asserts
the sanctity of human life. The African charter on Human and Peoples Right puts
it thus: “Human beings are inviolable. Every human being shall be entitled to
respect for his life and integrity of his person. No one may be arbitrarily
deprived of this right.
Section 33(1) of the 1999
constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria states that:
“Everyone has a right to
life and no one shall be deprived intentionally of his life, sake in the
execution of the sentence of a court in respect of a criminal offence of which
he has been found guilty in Nigeria.
Section 33(2) a person
shall not be regarded as having been deprived of his life in contravention of
this section, if he dies as a result of the use, to such extent and in such
circumstances as are permitted by law of such force as is reasonably necessary:
(a) For the defense of any
person from unlawful violence or for the defense of property.
(b) In order to effect a
lawful arrest or to prevent the escape of a person Lawfully Detained.
(c) For the purpose of
suppressing a riot, insurrection or mutiny.
It must be stated that the
rights enumerated in chapter V of the 1999 Constitution are not absolute.
Derogation from them is permissible under the Constitution. The rationale for the
principle of derogation is founded on the basis that freedom is in itself
limitless.
With regards to right to
life, the 1999 Constitution accept that life is sacrosanct; it is the basis of
human existence and the right to it can only be derogated from in respect of
death resulting from acts of wars. Not only that the 1979, 1989 and 1999
constitutions go on to protect this right by prohibiting the use of retroactive
legislation to impose a penalty heavier than that existing at the time a crime
for which the penalty is prescribed, was committed.
It is on account of the
sacredness accorded to this right that caused the Supreme Court to condemn in a
most caustic language the action of the Oyo State Governor in the premature
execution of a convict whose appeal was pending before the court of appeal.
In the case of, Aliu Bello and 13ors V Attorney-General Oyo
State (1986) 5 NWLR 828; the accused had been convicted of armed robbery
and had been sentenced to death by the Oyo State High Court under the Robbery
and Firearms Law of the State.
The convicts appeal was
pending before the court of appeal when the Governor ordered his execution. The
deceased dependant brought an action claiming damages for the illegal killing
of their bread- winner.
The Appeal was heard by the
Supreme Court embank. The Court castigated the Government of Oyo State in the
case, the first of its kind in which the government “Hastly and illegally
snuffed life of an Appellant whose appeal had vested and was in being
considered”.
Thus
in effect, the courts have stood stoutly in defense of the citizen’s right to
life.
The right to life
guaranteed by the 1999 constitution has been interpreted in other jurisdiction,
particularly by the India supreme court, not only as a right to:
a)
Physical existence,
b)
The use of other limbs or facility through
which life is enjoyed.
c)
Live in basic human dignity. Since without
basic human dignity, life would not be worth living.
d)
The state duty to reduce infantile
Mortality.
The Human Rights committee
of the United Nations dealing with Article 6 of International Covenant on Civil
and Political Rights, which guarantees the rights to life, has rejected a
narrow interpretation of this right. The committee has interpreted the
commitment undertaken by this Article to include the duty to take steps to
eradicate infantile mortality, the elimination of malnutrition to prevent
epidemic and to banish weapons of destruction.
Also read: Human Rights as a Universal Concern
Enforcement Procedure
The 1999 Constitution
confers a special jurisdiction on the High Court for the purpose of enforcement
of the fundamental Rights provisions. It provides that “Any person who alleges
that any of the provision of chapter IV of the 1999 Constitution has been, is
being or likely to be contravened in any state in relation to him, may apply to
a High Court in that state for redress.
The Constitution empowers
the Chief Justice of Nigeria to make rules with respect to the practice and
procedure of a High Court for the purpose of fundamental human right
enforcement.
The High Court has the
power, in its original jurisdiction, to make an appropriate order or use any of
the prerogative writs of habeas corpus, mandamus, certiorari, and prohibition
and its power of contempt to ensure compliance. The courts may also resort to
injunctions and declaratory judgments.
Also read: What are the 10 Fundamental Rights?
Conclusion
on Right to life Human
Rights
The right to life is a
constitutional concept which no other law can invalidate. This article has
highlighted the normal line and the procedural framework for the protection of
the rights to life in Nigeria.
The Nigeria courts have
been more courageous in interpreting constitutionally and international
guaranteed rights.
In this article, you have
learnt about the:
• Right to life
• International Covenants
and Conventions on Right to life.
• Domestic Laws on Right to
life
• The 1999 Constitutional provision
on Right to life.
• The framework for
enforcement of right to life, as a Fundamental
Human
Right.
Also read: Historical Antecedents of Human Rights in Nigeria
0 Comments