1_9788411691031 by Editorial Tirant Lo Blanch

156 Coordinator

José María Puyol Montero

Vulnerability and rights

alternativa

VULNERABILITY AND RIGHTS

COMITÉ CIENTÍFICO DE LA EDITORIAL TIRANT LO BLANCH María José Añón Roig

Marta Lorente Sariñena

Ana Cañizares Laso

Javier de Lucas Martín

Jorge A. Cerdio Herrán

Víctor Moreno Catena

José Ramón Cossío Díaz

Francisco Muñoz Conde

Catedrática de Filosofía del Derecho de la Universidad deValencia

Catedrática de Derecho Civil de la Universidad de Málaga

Catedrático de Teoría y Filosofía de Derecho. Instituto Tecnológico Autónomo de México Ministro en retiro de la Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación y miembro de El Colegio Nacional

María Luisa Cuerda Arnau

Catedrática de Derecho Penal de la Universidad Jaume I de Castellón

Manuel Díaz Martínez

Catedrático de Derecho Procesal de la UNED

Carmen Domínguez Hidalgo

Catedrática de Derecho Civil de la Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile

Eduardo Ferrer Mac-Gregor Poisot

Juez de la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos. Investigador del Instituto de Investigaciones Jurídicas de la UNAM

Owen Fiss

Catedrático emérito de Teoría del Derecho de la Universidad deYale (EEUU)

José Antonio García-Cruces González Catedrático de Derecho Mercantil de la UNED

José Luis González Cussac

Catedrático de Derecho Penal de la Universidad deValencia

Luis López Guerra

Catedrático de Derecho Constitucional de la Universidad Carlos III de Madrid

Ángel M. López y López Catedrático de Derecho Civil de la Universidad de Sevilla

Catedrática de Historia del Derecho de la Universidad Autónoma de Madrid Catedrático de Filosofía del Derecho y Filosofía Política de la Universidad deValencia Catedrático de Derecho Procesal de la Universidad Carlos III de Madrid Catedrático de Derecho Penal de la Universidad Pablo de Olavide de Sevilla

Angelika Nussberger

Catedrática de Derecho Constitucional e Internacional en la Universidad de Colonia (Alemania) - Miembro de la Comisión de Venecia

Héctor Olasolo Alonso

Catedrático de Derecho Internacional de la Universidad del Rosario (Colombia) y Presidente del Instituto Ibero-Americano de La Haya (Holanda)

Luciano Parejo Alfonso

Catedrático de Derecho Administrativo de la Universidad Carlos III de Madrid

Consuelo Ramón Chornet

Catedrática de Derecho Internacional Público y Relaciones Internacionales de la Universidad deValencia

Tomás Sala Franco

Catedrático de Derecho del Trabajo y de la Seguridad Social de la Universidad deValencia

Ignacio Sancho Gargallo

Magistrado de la Sala Primera (Civil) del Tribunal Supremo de España

Elisa Speckmann Guerra

Directora del Instituto de Investigaciones Históricas de la UNAM

Ruth Zimmerling

Catedrática de Ciencia Política de la Universidad de Mainz (Alemania)

Fueron miembros de este Comité: Emilio Beltrán Sánchez, Rosario Valpuesta Fernández y Tomás S. Vives Antón

Procedimiento de selección de originales, ver página web: www.tirant.net/index.php/editorial/procedimiento-de-seleccion-de-originales

VULNERABILITY AND RIGHTS

JOSÉ-MARÍA PUYOL MONTERO Coordinator

tirant lo blanch Valencia, 2023

Copyright ® 2023 Todos los derechos reservados. Ni la totalidad ni parte de este libro puede reproducirse o transmitirse por ningún procedimiento electrónico o mecánico, incluyendo fotocopia, grabación magnética, o cualquier almacenamiento de información y sistema de recuperación sin permiso escrito de los autores y del editor. En caso de erratas y actualizaciones, la Editorial Tirant lo Blanch publicará la pertinente corrección en la página web www.tirant.com. Sponsors: Real Colegio Complutense at Harvard University; Institute for Global Law and Policy (Harvard Law School); Harvard Law School Criminal Justice Policy Program; RCC Study Group ‘Studies on Life and Human Dignity’; Tirant lo Blanch Publisher.

© TIRANT LO BLANCH EDITA: TIRANT LO BLANCH C/ Artes Gráficas, 14 - 46010 - Valencia TELFS.: 96/361 00 48 - 50 FAX: 96/369 41 51 Email:tlb@tirant.com www.tirant.com Librería virtual: www.tirant.es ISBN: 978-84-1169-103-1 MAQUETA: Tink Factoría de Color Si tiene alguna queja o sugerencia, envíenos un mail a: atencioncliente@tirant.com. En caso de no ser atendida su sugerencia, por favor, lea en www.tirant.net/index.php/empresa/politicas-de-empresa nuestro procedimiento de quejas. Responsabilidad Social Corporativa: http://www.tirant.net/Docs/RSCTirant.pdf

Authors:

Santiago Cañamares Grzegorz J. Blicharz Manuel Estepa Montero Liviu Olteanu Juan-Pablo Puy-Segura José-María Puyol Montero Francesc Torralba Daniel-Bernardus van Schalkwijk

Table of contents Introduction: Dignity andVulnerability, an Ongoing Historical Process ............

MAN AND NATURE: ANALYZING THE COMMONS WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF ROMAN LAW* Grzegorz J. Blicharz I. INTRODUCTION........................................................................ II. THE IMPORTANCE OF HISTORICAL RESEARCH ON THE COMMONS. III. ROMAN LAW INTUITION: A TYPOLOGY OF GOODS....................... IV. ROMAN LAW PEDIGREE OF WATER MANAGEMENT RULES.............. V. CONCLUSION........................................................................... VI. BIBLIOGRAPHY..........................................................................

38 39 45 55 63 64

SINGER VERSUS SOCRATES’ LEGACY IS “SANCTITY OF LIFE” REALLY SPECIESISM? Daniel-Bernardus Van Schalkwijk Juan-Pablo Puy-Segura I. INTRODUCTION........................................................................ II. SINGER’S ATTACK ON SOCRATES’ LEGACY.................................... 1. Singer answers the defense from potentiality.................................... 2. Defense against the charge of dualism............................................. 3. Singer’s reply in case “sanctity of life” were not speciesist..................... III. SPAEMANN’S VIEW OF PERSONHOOD.......................................... 1. Spaemann’s view of personhood................................................... IV. SOCRATES’ LEGACY AND LEONARDO POLO................................. 1. Knowledge limits..................................................................... 2. The knowing person................................................................. 3. Polo on utilitarianism................................................................ V. WHY SOCRATES’S LEGACY IS NOT SPECIESISM.............................. VI. IS IT ALWAYS WRONG TO TAKE AN INNOCENT HUMAN LIFE?........... VII. A DEFENSE OF SOCRATES’ LEGACY?............................................. VIII. SANCTITY OF LIFE AND ANIMALS................................................. IX. IN CONCLUSION....................................................................... X. BIBLIOGRAPHY..........................................................................

68 69 71 72 73 74 78 80 81 85 88 90 91 91 92 96 99

Table of contents

HUMAN BEINGS CONFRONTING THEIR VULNERABILITY Francesc Torralba I. MEDITATION ON VULNERABILITY................................................ II. EPIPHANIES OF VULNERABILITY.................................................. 1. Pain...................................................................................... 2. Disease.................................................................................. 3. Fatigue.................................................................................. 4. Impotence.............................................................................. 5. Failure.................................................................................. 6. Reduction of autonomy.............................................................. 7. Digital vulnerability.................................................................. 8. Economic precariousness............................................................ III. ATTITUDES IN FRONT OF VULNERABILITY.................................... IV. CONCLUSION........................................................................... V. BIBLIOGRAPHY..........................................................................

101 104 104 105 106 106 107 108 109 110 111 115 116

CONDEMNED PRISONERS AND THEIR RIGHTS IN SPAIN IN THE NINETEENTH AND TWENTIETH CENTURIES José-María Puyol Montero I. INTRODUCTION........................................................................ II. PRISONERS AND THEIR RIGHTS AFTER SENTENCE WAS PASSED AND THE WAITING PERIOD................................................................ III. TRANSFER OF PRISONERS FROM THE PRISON TO THE GALLOWS..... IV. EXECUTION OF THE CONDEMNED.............................................. 1. The place of execution............................................................... 2. The date and time of execution.................................................... 3. At the time of execution............................................................. V. EXHIBITING THE BODY OF THE EXECUTED. THE BURIAL................. 1. Exhibiting the body of the executed person...................................... 2. Delivery of the body to the family and burial.................................... VI. SOME CONCLUSIONS................................................................. VII. BIBLIOGRAPHY..........................................................................

118 119 129 137 137 142 144 147 147 150 152 154

THE PROTECTION OF THE RIGHT TO LIFE IN THE COUNCIL OF EUROPE. ITS IMPLICATIONS ON THE RECOGNITION OF CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTION IN LIFE-RELATED SITUATIONS Santiago Cañamares Arribas I. INTRODUCTION........................................................................ II. THE RIGHT TO LIFE IN THE EUROPEAN CONVENTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS.....................................................................................

158 160

Table of contents

1. Normative framework............................................................... 2. The right to life in context. The position of the European Court of Human Rights in life-related situations..................................................... 2.1. Beginning of life................................................................ 2.2. End-of-life situations........................................................... III. THE PROTECTION OF CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTION IN LIFE RELATED SITUATIONS.............................................................................. 1. General overview..................................................................... 2. Conscientious objection of health personnel in life-related situations....... IV. FINAL REMARKS........................................................................ V. LIST OF REFERENCES.................................................................

11 160 162 162 166 170 170 172 175 177

ALL LIVES MATTER! HOW TO SOLVE THE ISSUE OF HATE SPEECH AND RELIGIOUS HATRED, COUNTERING ABUSES IN TIME OF NEW NORMALCY Liviu Olteanu I. INTRODUCTION: TO MONITOR AND INFLUENCE CHANGES........... 1. Questions for Thinking Based on This Paper..................................... 2. Key Proposals During Pandemic, War and Emergency Laws.................. 3. Authority and Religion in a Polarized World..................................... II. DYSTOPIAS AND THE TRUTH: A LIVING DILEMMA........................... 1. Dystopias: A Planning of Society’s Future?....................................... 2. Queries and Exploration on COVID-19 Crisis & Emergency Laws – Where Are We Moving Towards?............................................................ III. SUMMING UP THE PREVIOUS PAPER: HOW “NEW WORLD ORDER’ SCENARIOS” FACE FREEDOM OF CONSCIENCE AND HUMAN DIGNITY DURING PANDEMIC AND EMERGENCY LAWS................................ 1. Etiology of Scenarios................................................................. 2. Human Dignity and Freedom of Conscience Impacted by Scenarios........ 2.1. A Cosmic Panorama of the Future.......................................... 2.2. The American Intentions on New World Order.......................... 2.3. China's Artificial Intelligence & Democracy in Digital Age: A New World Order.................................................................... 2.4. Traditional or New Enemies Identified..................................... 2.5. The Great Reset and Coercive Measures................................... 2.6. The COVID-19 Pandemic and the Great Reset........................... 2.7. The Great Reset as a Wake-Up Call......................................... 2.8. Beliefs Desirable for Authorities............................................. 2.9. Establishment of a New Sexual World Order.............................. 2.10. Reasonable Doubt Ahead of Political Correctness & Restriction of Liberty...........................................................................

182 182 182 183 186 186 191 201 201 203 203 204 204 204 205 205 205 206 206 207

Table of contents

2.11. Greatest Risk of Global Catastrophe & Pandemic as a Surprised Infectious Disease.................................................................... 2.12. Clade X Pandemic Exercise/ The SPARS Pandemic & The Event 201 Exercise.......................................................................... 2.13. Many Short-Term Emergency Measures Will Become a Fixture of Life................................................................................ 2.14. Pandemic Has Brought us to a Crossroads, the Future Starts Today... 2.15. Scientific or Political ‘Prophecies’ on Horizon............................ 2.16. Global Information Control on Pandemic................................. 2.17. Lock Step Scenario on Control and Authoritarian Leadership.......... 2.18. Scenario to Re-Create a New World Order for Autocracy.............. 2.19. Lockdowns for Pandemic and Climate Change........................... 2.20. Christian Nationalism as a Persecution Scenario.......................... 2.21. Freedom of Conscience and Sunday Law Scenario....................... 2.22. Scenario to Unite All Christians & All Religions.......................... 2.23. Scenario of A Global Political Authority.................................... 3. Vulnerabilities on Government Restrictions, Social Hostilities and Religion Abuses.................................................................................. IV. HOW TO SOLVE THE ISSUE OF HATE SPEECH AND RELIGIOUS HATRED....................................................................................... 1. Freedom and Responsibility........................................................ 2. Stand Up for Free Speech & Freedom of Conscience. Case-Study: Paivi Rasanen................................................................................. 3. Facing Hate Speech and Divergences on Freedom of Expression............. 3.1. Governments to Guarantee the Security of Journalists, Writers, Scientists, Other Experts and Protecting Freedom of Expression of all Actors to Criticize Authority............................................. 3.2. Criminal Offences on Hate Speech to Follow Principles of Legality, Proportionality and Necessity, but Assessing the Severity of Hatred by Six-Part Threshold Test........................................................ 3.3. Education of Journalists and Other Stakeholders on Expressing with Prudence, Respect, and Responsibility to Sensitive Issues as Religious Sentiments....................................................................... 3.4. Speaking Out Publicly Against Hate Speech and Religious Hate Propaganda & Appreciating the Positive Significance of Freedom of Expression....................................................................... 3.5. Tackling Societal Root-Causes and To Be Vigilant About Utilization of Religion, or Pandemic COVID-19, Climate Change, Common Good & Laws of Emergencies for Political Gains................................. 3.6. During Emergency Times There is a Special Need to Focus on Human Rights and its Violations, such as Rights to Life, Freedom, Privacy, Health, Movement, Worship.................................................

207 208 209 209 209 210 210 211 211 212 212 213 213 214 214 215 216 219 219 220 221 223 223 225

Table of contents

3.7. To Counter Hate SpeechThrough Education in Human Rights, Respect for Diversity and Tolerance, by Actors’Training and Public-Awareness Campaigns....................................................................... 3.8. Hatred and Hate Speech is Moving in Liberal Democracies and Authoritarian Systems Alike.......................................................... V. COUNTERING ABUSES ON SECURITY IN TIME OF EMERGENCY LAWS & NEW NORMALCY................................................................... 1. Security as an Explicit Border of Fundamental Freedoms..................... 2. Personal Safety, Restriction of Freedoms on Situations of Risk............... 3. Emergency and National Security Laws Could Be Used as Pretext and Political Abuse and Discrimination of Those That Oppose Official Narrative.. 4. Discrimination of Religious Minorities Have Consequences on Security for Majority................................................................................ 5. Limiting the State’s Mandates and Political Abuse............................... 6. Fundamental Rights as Limits to the Power...................................... 7. Emergency Measures Not Taking Precedence Over Fundamental Freedoms.................................................................................... VI. CONCLUSION........................................................................... 1. New World Order’s Scenarios: Concerns, Dreams or Certainty............. 2. Reality Versus Political Correctness............................................... 3. For a Stable & Better World – Let’s Think, Stand Up & Love!................ 3.1. THINK!.......................................................................... 3.2. STAND UP!..................................................................... 3.3. LOVE!............................................................................ VII. BIBLIOGRAPHY..........................................................................

226 227 227 227 228 229 230 230 231 231 232 232 233 235 237 238 240 241

ON THE RECENT DEVELOPMENT OF THE CASE-LAW OF THE RIGHT TO BE FORGOTTEN FOR THE PROTECTION OF PERSONAL DATA Manuel Estepa Montero I. INTRODUCTION........................................................................ II. THE GENESIS OF THE RIGHT TO BE FORGOTTEN IN THE JURISPRUDENCE OF THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE OFTHE EUROPEAN UNION AND ITS IMPACT ON SPAIN.......................................................... III. EXAMINATION OF THE SPANISH JURISPRUDENCE OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT AND THE SUPREME COURT ON THE RIGHT TO BE FORGOTTEN......................................................................... 1. The right to be forgotten in the context of the collision of the fundamental rights to honor, personal and family privacy, as well as the protection of personal data, with freedom of expression.......................................

246 254 259 260

Table of contents

2. The right to be forgotten in the context of the collision of the fundamental right to the protection of personal data with the right to freedom of religion and worship............................................................................ 3. The Resolution of the Spanish Agency for Data Protection (SDPA) that delimits the exercise of the right of deletion..................................... IV. CONCLUSIONS.......................................................................... V. BIBLIOGRAPHY.......................................................................... RCC Study Group «Studies on Life and Human Dignity» ...............................

266 270 271 273 275

Introduction: Dignity and Vulnerability, an Ongoing Historical Process Every human being has the right to be born, to live and to die ‘as a human being’.This statement may seem generic and perhaps a bit vague if we do not define what this means for human beings’. When we speak of behaving ‘like a man’, we are referring to behaving in accordance with the special dignity that every human has, because they have special capacities, far surpassing those of animals. The expression ‘to behave like a man’ sets us apart from the behavior expected of animals, because people should not behave in a purely instinctive way, but should base this on reason. The special dignity inherent to human beings thus arises from the fact they are people and belong to the human species. This entails two things: that of always behaving as humans; and always respecting one another, as the human beings that we are1. People are far superior to animals. They can reason and understand and have a sense of right and wrong. They try to do good and every time they do so, they feel happy. They do this because they want to be happy and evil is the antithesis of happiness. They have a special capacity which enables them to choose different ways of behaving. This is because they are free and thus not controlled by their instinct at any given moment. Human behavior is not therefore genetically programmed by their nature which means they are free to act2. It also means they can even act unnaturally, unreasonably and without using their common sense, as they are free and have free will. However, they do not always make good choices. Moreover, experience shows that they often make mistakes. We do not always choose what is best or that is most suitable for us. 1 2

MÉNDEZ, J.L. and BARBEITO, J., Una vida lograda. Moral de la persona, Ediciones Palabra, Madrid, 2021, pp. 15-16. See in this book the article BLICHARZ, G. J., “Man and Nature: Analyzing the Commons within the Framework of Roman Law”, pp. 37-64.

José-María Puyol Montero

Apart from freedom, people enjoy other extraordinary capacities, such as that for abstract thought; having a sense of the past, present and even future; and the capacity to be spiritual and religious. Memory permits them to remember the past in a wealth of detail. It can file or relate to different information, predict the future and accept responsibility for the positive and negative consequences of their decisions3. These capabilities surpass by far those of animals. However, they too are valuable in their own right. They may even be entitled to certain rights. Recognizing this does not mean they are on an equal footing to humans in terms of value and dignity. Animal lives are naturally subordinated and subjected to humans, who exploit them for profit and sustenance. People run farms, exploit animals and domesticate them, for food or other useful products. The same is true for vegetables and minerals. However, they have a duty to respect and conserve all of this. They must pass on nature to future generations in the best possible conditions. This is true for flora, rivers and mountains. Nature is our heritage and that of future generations and is vital for life on earth. It is everyone’s duty to take care of the environment and human life should not interfere with ecosystems. People must live sustainably and in harmony with Nature. While animals are ordered and limited by genetics and instinct, human behavior revolves around reason. It must be based on reason, understanding and free will. People must behave ethically and honestly and involves making many free decisions, each of which has its consequences. Humans are born and from that moment on they are shaped as people and their personalities begin to take shape. This is a lifelong process and therefore, they are beings in permanent flux. We are all born with a similar nature, with few differences, which are genetic. However, over time, we develop a secondary essence, which stems from making our own decisions. Little by little, we develop our own personality, which will be distinctive. That is why each person is unique, distinct and unrepeatable, not only their faces or fingerprints, but their mannerisms too and their personal experience, which will stem from their background, education and context. Ortega already stated 3

MÉNDEZ, J.L. and BARBEITO, J., Una vida lograda, pp. 17-18.

Introduction

“I am me and my circumstance”4. Everything people have lived through and what has conditioned them has affected and left a mark on them. A society is made up of a group of people in a given time and place. As each person is different, a society will also be constantly changing. Moreover, as people are born, live and die, each society is in permanent flux. As the years pass a society bears little resemblance to what it used to be. Each society is also very rich, as it is the accumulation of the varied personalities of every individual in it. The number and variety of people in a social group contribute to its richness. Each individual provides something to the society in which they live. Also, every action we take influences our environment to a greater or lesser degree and, we often leave a mark and we do not know how long this might last; it might be a short time, years or centuries. Moreover, every society is alive, as are those who live in it. Each society is creative, as are those who make it up. All this is part of the mystery of our life on earth. For instance, I teach at a university and every course that passes through the faculty is different. The classrooms and furniture and even the same professors, schedules and subjects may be the same as in previous courses, but each course has its own personality5.This also applies to every family, social group and society. Every human community is different and is in permanent evolution. The culture of a society and its traditions also evolve: they are something dynamic, advancing and enriched with what each person and generation contributes. Ancient societies are particularly rich. They have a centuries-long cultural legacy, one that has accumulated and been passed on from generation to generation. Each one contributes to the accumulation of ideas and features that make up the current culture of a nation, people, and territory. It is a sediment that is seemingly invisible, but one that influences and conditions many customs and how a people behave. Each society gradually forges its own culture. We can easily find art, buildings and creations from different eras, which intermingle and coexist 4 5

ORTEGA Y GASSET, J., Meditaciones del Quijote. Ideas sobre la novela, Revista de Occidente, Madrid, 1975. See PUYOL MONTERO, J. Mª, La Historia del Derecho en la Universidad del siglo XXI, Dykinson, Madrid, 2023, pp. 123-142.

José-María Puyol Montero

with contemporary products. Each generation is especially marked by the particular traditions it has, ones that the members of each society inherit and pass on to the next generation. Healthy policies leave a positive mark on society. On the contrary, periods in which corruption abounds, or when politicians only protect their own interests leave a bad taste in the mouth, which may take time to disappear. Good leaves a positive trace and evil a negative one. Some bring good to society, while others detract from it. Policies oriented at respecting fundamental rights and considering human dignity are always beneficial, not just for this generation, but also for future ones. The same is true in smaller units, such as villages or families. Respecting human dignity is tantamount to laying a solid foundation for human coexistence; it entails focusing on the individual and collective good of all members of that society.

I. DIGNITY IN LIFE We have seen that being born ‘as a person’ means from the outset having all the dignity intrinsic to being human. However, it also signifies being born with all our limitations. Each one of us, from the time we are born or even before, have a myriad of rights that are inherent to every member of the human species. They are innate and are neither acquired nor granted. They do not even need to be recognized by law or society itself. They are rights in themselves, and we must promote them as much as possible to spread knowledge about them and for them to be recognized. They should never be ignored or unknown. Since their existence is innate, they are not based on any law or feature in any constitution or declaration of rights. Experience shows that civilization goes hand in hand with effective recognition of the dignity of every human being. A theoretical declaration must always be supplemented by practical measures. The declarations of rights are in a process of perpetual improvement and strive to be ever more precise in terms of the rights we have. The legal systems in every country collate these rights and regulate them, so that they are respected and effective. Public authorities must also orient their policies towards this. In addition, today, there are an ever-increasing

Introduction

number of services and benefits that observe these rights. This is a sign of how civilization has progressed. It also shows that channels have been established to defend and claim these as an expression of recognizing individual dignity 6. Evidently, recognition of human rights is ever more universal. It is a phenomenon that today most countries endorse and any civilized nation is expected to recognize and respect them. Those countries yet to accept these basic principles of coexistence face serious problems in the international community: today there are universal values that are considered sacred, such as the right to life, gender equality, basic political rights, for employment, education, health care and to form a family. In order we all move in this direction, it would be very beneficial, albeit not essential, to seek consensus. However, there is also a danger we go too far. As granting rights is so popular, artificial or false ones might be created. Sometimes this means they are created at the expense of others and could be detrimental to essential values for coexistence. Therefore, they cannot be extended at any price, if they are not based on respect for dignity and our true nature. Therefore, protecting human rights and the dignity of each person is a sign of civilization. In a democracy there must be a law that can guarantee special protection to the individual rights of the people, as well as its collectives. Firstly, law, is a shield that protects and upholds our rights against the abuse and greed of the powerful. Secondly, it has a pedagogical function: it proclaims rights and thus encourages people to know, recognize and observe them well. A fundamental mission of the law is to extend special protection to the weakest and most vulnerable in society. In a democracy, it also has to protect minorities against the power of the majority. A majority can also use the vote to impose its will or convictions intransigently. This way it can ride roughshod over the opinions or rights of individuals or minorities, which must always 6

About the concept of human dignity see TORRALBA, F., “Dignity: a Philosophical Approachexploration”, New Challenges for Law. Studies on the Dignity of Human Life, Tirant lo Blanch Publisher, Valencia 2021, pp. 27-42; in the same book see STEPKOWSKI, A., “Human Dignity and Two Ways of its Understanding”, pp. 43-59.

José-María Puyol Montero

be taken into account when making a decision. The majority must respect the minority and rely on it, when seeking formulas that favor the common good and the general interest. Likewise, minorities should not impose their will when it clashes with what is suitable for the majority. That is, when they exclusively think of their own particular interests. All this shows us that law as a science is an art and must seek balance and harmony, so that individual and group rights are respected and protected. Every human is worthy and should always be respected and considered. In light of this, the law aims to harmonize all our interests, so we can coexist in peace, be free and safe. This is the responsibility of us all, not just for the authorities or legislators. We must all work together so that the rights of us all are respected, from the time we are born until we die a natural death. Living ‘as a human’ is therefore, something enriching, which is worth reflecting on. Maintaining over time an attitude of respect for human dignity has positive consequences. Thus, the dignity of human life comes with two responsibilities, one is active and the other passive. Firstly, every human must behave according to the standards of civilization inherent to life in society. Every person is expected to behave with dignity, in accordance with their own rights and those of others. Additionally, human dignity entails an obligation to others: it requires they respect others and themselves. In other words, one must behave with dignity, be respectful and be respected. The famous saying ‘individual freedom ends where the freedom of others begins’ implies that we do not live in isolation nor do we have absolute rights. We must all respect the rights of others. Respect is therefore an essential value in a system of freedoms and has different aspects: respect for health, fame and honor, physical or moral integrity; for rest, the needs in relationships and life in society; for family and friends; for work and property; and so on and so forth. Various declarations of rights contain innumerable cases that contemplate de facto situations in which human dignity must be respected. Even the vulnerable have fundamental rights. This is true, even if one behaves immorally and in an undignified manner: even criminals and prisoners have dignity, with rights and deserve respect, even if their