Legal Exam Revision Flashcards
What are human rights?
Human rights are rights we have simply because we exist as human beings - they are universal and inherent to us all, regardless of nationality, sex, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, language, or any other status. They range from the most fundamental - the right to life - to those that make life worth living, such as the rights to food, education, work, health, and liberty.
What are some examples of human rights?
- All human beings are free and equal
- No discrimination
- Right to life
- No slavery
- No torture and inhuman treatment
- Same right to use law
- Equal before the law
- Right to treated fair by court
- No unfair detainment
- Right to trial
- Innocent until proved guilty
- Right to privacy
- Freedom to movement and residence
- Right to asylum
- Right to nationality
- Rights to marry and have family
- Right to own things
- Freedom of thought and religion
- Freedom of opinion and expression
- Right to assemble
- Right to democracy
- Right to social security
- Right to work
- Right to rest and holiday
- Right of social service
- Right to education
- Right of cultural and art
- Freedom around the world
- Subject to law
- Human rights can’t be taken away
What is the anti-slavery movement?
The anti-slavery movement was a social and political movement that sought to end the practices of slavery and the slave trade.
It began in the 18th century.
The movement was led by abolitionists who believed that slavery was morally wrong and violated the principles of freedom and equality.
When did the transatlantic trade begin and finish?
Started in the 1400’s,
Lasted for over 400 years, until it was abolished in the 19th century,
What was the transatlantic slave trade?
Involved the forced transportation of millions of African slaves to the Americas,
During this time, millions of people were forcibly taken from their homes in Africa and brought to the Americas to work on plantations and in other industries.
What was the economic biases of Africa and America during the transatlantic slave trade?
Africa
- In their interest, African kings sold criminals, debtors, rival prisoners or prisoners of war in exchange for European weapons
America
- European colonies wanted to expand agriculture (cugar, cotton, tabacco)
- Needed cheap labour (as they were labour intensive crops)
What is the lasting legacy of the transatlantic slave trade?
Today, the legacy of the slave trade continues to shape the social and economic landscape of many countries. It is important to remember this dark period in history and work towards creating a more just and equitable society for all.
What was the transatlantic save trade
Forced transportation of African people to the Americas, sold into slavery.
Define Slavery
- Slaves were forced to carry out menial or labour-intensive jobs, but gained food and accomodation where the structure of the modern welfare state did not exist.
- Slaves were mistreated and brutalised, with no legal rights and no means of escape.
- Laws generally treated slaves as objects, rather than subjects of the law.
How did slavery spread?
- European ships would trade products for slaves in West Africa.
- Europeans began to conquer the New World and their empires expanded, they required more and more resources to grow and support their new colonies.
- Slave labour was sought from new populations or races.
How did the abolitonist movement begin? Why did it succeed?
- The move began in the 12th century in European cities and states.
- People became aware of the slave trading, and a large amount of the religious population became outraged by what was happening and became opposed to the business of slave trading.
Somerset v Stewart 1772 UK - Case Notes
- Somerset was bought in Virginia (age 8) by Stewart.
- He was then taken to England
- Somerset escaped and then was recaptured by Stewart.
- Somerset was set on a boat off to Jamaica.
- It was stopped by a group of abolists that brought up Writ of Habeus Corpus
What is the procedural history of the Somerset case?
- December 3 1771, Somsersets godparents applied for the Courts Kings Bench for a writ of habeus corpus
- Six days later, Somerset was produced before the Court of Kings Bench, to determine whether his inprisonment was lawful.
- Hearing was ordered for the 21st of January 1772 - meanwhile Somerset was free.
- The court held that ‘a master could not seize a slave in England and detain him preparatory to sending him out of the realm to be sold’. It also ruled that habeas corpus was a constitutional right available to slaves to forestall such seizure, deportation and sale, because they were not chattel, or mere property – they were servants and thus persons invested with certain (but limited) constitutional protections.
- July 10, 1772, Somerset wrote to a fellow slave informing of his right to freedom that outraged his ‘owner’.
Legal reasonings of the Somerset case
- ‘habeas corpus’ means ‘you may have the body’ and was the expression used in the Middle Ages to bring a prisoner into court. Its purpose since the 17th century was to protect against false imprisonment, as habeas corpus determines whether a prisoner has been afforded due process, not whether he or she is guilty. As such, Somerset’s case was argued against Captain Knowles, the person accused of unlawfully detaining Somerset.
- This case was an opportunity to promote the arguments Sharp had made inA Representation of the Injustice and Dangerous Tendency of Tolerating Slavery in England(1769).
- Somerset’s lawyers defined villeinage as ‘a slavery in blood and family, one uninterruptedly transmitted through a long line of ancestors’, and argued that English ancestry was a requirement of villeinage.
- They argued that villeinage had anyway expired, that there was no positive law relating to slavery in England, and that the law of Virginia, under which the contract for Somerset’s enslavement was made, did not apply in England. Further, Somerset could not be accused of breach of contract because the basic requirement for any contract – that the parties be free to enter into it – had not been met.
- Despite the complex legal arguments, Mansfield was determined to issue a narrow ruling, clarifying that ‘The only question before us is, whether the cause on the return is sufficient? If it is, the negro must be discharged.’ The question at stake was not the legality of slavery, but whether Knowles – on behalf of Steuart – had a legal right to detain Somerset, the legal protection which habeas corpus affords.
- The court held that ‘a master could not seize a slave in England and detain him preparatory to sending him out of the realm to be sold’. It also ruled that habeas corpus was a constitutional right available to slaves to forestall such seizure, deportation and sale, because they were not chattel, or mere property – they were servants and thus persons invested with certain (but limited) constitutional protections.
What was the Zong Massacre?
29th November 1781
- In 2 days, they chucked over 132 slaves overboard to cash in their insurance policy.
- 442 slaves were on board which was twice the amount it was capable of holding safetly.
- By the end of the third week of November, drinking water was getting low. They had been on the hsip since August.
- The ship sailed 300 miles past its destination of Jamaica
- Only 208 arrived in Jamaica
- The ships insurance company refused to pay out.
- Insurers v Ship Owners
- Found in the Insurances favour
