Road Safety is a Fundamental Human Right – and Youth Should Be Part of it
Photo from Vision Zero Youth Council
It is a well-established principle that the right to life is fundamental. This is provided in all kinds of legal instruments. At an international level, the United Nations’ International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) provides under Article 6 “the inherent right to life”.
At a regional level, this same right to life is offered in various instruments such as Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), Article 4 of the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights (The Banjul Charter), Articles 5 & 6 of the Arab Charter on Human Rights and Article 4 of the American Convention on Human Rights.
Even a right so well established as this is denied to people around the world by their states in terms of road safety. This is evidenced by the fact that road traffic injuries (RTIs) are the leading cause of death worldwide that is not from natural causes such as a disease, as seen in the figure presented.
How are states denying citizens these rights?
In human rights law, the state has a positive obligation to protect the fundamental rights of its citizens without discrimination. The European Court of Human Rights has established the obligations of the state in terms of protecting the right to life.
There are two substantive obligations, firstly to take steps to protect life before it is lost as held in Osman v UK. Secondly, a procedural obligation – to investigate any loss of life which was preventable or intentional (Armani Da Silva v UK).[3] In terms of road safety, the main focus is under the first limb of the obligation, the prevention of death.
Yet, RTIs remain the eighth leading cause of death in the world, whilst being preventable in almost every circumstance, thus states are not complying with their positive obligations under the right to life. The preventability of car accidents can be showcased in high-income countries where more interventions have been established.
This can be seen in the figure below where a general trend shows there are more deaths per 100,000 population caused by RTIs in lower-income regions such as Africa and South East Asia than higher-income regions such as Europe. Yet even in higher-income areas, it is by no means perfect in terms of road safety - there is still a long way to go.
The data makes it clear that the states need to pour resources into road safety interventions in order to fulfill their positive obligations to the right of life.
In LCB v UK the European Court of Human Rights held unanimously that there is an obligation of the state to “take appropriate steps to safeguard the lives of those within its jurisdiction.”
Accordingly, states should be taking appropriate steps to implement road traffic interventions. This has been expanded in the Strasbourg jurisprudence in Öneryildiz v Turkey, to include the provision of equipment that can protect life.
In fact, in India, the Bombay High Court has ruled that citizens have a fundamental right to have roads kept in reasonable condition, which is pertinent to their right to life under the Indian Constitution.
It is plain to see that this should include the provision of road safety equipment and interventions, yet somehow, many states are underestimating their duty in the sector. Thus, they are failing to fulfill their obligations owed to their citizens under the right to life.
Photo from The Naul Road Safety Protest
The relevance of youth
It is increasingly important that youth are involved in the efforts to assist states with their positive obligations to protect life in terms of road safety. There are many reasons for this. Firstly, because youth are so often victims of RTIs. RTIs are the leading cause of death for children and young adults aged between 5-29.
Youth becoming involved in a global effort to reduce road fatalities could hugely increase awareness and education on the subject, allowing youth to identify if they are in danger. Furthermore, the more youth that becomes involved, the brighter the future will be once these ideas are manifested in society due to the education and awareness that youth had carried with them.
Not only is it important for youth to be involved, but they also have a right to be. Under the United Nations’ Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC), a unique and essential right is given to children and youth.
“assure to the child who is capable of forming his or her own views the right to express those views freely in all matters affecting the child, the views of the child being given due weight ”
As youth become progressively more involved in road safety advocacy, it is their right that the states give weight to their views. In this way, youth really is the answer in achieving road safety outcomes, and can aid states to fulfil the positive obligation to protect life in terms of implementing road traffic interventions and policies.
Photo from UN Road Safety Collaboration (WHO)
There is an internationally recognized fundamental right to life. This right includes the right to safe roads and states must act positively to ensure this right to its citizens to comply with its obligations under this right. Furthermore, the UNCRC has recognized a fundamental right for children to participate in their own future. This allows youth to make meaningful contributions to the field of road safety, and governments have a duty to involve them in the decision-making process when drafting policies that will affect their lives. The more youth that can participate now, the better the future looks for road safety.
Article by James Brown
References:
World Health Organisation, ‘The top 10 causes of death’ (24 May 2018) <https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/the-top-10-causes-of-death> accessed 4 Aug 2020.
Articles 2 & 26, ICCPR.
Osman v United Kingdom App No 23452/94 [1998] ECHR 1010.
Armani Da Silva v United Kingdom App No 5878/08 [2012] ECHR 1594.
World Health Organisation, ‘Global status report on road safety 2018’ (2018) Page 8 <https://www.who.int/violence_injury_prevention/road_safety_status/2018/en/> accessed 4 Aug 2020.
LCB v United Kingdom App No 23413/94 [1998] ECHR 108, [36] (Bernhardt P).
Öneryildiz v Turkey App No 48939/99 (2005) 41 EHRR 20.
R Bhasin, ‘Good roads a fundamental right of citizens: Bombay High Court’ The Indian Express (21 May 2015) <https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/mumbai/good-roads-a-fundamental-right-of-citizens-bombay-high-court/> accessed 4 Aug 2020.
World Health Organisation, ‘Road Traffic Injuries’ (7 Feb 2020) <https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/road-traffic-injuries> accessed 4 Aug 2020.