Freedom, freedoms are treated differently, especially known almost instinctively and blatantly violated.
CHARTER OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS OF THE EUROPEAN UNION
2012/C 326/02
PREAMBLE
TITLE I |
DIGNITY |
TITLE II |
FREEDOMS |
TITLE III |
EQUALITY |
TITLE IV |
SOLIDARITY |
TITLE V |
CITIZENS’ RIGHTS |
TITLE VI |
JUSTICE |
TITLE VII |
GENERAL PROVISIONS GOVERNING THE INTERPRETATION AND APPLICATION OF THE CHARTER |
CHARTER OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS OF THE EUROPEAN UNION
The European Parliament, the Council and the Commission solemnly proclaim the following text as the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.
CHARTER OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS OF THE EUROPEAN UNION
The peoples of Europe, in creating an ever closer union among them, are resolved to share a peaceful future based on common values.
Conscious of its spiritual and moral heritage, the Union is founded on the indivisible, universal values of human dignity, freedom, equality and solidarity; it is based on the principles of democracy and the rule of law. It places the individual at the heart of its activities, by establishing the citizenship of the Union and by creating an area of freedom, security and justice.
The Union contributes to the preservation and to the development of these common values while respecting the diversity of the cultures and traditions of the peoples of Europe as well as the national identities of the Member States and the organisation of their public authorities at national, regional and local levels; it seeks to promote balanced and sustainable development and ensures free movement of persons, services, goods and capital, and the freedom of establishment.
To this end, it is necessary to strengthen the protection of fundamental rights in the light of changes in society, social progress and scientific and technological developments by making those rights more visible in a Charter.
This Charter reaffirms, with due regard for the powers and tasks of the Union and for the principle of subsidiarity, the rights as they result, in particular, from the constitutional traditions and international obligations common to the Member States, the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the Social Charters adopted by the Union and by the Council of Europe and the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union and of the European Court of Human Rights. In this context the Charter will be interpreted by the courts of the Union and the Member States with due regard to the explanations prepared under the authority of the Praesidium of the Convention which drafted the Charter and updated under the responsibility of the Praesidium of the European Convention.
Enjoyment of these rights entails responsibilities and duties with regard to other persons, to the human community and to future generations.
The Union therefore recognises the rights, freedoms and principles set out hereafter. read more on https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:12012P/TXT
Starting from these provisions, several questions arise: Is breaking the law the absolute feeling of freedom? Is the form of government an excuse or reason for various behaviors (hating, hatred, xenophobia, racism, genocide, bullyng, violence, crime, trafficking, etc.)?
For crimes and criminals, theories, studies with multidisciplinary ramifications (psychology, sociology, etc.) are developed, while breaking the law becomes more and more refined. Each world and group focuses on its own freedom, understood and exercised instinctively and even taken to extremes. The survival of one, some and the imposition lead to the violation of the freedom/freedom of others.
The plot uses rumor, lies, distortion of facts and events so that we could say that it meets forms of crime and violation of the law depending on the goals pursued: destabilization, anarchy, gathering information, compromise, blackmail, etc. In these situations, the current examples are highly visible but complex “behind closed doors”. We will not nominate so as not to offend or denigrate anyone.
The most criminalized forms of violation of the law are by far criminal, civil acts, while the others are viewed contextually, gently, due to certain circumstances: political dissent, political opinions in which anything and everything is said, diplomacy where policies are based on interest, political through all forms, ideologies and differences of social and professional class, etc.
A simple browse of facts reveals the flagrante and existence of the supreme feeling of individual freedom, of opportunities, of breaking laws as thought?… to leave the loophole of the above? Are laws superficially thought out, insufficiently enforced (arbitrary, ignored, etc.)?
Would a possible legal education give birth to a limited society without thinking freely at the risk of breaking the law?
This material contains journalistic observations, no offense, interference or incitement is intended.
A challenge to society, elites and its existence.
By
Robert Williams
Editor in Chief