Marie Yuvienco: Of Human Bondage
by Marie Yuvienco. Interaksyon.com

Occasionally, I like to f*** with constitutional interpretation just for the hell of it.

At heart, we can agree that constitutions, being human creations, are intended for the benefit of their creators.

This conclusion is self-evident yet at the same time limiting. There are as many constitutions as there are people who organize themselves into countries; also, a constitution’s reach extends only as far as a country’s territorial borders.

But whatever their form, constitutions are written to do one thing, which is to reduce to text certain inalienable and indefinable rights which, by virtue of a paradox, do not need words to create or define them.

Freedom is one of these rights.

Constitutionally, freedom is not interpreted to refer strictly to physical liberty; it is broad enough to encompass a wide gulf of concepts that are negative – such as freedom against illegal searches and seizures – or positive – such as freedom of religion – so for now, let us adopt that looser interpretation.

On December 6, 1865, Georgia became the 27th state to cast a vote favoring an amendment to the Constitution of the United States; twelve days later, Secretary of State William Henry Seward, best known in history as the man who purchased Alaska from Russia, issued the certification that three-fourths of state legislatures – at the time, there were only 36 states – had approved the amendment, by virtue of which the 13th Amendment came into being.

Read full article @ www.interaksyon.com

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Trending

Discover more from Human Rights Online Philippines

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading