Do you want to improve your writing? Try our new evaluation service and get detailed feedback.
Check Your Text it's free

In the context of COVID-19 pandemic, covering faces in public is compulsory in a lot of countries. However, a considerable number of people object this law as they think that it is an act of humna rights violations. To what extent do you agree or disagree

In the context of COVID-19 pandemic, covering faces in public is compulsory in a lot of countries. However, a considerable number of people object this law as they think that it is an act of humna rights violations. yXwqP
In respect of the Covid-19 epidemic, face cover in the public is obligatory in various countries. Nevertheless, there are schools of thought that believe this law infringes on human rights. Personally, I object to this statement. First and foremost, human rights can be legally regulated by the authorities. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) provides that everyone has “the right to life, liberty, and security of persons”. Similarly, the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) details that “everyone’s right to life shall be protected by law”. However, it is also clearly stated that rights can be legitimately restricted by governments. According to the ECHR, human rights can be restricted for national security, public safety, protection of health, and rights of others. In this case, masks and face covers are required inasmuch as the pandemic is at its height. This protection is similar to the obligatory to wear a helmet while riding a motorcycle or the ban of smoking in closed places. It is said by some people that, as a human, they can “do whatever they want”, and as a result, this law in face cover violates their rights. Nevertheless, this statement is incorrect. While as humans, people have their own rights, these rights are constrained by law. Laws are laid down with an aim to protecting and organizing the community. In the context of COVID-19, lack of face cover is considered menacing and might lead to the spread of this disease. In this case, the law is legitimately doing its job, protecting the public from health threats, specifically the virus corona.
In respect of the Covid-19 epidemic,
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
face
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
cover
in the public is obligatory in various countries.
Nevertheless
, there are schools of
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
thought
that believe this
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
law
infringes on
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
human
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
rights
.
Personally
, I object to this statement.

First
and foremost,
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
human
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
rights
can be
legally
regulated by the authorities. The Universal Declaration of
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
Human
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
Rights
(
Possible spelling mistake found.
UDHR
) provides that everyone has “the
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
right
to life, liberty, and security of persons”.
Similarly
, the European Convention on
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
Human
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
Rights
(
Possible spelling mistake found.
ECHR
)
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
details
that “everyone’s
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
right
to life shall
be protected
by
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
law”
.
However
, it is
also
clearly
stated that
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
rights
can be
legitimately
restricted by
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
governments
. According to the
Possible spelling mistake found.
ECHR
,
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
human
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
rights
can
be restricted
for national security, public safety, protection of health, and
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
rights
of others.
In this case
, masks and
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
face
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
covers
are required
inasmuch as the pandemic is at its height. This protection is similar to the obligatory to wear a helmet while riding a motorcycle or the ban of smoking in closed places.

It
is said
by
This phrase/word is too simple and can be replaced with:
some
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
people
that, as a
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
human
, they can “do whatever they want”, and
as a result
, this
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
law
in
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
face
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
cover
violates their
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
rights
.
Nevertheless
, this statement is incorrect. While as
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
humans
,
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
people
have their
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
own
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
rights
, these
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
rights
are constrained
by
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
law
.
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
Laws
are laid
down with an aim to protecting and organizing the community. In the context of COVID-19, lack of
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
face
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
cover
is considered
menacing and might lead to the spread of this disease.
In this case
, the
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
law
is
legitimately
doing its job, protecting the public from health threats,
specifically
the virus corona.
What do you think?
  • This is funny writingFunny
  • I love this writingLove
  • This writing has blown my mindWow
  • It made me angryAngry
  • It made me sadSad

IELTS essay In the context of COVID-19 pandemic, covering faces in public is compulsory in a lot of countries. However, a considerable number of people object this law as they think that it is an act of humna rights violations.

Essay
  American English
3 paragraphs
263 words
6.0
Overall Band Score
Coherence and Cohesion: 5.5
  • Structure your answers in logical paragraphs
  • ?
    One main idea per paragraph
  • Include an introduction and conclusion
  • Support main points with an explanation and then an example
  • Use cohesive linking words accurately and appropriately
  • Vary your linking phrases using synonyms
Lexical Resource: 5.0
  • Try to vary your vocabulary using accurate synonyms
  • Use less common question specific words that accurately convey meaning
  • Check your work for spelling and word formation mistakes
Grammatical Range: 6.5
  • Use a variety of complex and simple sentences
  • Check your writing for errors
Task Achievement: 6.0
  • Answer all parts of the question
  • ?
    Present relevant ideas
  • Fully explain these ideas
  • Support ideas with relevant, specific examples
Labels Descriptions
  • ?
    Currently is not available
  • Meet the criteria
  • Doesn't meet the criteria
Recent posts