准父母有权利埋葬他们死去的前胎吗?讨论宪法法院如何制造了巨大的法律不确定性

Sarah Fick
{"title":"准父母有权利埋葬他们死去的前胎吗?讨论宪法法院如何制造了巨大的法律不确定性","authors":"Sarah Fick","doi":"10.17159/2077-4907/2023/ldd.v27.16","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Constitutional Court, in Voice of the Unborn Baby NPC v Minister of Home Affairs, was faced with a request to recognise a constitutionally protected right to bury a deceased previable foetus. This is a sensitive topic, since many persons who lose a foetus in utero wish to bury the remains for personal or religious purposes. Prior to this case, the general understanding was that such burials were prohibited in terms of the Births and Deaths Registration Act (BADRA), which allows the burial only of viable foetuses. The case, therefore, turned on whether BADRA permits the burial of a deceased previable foetus and, if not, whether this is unconstitutional. The applicants requested that the court declare that prospective parents have a right to bury their previable foetuses. The High Court found that BADRA does not allow such burials, and that this is unconstitutional. The Constitutional Court, however, found that BADRA does not prohibit such burials, since such deaths are not covered by the Act at all. This article discusses the lacuna that the Constitutional Court's decision created. It specifically considers whether such a right is protected in the Bill of Rights, and what the current law is regarding the burial ofpreviable foetuses, given the finding that this matter is not covered by BADRA.","PeriodicalId":489270,"journal":{"name":"Law, Democracy & Development","volume":"51 s29","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Do prospective parents have a right to bury their deceased previable foetuses? A discussion of how the Constitutional Court has created great legal uncertainty\",\"authors\":\"Sarah Fick\",\"doi\":\"10.17159/2077-4907/2023/ldd.v27.16\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The Constitutional Court, in Voice of the Unborn Baby NPC v Minister of Home Affairs, was faced with a request to recognise a constitutionally protected right to bury a deceased previable foetus. This is a sensitive topic, since many persons who lose a foetus in utero wish to bury the remains for personal or religious purposes. Prior to this case, the general understanding was that such burials were prohibited in terms of the Births and Deaths Registration Act (BADRA), which allows the burial only of viable foetuses. The case, therefore, turned on whether BADRA permits the burial of a deceased previable foetus and, if not, whether this is unconstitutional. The applicants requested that the court declare that prospective parents have a right to bury their previable foetuses. The High Court found that BADRA does not allow such burials, and that this is unconstitutional. The Constitutional Court, however, found that BADRA does not prohibit such burials, since such deaths are not covered by the Act at all. This article discusses the lacuna that the Constitutional Court's decision created. It specifically considers whether such a right is protected in the Bill of Rights, and what the current law is regarding the burial ofpreviable foetuses, given the finding that this matter is not covered by BADRA.\",\"PeriodicalId\":489270,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Law, Democracy & Development\",\"volume\":\"51 s29\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Law, Democracy & Development\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17159/2077-4907/2023/ldd.v27.16\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Law, Democracy & Development","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17159/2077-4907/2023/ldd.v27.16","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在“未出生婴儿之声”诉内政部部长一案中,宪法法院面临着一项请求,即承认宪法保护的埋葬已故前胎的权利。这是一个敏感的话题,因为许多在子宫内失去胎儿的人希望出于个人或宗教目的埋葬遗体。在此案件之前,一般的理解是,《出生和死亡登记法》禁止这种埋葬,该法只允许埋葬存活的胎儿。因此,这一案件的关键在于,《BADRA》是否允许埋葬死前胎儿,如果不允许,这是否违宪。申请人要求法院宣布准父母有权埋葬他们的前胎。高等法院发现BADRA不允许这样的葬礼,这是违宪的。然而,宪法法院认为,《BADRA》并不禁止这种埋葬,因为这种死亡根本不包括在《法案》之内。本文讨论了宪法法院的判决所造成的空白。它特别考虑了这种权利是否受到《权利法案》的保护,以及现行法律对埋葬可存活胎儿的规定是什么,因为这一问题不包括在《BADRA》中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Do prospective parents have a right to bury their deceased previable foetuses? A discussion of how the Constitutional Court has created great legal uncertainty
The Constitutional Court, in Voice of the Unborn Baby NPC v Minister of Home Affairs, was faced with a request to recognise a constitutionally protected right to bury a deceased previable foetus. This is a sensitive topic, since many persons who lose a foetus in utero wish to bury the remains for personal or religious purposes. Prior to this case, the general understanding was that such burials were prohibited in terms of the Births and Deaths Registration Act (BADRA), which allows the burial only of viable foetuses. The case, therefore, turned on whether BADRA permits the burial of a deceased previable foetus and, if not, whether this is unconstitutional. The applicants requested that the court declare that prospective parents have a right to bury their previable foetuses. The High Court found that BADRA does not allow such burials, and that this is unconstitutional. The Constitutional Court, however, found that BADRA does not prohibit such burials, since such deaths are not covered by the Act at all. This article discusses the lacuna that the Constitutional Court's decision created. It specifically considers whether such a right is protected in the Bill of Rights, and what the current law is regarding the burial ofpreviable foetuses, given the finding that this matter is not covered by BADRA.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信