What are the core concepts and issues surrounding human rights?
Defining Human Rights
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is a cornerstone in the development of human rights law, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1948. It outlines a set of fundamental rights and freedoms to which all individuals are entitled, regardless of nationality, race, religion, sex, or gender. The UDHR has had a profound impact on the development of human rights law, inspiring the creation of numerous international and regional treaties, as well as inspiring national legislation.
One of the key features of the UDHR is its emphasis on the universality and indivisibility of human rights, as well as the interdependence and interrelatedness of human rights. This means that all rights are equally important and cannot be selectively respected or disregarded, and the realization of one right often depends on the fulfillment of others. Despite its foundational status, the UDHR is not without its critics, who argue that it reflects a predominantly Western conception of human rights. Nevertheless, the UDHR remains a powerful symbol of humanity’s shared commitment to the protection and promotion of human rights.
History of Human Rights
Ancient civilizations and religious traditions will stake their own claim in the history of human rights, but two key documents in the development of modern human rights are the Magna Carta and the 1689 Bill of Rights. The Magna Carta, signed in 1215 by King John of England, established the principle that the king was not above the law. The 1689 Bill of Rights further defined the relationship between the individual and the state, enshrining principles such as the right to petition the government, freedom of speech within Parliament, and freedom from royal interference in the law.
These documents have had a significant impact on the development of human rights, as they established the idea that individuals possess certain rights that should not be violated by the state, albeit by monarch or by government.
However, it is important to recognize that these documents were products of their time and did not address the full range of rights and freedoms that are recognized today. Compared to the UDHR, for example, the Magna Carta and the Bill of Rights are very limited documents.
Human Rights vs. Human Needs
Human rights and human needs are closely related concepts, but they are not synonymous. Human rights refer to the legal rights and freedoms to which all individuals are entitled, as enshrined in international and regional human rights instruments. These rights encompass a wide range of civil, political, economic, social, and cultural rights. Human needs, on the other hand, are the basic requirements for survival and well-being, as outlined in Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs. Maslow identified the categories of human needs as physiological, safety, love and belonging, esteem, and self-actualisation.
Despite the overlap between human rights and human needs, the two concepts differ in several key respects. Human rights are legally binding obligations that states have towards their citizens and other individuals within their jurisdiction, whereas human needs are not necessarily enshrined in law. Moreover, human rights are universal and inalienable, whereas human needs may vary depending on individual circumstances and cultural contexts.
International Human Rights Law
The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) is a key instrument in the field of international human rights law. It was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1966 and elaborates on the civil and political rights set forth in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). The ICCPR imposes legally binding obligations on states that have ratified the treaty, requiring them to respect, protect, and fulfill the rights of individuals within their jurisdiction.
Other key instruments include the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), and the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC). These treaties address specific rights and issues, and together with the ICCPR, form the core of the international human rights legal framework.
The development and enforcement of international human rights law is an ongoing process that evolves to address emerging challenges. New treaties are introduced, and old treaties amended, to cover any gaps in protection.
Regional Human Rights Systems
Whereas international human rights instruments have global application, regional human rights systems have jurisdiction over a specific geographic region. The European, African, and American continents have their own human rights instruments and courts.
The European Court of Human Rights applies the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and adjudicates complaints of human rights violation against states that are party to the Convention. For example, in Selmouni v France, Mr Selmouni alleged that his treatment in detention by French police officers constituted a breach of article 3 of the ECHR, the prohibition of torture.
The Inter-American Court of Human Rights, established under the American Convention on Human Rights, serves a similar function in Central and South America. It has contributed to the advancement of human rights in the region, particularly in the areas of indigenous peoples’ rights.
The African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights, established under the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, is the newest of the three regional human rights courts, and operates across Africa.
These regional human rights systems, while distinct in their legal frameworks and procedures, share a common goal of promoting and protecting human rights within their respective regions.
Human Rights Organizations
Human rights instruments are essential in outlining an individual’s specific legal rights, but non-judicial organizations are equired to advocate on behalf of individuals outside of the court system.
There is a rich history of organizations mobilising to advocate for the promotion and protection of human rights worldwide. Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and Anti-Slavery International are among the most prominent in the field.
Amnesty International was founded in 1961 and works to document human rights abuses, advocate for policy changes, and provide support to victims of human rights violations.
Human Rights Watch, established in 1978, produces detailed reports on human rights conditions in various countries and works to promote human rights and hold perpetrators accountable.
Anti-Slavery International, founded in 1839, focuses on combating modern forms of slavery, such as forced labor, human trafficking, and child labor.
These organizations are essential to the ongoing struggle for human rights around the world, as they raise awareness of human rights issues, influence policy and legal reforms, and provide direct assistance to those affected by violations of individual rights.
Human Rights and Culture
The relationship between human rights and culture is complex and often contentious, particularly in the discourse between cultural relativism and cultural universalism.
Cultural relativism is the idea that the norms and principles that underpin human rights should be interpreted and applied in light of local cultural values and traditions. For example, in the 1990s an intellectual debate questioned whether the emphasis on individual rights in international human rights law was incompatible with the collectivist values and social harmony prioritized in many Asian societies.
The opposite of cultural relativism is cultural universalism, which says that certain traits and principles are known to human culture worldwide.
Most human rights scholars and practitioners maintain that the core principles of human rights are universal and should not be compromised in the name of cultural relativism. They argue that human rights can and should be adapted to different cultural contexts, but that certain fundamental rights and freedoms must be upheld in all societies, regardless of cultural differences.
This ongoing discussion underscore the importance of cross-cultral dialogue that finds the value, instead of the friction, in cultural and regional difference.
