Law and Society - Liberalism PDF

Preview

Summary

Topics covered - Law and Liberalism o Individual wish and social value o Mill o Hart and Devlin Debate - Law and Social context o Classic dilemma o Basic premise - Beginning and End of Life o Abortion o Euthanasia  Active and passive euthanasia  Shall we respect other people’s wish - Civil Disobed...

Description

Topics covered • Law and Liberalism o Individual wish and social value o Mill o Hart and Devlin Debate • Law and Social context o Classic dilemma o Basic premise • Beginning and End of Life o Abortion o Euthanasia  Active and passive euthanasia  Shall we respect other people’s wish • Civil Disobedience Exam Format • 12 May 2017 (9:30 am; Tuesday) • Deadline to raise Q: Noon 11 May (Monday) • Please post your question onto Moodle Discussion Forum, otherwise it will not be answered • At least one from each part o Choose 3 questions out of 6; each on separate booklet o Part A: set by Albert & Eric; Part B: set by Anne & Terry • Time: 2.5 hours (including 15 minutes reading time) Points to Note • Bring your U student card! • READ the instructions!! • Answer each Q on a new booklet • Only write with Black or Blue ball pen • Practise writing • If your handwriting is difficult to read, write on alternate lines • Only use abbreviation when you have introduced the full name, e.g. ICCPR (International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights) • Do not write in point form unless you run out of time …

Structure • For each problem, discuss:

1

o Frame the ISSUE (legal question)  point out relevant law/ concept/ statute/ provision; Start with W o Facts  Legal positions based on Facts o Traditional Defence/ Arguments o Problems/ Controversies re: application of standard Common problems in Past Answers • Legal Analysis missing?? o Why you agree and why you disagree • Mere repetition of facts in question • Without application of law to facts • Getting too emotional without analysis Your Questions • 1. As more of the past exam questions on section B are long problem question, I would like to ask about the answering techniques and answer structure to the questions in the exam. Specifically, how should we structure our answer, are there elements that we should cover? How should we approach the question and how long should our answer be? Are there any sample answers too? o Look at Exam report o Each questions on single booklet (4 pages) o Average: 3-4 pages o How judges approach the issue in giving the opinion and decision? o Cohesive answers o ** CD  relate to morality and public and private morality o Define your focus and answers in such a way that you can grow and use to develop and link to the next issues o Find link and arrangement • 2. As according to Hoffman, we may not be so harsh to impose a severe punishment or sentences to the disobedient. Do you think there is any differences in the punishment if the movement is a success or failure? Then, if the Umbrella Revolution is a success i.e. Chinese government allow us to have universal suffrage. Will it be different? o Political reality: No if PRC really allows us to have universal suffrage • 3. Does democracy really deliver what people want? Rawls  the principle of equal liberty and fair equality of opportunity? Should we force them to comply with the law? (political theory and democracy) o Why democracy is the best? o Advantages of democracy: include a fair system o Assume democracy is the best! Not necessary best leader, but **Accountability o Power corrupts

2

•

•

• • •

o Instrumental value: Accountability of our system; intrinsic value: human rights  make sure fair system o –ve: may not be the best system to attract best leader; not efficient 4. Backfire (umbrella revolution). Should the Umbrella Movement really be carried out? o Do you think it worth? o Waste of time/ resources? Also cause deeper mistrust/ tore society apart o Shouldn’t judge a movement whether it is worth and should not be so resultoriented o Gandhi/ Martin Luther King/ Revolution in China  didn’t success in one goal 5. Criticize their leaders  Do you think it is a good thing o CD is good?  PRC government is now frightened for more freedom o Is it really a good move? o Martin Luther King: equality; Gandhi: end of colonial rule o Revolution/ Movement  Not to overthrow the regime o Universal Suffrage is guaranteed in the Basic Law  negotiated between UK and PRC o Why: Accountability o https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accountability 6. Problem setting in Hong Kong? Usually (for you to apply law in Hong Kong) 7. Tip for revision? 8. If exam question not specify the reading/ philosopher  can we refer to additional reading? Yes. Use the material we have learnt and also cases; can refer to reading that you know

Peter Singer  euthanasia Michael Sandal

3

Question 5 • Problem-based questions • Structure • Introduction o Approach/ issue/ stance • Issue: frame the question(s) • Analysis: apply the law/ legal theories to the facts given • Stance: your view should be supported by legal arguments o Your reason should be backed by legal theory o Not good: not support because you are sympathetic o Respects body / individual autonomy Issues • Can Anthonia and Angelo justify their acts no CD? • Shall the government force-feed Angelo? Apply • Meaning of “CD”: public, nonviolent, conscientious yet political act breaking the law with the aim of bringing about a change in the law • This is too subjective: conscientious • What shall we do? • Need to quote the definition from Rawls and Raz • Rawls: justice: equal liberty or fair equality of opportunity; Raz: participation in political life • Rawls: higher constitutional order • Difficulty in this case: it is not about human right but animal right o Whether it suits the model of Rawls Application • How did she fight for it? / What has she done?  • she is fighting for animal rights (broke into the lab and release the animals • Angelos: Set fire to the laboratory and kill 5 innocent employees • Non-violent/ Rawls: related to constitutional principle: equality liberty and fair access to justice principles • Problem: violent; protesting the law against other jurisdiction  will it consider to CD (against common understanding and Rawls’s model) o May apply to Raz’s model: using violent mean in HK and fighting for other countries • Cannot fight for the end of nuclear weapon  then pick US Analysis • Anthnoia’s situation: is it about CD?

4

•

Angelo’s situation: any difference?

Common problems • Did not apply the significant of the issue? o Animal right/ outside HK o Break HK law but fight for animal right in other jurisdiction • Did not apply the theory but only the definition? • Then why Rawls and Raz The Issue of Force Feeding • Should they force feed Angelos? • Implication: should we let him starve himself? • The conflicting value: “Starving one to death” • Individual: self-determination/ body integrity/ individual wish • VS Sanctity of life  explain: human life is valuable and we should respect human life and we should stop human from hurting themselves • Is this a form of suicide? • Do we punish them from committing suicide? • Autonomy/ self-determination • Forbid any form of assisted suicide • Prison officer protect the welfare of the prisoners • 3 conflicting values/ premises: o Self- determination o Sanctity of life o Best interest of patients/ public interest and public policy • Passive euthanasia: Bland; Active euthanasia: Nicklinson o Judgement: We will let him go (Bland: brain cell ) • Involves issue of self-determination (autonomy), sanctity of life, utilitarianism • We should address the difference between Bland and Angelos • And the similarities and difference between Nicklinson and Angelos o Active  should his will o Angelos: show his will that he did not want to take any food • Explain these two cases and your own view • Right to private life (article 8 ECHR; Article 14 HKBOR) • Public interest being served? o Bear the consequences of acting against law Analysis • Your views? Do you support force feed of Angelo? Reasons? Central: • How does the law respond when the social perspective change?

5

• •

What happen when social perspective change that the law also need to change! How you think the law can respond and should respond? And what are the restrictions?

Conclusion • Advice? • Recommendation?

6...