Debate on Human Rights
As much as “human right” is important, there are several different debates going on about it. This part of the essay would introduce three major issues of debate which are the East-West conflict, North-South conflict, and universalism versus cultural relativism. The notion of East-West conflict is the clash of ideas between the Western parts of the world versus the East. More specifically, this conflict occurred when the West side of the world, with United States on the lead, emphasized civil and political rights over social and economic rights. They used the concept of civil and political rights to criticize the Soviet Union and to justify themselves for the Cold War policies. On the other side, the Soviet Union criticized United States back for racial discrimination and opposed them by emphasizing social and economic rights. A simplified definition of the North-South conflict is conflict between the wealthy and the poor. In this case, the wealthy would generally be the northern part of the world and the poor would be the southern. These two groups of countries in the international community started to collide when the developing nations in the south wanted to actualize cultural and collective rights. Yet, the developed countries started to ignore the basic needs of the people in the developing countries and denied the existence of any “right to development”. The universalism and cultural relativism conflict involves two layers of debate – applicability and differences among cultures. Cultural relativists have a say in both layers. They argue that inherent biases are involved. They claim that conceptualization of human right by the United Nations fail to acknowledge the different characteristics of the non-western countries, being Eurocentric. Under this stance cultural relativist are against the West to impose their values on the rest of the world.
Dealing With Violations of Human Rights
Despite the different perspectives and...
...Are humanrights innate and universal?
Post WWII on the 10 December 1948, the Universal Declaration of HumanRights (UDHR) was espoused by the General Assembly of the United Nations in order to agree on the notion that such atrocities that occurred throughout the Great War and the Second World War would not ever be reciprocated. The document that was drawn up in less than two years by the UN and Western states, and although ambitious it would guarantee a premise for life and living for every individual all over the world. The UDHR are founded on nobility, equality and reverence, and are said to be aimed at all cultures and religions within the West and East of the globe. However there is great discrepancy regarding the justification and practicality of humanrights all over the world due to political, economic and cultural differences and limitations. Universal means that ‘something’ affects, applies or is completed by everyone all over the world – there is no distinctive bias shown and equal policies are applied. Innate, in relation to humanrights, means that people are given natural rights purely based on the fact that he/she is human and alive. Therefore, are humanrights universal and innate or is the Universal Declaration of Human...
...exterminated by Hitler’s Nazi regime, the Universal Declaration of HumanRights was adopted and proclaimed on December 10th 1948 to prevent a another holocaust and to achieve a universal standard of humanrights. Over the last sixty years various regional and international treaties and conventions have been adopted to protect and advance humanrights towards universality. Furthermore, it equally important to mention that there has been a western dominated movement to universalise humanrights. Nevertheless, Universal Human remains a contentious issue of debate among intellectual and policy circles. The purpose of this essay is to outline a few of the prominent issues and problems that are associated with the concept of Universal humanrights.
“All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights” (UDHR. 1948. P.2) Humanrights in its contemporary perception is a fairly recent concept. In fact the Universal Declaration of HumanRights which is often cited as the corner stone of humanrights only came into force following World War II and the most “systematic and blatant” violation of humanrights in record history that was the Holocaust...
...Humanrights in today’s world have become pivotal to the functioning of our society as a whole, largely due to the increased occurrences which in turn have led to greater awareness and repudiation of the same in the world community. In present times the humanrights field encompasses a broad range of civil, political, economic and social rights which shows its all pervasive nature, and the accountability for the violation of these rights by state and non-state actors alike. The scope of humanrights in today’s day and age has thus widened considerably as gradually the individual becomes an end in himself and is recognized as being of primordial concern.
Humanrights law is a subset in the field of humanrights. Humanrights are what define a society; hence the humanrights law takes primacy over all the laws. There is nothing more important than the development of humanrights in an evolving society
Humanrights and criminal law are closely inter - related. My personal interest lies towards humanrights as under the criminal law. Today we see all kinds of crimes being committed- state or non-state, say torture of prisoners, child labour, or most importantly...
...Are all humanrights universally applicable?
If this question were posed to the ancient Greek philosopher and pioneer Plato, his response would be something like: “Of course, truth and virtue are universal. They are above of any state law. Not for slaves though.” Since then, slavery has been almost eliminated and several declarations for humanrights have been signed in the name of a “better world.” The word ‘applicable’ indicates that this question is highly normative, as none would argue that the president of the United States has, at the moment, the same rights with a woman in Kabul. Some would however argue that ideally that should be the case and this essay will try to illustrate that the history of mankind can be seen simply as the pursuit of this ideal and thus humanrights are normatively universal. By taking into consideration the contentions of several philosophers and political theorists on how ‘humanrights’ can be defined and adopted by societies, the distinction between natural and positive rights and the way people have been trying to set the fundamental rights of their existence from the beginning of history, it can be depicted that, although this notion has taken many definitions and forms, a ‘natural’ trend is followed in the chase for what Plato would suggest as ‘universal truth and virtue.’...
...protest, but we do not make enough use of them. ------If all parties are forced by citizens to focus --------on issues relevant to the people, then opposition parties will focus on public interest -----------rather than narrow political gains.
Another merit of our system is that we have never had even a touch of a military coup. It's because faith exists in the hearts of people. It's true ------that many dishonest characters find their way into parliament. But just imagine, if we had the presidential system and one such element succeeded in making it to the helm of affairs, sir, sorry to say, but he would be nearly impossible to dislodge. Yes we have huge problems. ---------Corruption, nepotism, power-broking, But these are more owing to human failure to deal with power responsibly than the failure of the parliamentary system.
Will a presidential system work any better? Sure not. My friends harped very high about presidential system but given the nature of our politicians, presidential form of democracy will be disastrous. Yes audience ----disastrous. Just look at Egypt, Afghanistan, Syria, Iraq, Russia and many many countries. Parliamentary system means stability. Presidential system will fail in India.
The Parliamentary system offers a lot of advantages. The close cooperation between the executive and the legislative organs leads to smooth functioning of government and avoids confrontation.
My friend said about the growing criminalization in the...
...HRV1601: HumanRights, Values and Social Transformation
Semester 01/ Assignment 01
The Historical Background and Development of HumanRights
Table of Contents
2) The Development of HumanRights
3) Historical Documents of HumanRights
3.1) The English Bill ofRights (1689)
3.2) The American War of Independence (1775-1783)
4) Developing and Maintaining a HumanRights Culture in South Africa
5) The South African Constitution
6) The South African Bill of Rights
A right is an inherent, irrevocable entitlement held by all human beings from the moment of birth. According to Ndungane (as stated in Slater 2010:19), “A humanright is a right that a human person has simply by virtue of being a human person, irrespective of his or her social status, cultural accomplishments, moral merits, religious beliefs, class membership or cultural relationships”. Basic humanrights are not earned or deserved, and should not be considered a privilege, but an imperative implement for the well-being and peacefulness of mankind. This...
...Humanrights in Pakistan:-
Pakistan’s humanrights situation is a complex one, as a result of the country's diversity, large population, its status as a developing country and a sovereign, Islamic republic as well as an Islamic democracy with a mixture of both Islamic and colonial secular laws. The Constitution of Pakistan provides for fundamental rights, which include freedom of speech, freedom of thought, freedom of information, freedom of religion, freedom of association, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly and the right to bear arms. These clauses are generally respected in practice. Clauses also provide for an independent Supreme Court, separation of executive and judiciary, an independent judiciary, independent HumanRights commission and freedom of movement within the country and abroad.
Although the government has enacted measures to counter any problems, abuses remain. Furthermore, courts suffer from lack of funds, outside intervention, and deep case backlogs that lead to long trial delays and lengthy pretrial detentions. Many observers inside and outside Pakistan contend that Pakistan’s legal code is largely concerned with crime, national security, and domestic tranquility and less with the protection of individual rights.
In May 2012, President Asif Ali Zardari signed the National Commission for Human...
...slavery, sickness and other arbitrary executions. To prevent such atrocities in the future, there are legal responses and non-legal responses to deal with the contemporary humanrights issues which is genocide.
First of all, legal responses refer to the UN humanright treaties and Genocide Convention that were adopted in 1948 and approved the Universal Declaration of HumanRight (UDHR) by the United Nation.
The Genocide Convention (1948) outlaws genocide, crime against humanity and crime under international law . All participating countries that ratified the convention will be prevented and punished the genocide in the war or a peace of time.
The Declarations defines the civil and political rights ( including the right to life, the right of liberty, and a fair trial) as well as the economic social and cultural rights( including the right to social security and participating in cultural right in one’s community).
In this case, Cambodia was a party that ratified the Genocide Convention on 14.10.1950. It was enforceable where the Senior Leader of Khmer Rouge between1975 -1979 under the definition of Convention. In contradiction, it was enforceable but it could not desist the massacre that happened in the 1975-1979.
Next, Cambodia was ratified the UDHR and International Convention on Civil and...