Government's interference with human rights

It is a common belief that the government's interference with human rights should be avoided. However, I firmly believe that government intervention can sometimes be necessary for civil liberties to protect people from danger and ensure that safety regulations are followed.
To begin with, everyone's safety is prioritized above all else. In situations where public safety is at risk, such as natural disasters, terrorism, or health crises, individual freedoms might be temporarily restricted for the greater good. For example, during the COVID-19 pandemic, governments imposed lockdowns and travel restrictions to limit the spread of the virus. Without interventions, the danger to individuals and communities would be far greater. Although these measures limit personal freedom, they are essential for safeguarding lives and minimizing harm to society as a whole.
On top of that, the reason for government intervention in individual freedoms is to make sure the safety regulations are not overlooked. Safety regulations, such as traffic laws, workplace standards, or environmental protection rules, are crucial for safeguarding the health and well-being of the community. By intervening, such as through enforcing these rules or carrying out regular checks, the government ensures that these measures are properly implemented and not ignored. For instance, in the food industry, health inspectors regularly check restaurants and food processing facilities to ensure they follow hygiene and safety protocols. This oversight helps prevent foodborne illnesses and ensures that food products are safe for consumption.
To sum up, the government plays a crucial role in protecting citizens from potential dangers and ensuring that safety regulations are followed. For these reasons, it is clear that government intervention in individual freedoms sometimes is necessary.

Kindly remember to clearly format your essay presentation based upon the regular expectation of the examiner. Each task 2 essay must be presented within 4 discussion paragraphs and clearly separated by a space in-between each paragraph. Failure to do so will severely lower your TA score regardless of the word count.


This sentence is not on topic. You must mention that the government might opt to restrict certain human rights during certain imperative instances.

The summary conclusion is only covered by 34 words. There is a 40 word minimum requirement for that paragraph. While you did write 2 sentences as expected, it is important that you meet the word count requirement as well or risk receiving a failing score for that paragraph. You could have achieved more than the word count in that section had you written a quick reference to the reasoning subjects that you presented in the previous paragraphs. It would have complete the recap requirement of the paragraph.