Due Process Rights are founded on the notion that the government must respect a person’s legal rights. Not just some of them, most of them or excluding a few, but all of them. Due Process is mentioned in the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the Constitution, which combined, assert that “No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law.
” Due Process is crucial not only in the handling of individuals accused of punishable behavior, but in the development of laws and legislation in that it places limitations upon them to guarantee that they do not curtail rights in favor of upholding the security of the State. The Fourth and Fifth Amendment to the United States Bill of Rights provide that a defendant has the right to protection from unreasonable searches and seizures, while the Sixth Amendment guarantees a right to counsel. In effect, such provisions protect the defendant from the use of evidence against him/her.
Searches and seizures can only be considered legal if they are warranted by probable cause, defined largely as “reasonable belief” that the defendant has committed a crime, otherwise they are protected by the exclusionary rule which premises that the means by which evidence is obtained is the criteria by which such evidence can be considered admissible. This is necessary to a fair criminal justice system, since it prevents law enforcement officials and prosecuting entities from attempting to use any means necessary to incriminate the defendant.
The exclusionary rule comes into play when confessions are involuntary – that is to say that they are obtained from torture or blackmail – and when searches are unwarranted in such a manner as to make the evidence obtained suspect. The United Nations primary role is ostensibly the facilitation of cooperation in matters of international law and security, global economic development and social progress as well as the guarantee of human rights.
In practice, peacekeeping and humanitarian pursuits have traditionally regarded as its most actively pursued goals. While the United Nations is arguably renowned for its ability to arbitrate in international matters, not all of its aspects are neutrally designed as some degree of power and authority is accorded to the developed member nations with the presumption that they operate in the interests of the rest of its member nations.
The forums by which nations are most able to interact in a neutral diplomatic setting are the General Assembly and the Secretariat. The General Assembly is the only organ of the United Nations in which all nations have equal representation and is tasked primarily with overseeing its budget, the appointment of the Security Council and the development of General Assembly Resolutions which make recommendations regarding matters concerning the international political stage.
The General Assembly has been crucial to the dialogue between industrialized nations and developing ones, particularly in the tail end of the 20th century, and its neutral character has been the source of diplomatic influence and provided for foreign relations for many developing countries that are ordinarily disenfranchised within global politics. The Secretariat is charged primarily with providing information and facilities for the United Nations, and carries out tasks dictated by the Councils.
Because the U. N. Charter provides that the Secretariat shall not seek or receive instructions from any authority other than that of the U. N. , and that each member nation respect the Secretariat in such a manner as to avoid influencing it, it is able to fulfill its duties in the resolution of international disputes, and in operations related to peacekeeping in as neutral a manner as possible. During the Cold War years, U. S. foreign policy maintained large scale international military involvement, which was a response to its own isolationist policies prior to World War II.
This was done primarily because of a fear of the spread of Soviet communism. Today, with issues of global security taking a backseat, and matters of environmental import taking center stage in discussions of global economic development it becomes increasingly important for the United States to take an active role in the latter. Developing nations frequently look up to the United States, not for its cultural or social values, but for its level of economic prosperity, yet the model which has permitted its luxuries is largely unsustainable.
It is wrong both to think that it can or should talk these nations out of these aspirations, so it will be necessary for the U. S. to set an example by recognizing that Rostovian take off model which enabled it to achieve present states of luxury is no longer desirable for other nations to imitate in an effort to enjoy a similar prosperity, by encouraging to leapfrog to the bright green future which is rapidly gaining currency within the U. S.