The Shipwrecked Sailors

The Case of..

The Shipwrecked Sailors

Three sailors on an oceangoing freighter were cast adrift in a life raft after their ship sank during a storm in the Atlantic Ocean. The ship went down so suddenly that there was no time to send out an SOS. As far as the three sailors knew, they were the only survivors. They had no food or water in the raft. And they had no fishing gear or other equipment that might be used to get food from the ocean.

After recovering from the shock of the shipwreck, the three sailors began to discuss their situation. Dudley, the ship's navigator, figured that they were at least one thousand miles from land and that the storm had blown them far from where any ships would normally pass. Stephens, the ship's doctor, indicated that without food they could not live longer than 30 days. The only nourishment they could expect was from any rain that might fall from time to time. He noted, however, that if one of the three died before the others, the other two could live a while longer by eating the body of the third.

On the twenty-fifth day, the third sailor, Brooks, who by this time was extremely weak, suggested that they all draw lots and that the loser be killed and eaten by the other two. Both Dudley and Stephens agreed. The next day, lots were drawn and Brooks lost. At this point, Brooks objected and refused to consent.

However, Dudley and Stephens decided that Brooks would die soon anyway, so they might as well get it over with. After thus agreeing, they killed and ate Brooks.

Five days later, Dudley and Stephens were rescued by a passing ship and brought to port. They explained to authorities what had happened to Brooks. After recovering from their ordeal, the two were placed on trial for murder.

The country in which they were tried had the following law: Any person who deliberately takes the life of another is guilty of murder.

Follow-up

Task 1

1. What happened in this case?

2. Who are the parties?

3. What facts are important? Unimportant?

4. Is any significant information missing?

5. Why did the people involved act the way they did?

6. What are the arguments in favor of and against each point of view?

7. Which arguments are most persuasive? Least persuasive? Why?

8. What might be the consequences of each course of action? To the parties? To society?

9. Are there any alternatives?

10. What questions might you pose if you had an opportunity to interview individuals involved in the case?

Task 2

1. Should Dudley and Stephens be tried for murder? Explain.

2. As an attorney for Dudley and Stephens, what arguments would you make on their behalf? As an attorney for the government, what arguments would you make on the government's behalf?

3. If Dudley and Stephens are convicted, what should their punishment be?

4. What purpose would be served by convicting Dudley and Stephens?

5. What is the relationship between law and morality in this case? Was it morally wrong for Dudley and Stephens to kill Brooks? Explain your answer.

6. Can an act be legal but immoral? Can an act be morally right but unlawful? Explain.

7. How you might approach the problem differently if you had another opportunity to consider the case?

Task 3: The case of the shipwrecked sailors involved a criminal trial against Dudley and Stevens. If a civil action had been brought against Dudley and Stevens, what would be the differences? Answer the questions that follow.

1. Who would bring the case?

2. What is the term used for persons bringing a civil case?

3. What is the role of the prosecutor in a civil case?

4. What term would be used for persons who are being sued in a civil case?

5. What would the persons bringing the case ask for?

6. How would the case get started?

7. If they did not have the money to hire one, would Dudley and Stevens be provided a free attorney in the civil case?

8. What is the burden of proof in a civil case?

9. How is the decision by the jury in a civil case different from the decision made in a criminal case?

10. Do you think that the persons bring the lawsuit against Dudley and Stevens should win? If so, what should they win? Give your reasons.

Human Rights

After completing this section students should be able to:

1. Explain the meaning of human rights, dignity, binding, covenant and taking a reservation.

2. Identify the rights included in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

3. Describe policies of Belarusian government in relation to international human rights agreements.

4. Identify and analyze examples of human rights violations in Belarus and elsewhere in the world.

“The people’s good is the highest law”

Cicero

Lead-in

1. What rights are guaranteed by the Universal Declaration of human Rights?

2. Can you think of examples of times in Belarusian and world history when specific rights have been violated? How the violation illustrates treatment of people as though they are not human beings?

3. Why dignity matters so much to us? Can you recall times in your childhood when you may have felt your dignity was violated? How the power of such memories demonstrates the innate need for dignity?

Reading

Task 1. Are these statements true or false? Give arguments to support your choice.

1. Human rights are the rights all people have simply because they are human beings.

2. Government can violate human rights.

3. We have our human rights from the moment we are born until the moment we die.

4. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights applies to all countries in the world.

5. The UDHR is a binding treaty.

6. Belarus has adopted most international human rights treaties.

7. Human rights cannot become.

Task 2. Read the text then explain the words in bold and suggest synonyms for the highlighted words.

Human Rights

Human rights are the rights all people have simply because they are human beings. To advocate human rights is to demand that the dignity of all people be respected. Both government and private individuals can violate human rights. Human rights apply in people's homes, schools, and workplaces. In fact they apply everywhere. We have our human rights from the moment we are born until the moment we die.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is a statement of basic human rights and standards for government that has been agreed to by almost every country in the world. First written and adopted by the United Nations (UN) in 1948 under the leadership of Eleanor Roosevelt, it proclaims that all people have the right to liberty, education, political and religious freedom, and economic well-being. The Declaration also bans torture and says that all people have the right to participate in their government process. Today these rights are generally promoted, recognized, and observed by countries that belong to the UN.

The UDHR is not a binding treaty. However, the UN has established a system of international treaties and other legal mechanisms to enforce human rights. These include the following major treaties:

• The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights protects the freedoms of speech, religion, and press and the right to participate in government.

• The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights provides for the right to adequate education, food, housing, health care, protection of property, and employment in safe conditions at an adequate salary.

• The Convention on the Rights of the Child spells out basic human rights to which children everywhere are entitled, including the right to education and to be free from exploitation.

Some believe the right to a clean environment should be added to the Covenants, while others call for a right to economic development for poor countries. Belarus has signed and ratified the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and has signed but not ratified both the Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

There are other important human rights treaties covering specific areas of human rights, including genocide and discrimination against women. Belarus has adhered to most international human rights and refugee law treaties[1]: Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, Refugee Convention, Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.

Human rights are standards that all countries can use when writing laws. Sometimes human rights become law in a country when the government signs an international treaty guaranteeing such rights. Human rights also can become law if they are included in a constitution or if the legislature of a country passes laws protecting or guaranteeing these rights. Even though they may not refer to them as "human rights," there are many provisions that protect human rights.

Many of the human rights documents—including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights—mention cultural rights, and it is widely accepted that all people have a right to their own culture. But what does this right to culture mean when culture comes into conflict with other universally accepted human rights? For example, the practice of female infanticide, or the killing of female babies, might be accepted in one culture, but the world community condemns it as a violation of a human right, the right to life. So cultural rights, like many other rights, are not absolute.

Task 3. Find English equivalents for the words in the text:

o достоинство, гордость; чувство собственного достоинства

o пытка

o обязывающий договор

o разъяснять, растолковывать

o соглашение; пакт; международный договор политического значения

o обязывать; требовать

o придерживаться, соблюдать; присоединяться

o беженец

o положение, условие; постановление

o детоубийство

o осуждать; приговаривать, выносить приговор

Task 4. What are the antonyms?

o advocate o violate o adopt

o liberty o to ban o binding treaty

o to enforce o to condemn o absolute

Task 5. Write (present) the main idea of the text.

Follow-up

You have been selected to join a group of space pioneers who will establish a colony on a distant planet. In order to create the best possible society, you and your group decide to make a list of the human rights that all space colonists should have.

1. List the three most important human rights that you believe should be guaranteed to all colonists.

2. Compare your list with those of other group members. Explain reasons for your selections.

3. Why do you think some of the rights you listed are more important than others?

4. Do any of the rights you listed conflict with one another? If so, which ones? Why?

5. Compare your list of rights with the rights listed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Which ones did you include? Which ones did you not include?

6. Are all the human rights you listed also legal rights? When does a human right become a legal right?

[1] http://www.geneva-academy.ch/RULAC/international_treaties.php?id_state=29

Дата добавления: 2015-11-04