Definition of Human Rights
Human rights are like amour: They protect
you. They are like rules, because they tell you how you can behave; and they
are like judges, because you can appeal to them. They are abstract like
emotions, and like emotions, they belong to everyone and they exist no matter
what happens. They
are like nature because they can be violated and like the spirit because they
cannot be destroyed. Like time, they treat us all in the same way rich and
poor, old and young, white and black, tall and short. They offer us respect,
and they charge us to treat others with respect. Like goodness, truth and
justice, we may sometimes disagree about their definition, but we recognize
them when we see them.
Various definitions of human rights abounds, some rather, too
narrow and inadequate, others open-ended and imprecise for easy comprehension.
According to professor Osita Eze, “Human right represent demands or claims
which individuals or group make on society, some of which are protected by Law,
while others remain aspirations to be attained in future.
Simply put, Human Rights are inherent in man, they arise from
the very nature of man as social animal. They are those rights which all human
beings enjoy by virtue, of their humanity, whether black, white, yellow, and
Malay or red, the deprivation of which would constitute a grave affront to
one’s natural sense of justice.
Human rights themselves are not a new phenomenon or a new morality. They have a history dated back to antiquity. The rights of man as expression of political philosophy may be traceable to the writings of early naturalists. Thomas Paine, Hobbes, John Tocke, Baron de Montesquieu, Jean Jacques Rousseau and Williams Kant to mention a few. There were the times when the writings of publicist had great impact on law and the society within which the law operated. According to these philosophers, every individual within society possesses certain rights which are inherent and which cannot be wantonly taken away and for which man is beholden to no human authority. That the major reason for individuals coming together to form a government is to enable these rights to be protected and fostered. Social contract, to which is traceable the origin of society itself is based on the concept of natural law to the effect that certain principles of justice are natural, that is, rational and unalterable and that the rights conferred by natural law are something to which every human being is entitled by virtual of the fact of being human and rational.
Based on this philosophy, man has over the centuries
struggled and got human Rights or their understanding of them, enshrined in the
constitutions and political traditions of their various societies. As Frederick
Douglas aptly put it, “Power concedes nothing without demand. It never did and
it never will." Many examples of the outcome of these struggles have
undoubtedly influenced later Constitutional and legal development all over the
world, the great Magna Carta of England (1215), the United States Declaration of
Independence (1776), the French Declaration of the Rights of man and the
citizen (1789), and the American Bills of Rights of 1791 etc. Apart from individual struggles, the world
community as a whole has in recent times drawn attention, in important declarations,
to the universality of human rights and adopted a number of durable conventions
in which these declarations have been enshrined. The first in the series was
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948). This is a declaratory
statement of those basic inalienable and inviolable rights, though mainly of
civil and political nature, to which men are entitled. International Covenant
and Civil and Political Right (1966) including its optional protocols;
International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural rights, The European
Convention for the Protection of Human rights and Fundamental Freedom (1950);
the inter-America Convention on Human Rights (1970) and the African charter on
Human Rights (1981).
Classification of Human Rights
The Concept of Generation
Since 1997, when Karel Vasak introduced the concept of
generations into the corpus of human rights discourse, the debate has taken
many forms and shapes. Vasak traced the developments of human rights and
concluded that, basically, rights are three generations. The first he called iberte (Liberty) i.e Civil and
Political Rights, the second he termed egalite
(equality), which relates to Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; and
the third he termed fratenite (solidarity),
refereeing to those rights that are held by the collectives in other words, “
group or people’s right. These classifications, sometimes discribed by a colour
scheme of “blue” “red” and “green,” are based on three different philosophies.
Each generation has its destructive characteristic but it suffices to note that
the first generation rights are negative rights or immunity claims in citizen
towards the state, in the sense that they limit the power of a government and
protect people’s rights against its power. They relate to the sanctity of the
individual and his rights within the socio-political milieu in which he is
located. They imply that no government or society should act against
individuals in certain ways that would deprive them of inherent political or
personal rights, such as the rights to life, liberty, and security of person,
freedom of speech, press, assembly and religion.
Second Generation Human Rights
The second generation rights are claims to social equality
consisting of economic, social and cultural rights. They are positive rights in
that they enhance the power of government to do something to the person to
enable her or him in some ways. They are generally interpreted as programmatic
clauses, obligating governments and legislature to pursue social policies, but
do not create individual claims. They require the affirmative action of
government for the implementation.
Third Generation Human Rights
Unlike the first two generation rights which focus largely on
individuals, the third generation rights include the rights of people and
groups. It has received increasing rhetorical affirmation at the international
level though “only the people’s rights to self-determination and to disposal of
natural wealth, included in the international covenants have received authoritative
acceptance in international law. Other group rights include “the right to
development, the right to peace, the right to environment, the right to
ownership of the common heritage of mankind, and the right to communication.
Characteristics of Human Rights
Philosophers
may continue to argue about the nature of human rights, but the international
community started its astonishing commitment to human rights through the
adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948. Since then, the
international community has established the UDHR's powerful concepts in
numerous international, regional and domestic legal instruments. The UDHR was
not intended to be legally binding, but the establishment of its norms in
numerous subsequent binding treaties (otherwise known as ‘conventions' or
‘covenants') makes the legal standing of its norms unquestionable today.
According to these principles:
Human
rights are inalienable: This
means that you cannot lose them, because they are linked to the very fact of human
existence, they are inherent to all human beings. In particular circumstances
some though not all may be suspended or restricted. For example, if someone is
found guilty of a crime, his or her liberty can be taken away; or in times of
national emergency, a government may declare this publicly and then derogate
from some rights, for example in imposing a curfew restricting freedom of
movement.
Human
rights are indivisible, interdependent and interrelated: This means that different human
rights are intrinsically connected and cannot be viewed in isolation from each
other. The enjoyment of one right depends on the enjoyment of many other rights
and no one right is more important than the rest.
Human
rights are universal: Which
means that they apply equally to all people everywhere in the world, and with
no time limit. Every individual is entitled to enjoy his or her human rights
without distinction of "race" or ethnic background, colour, sex,
sexual orientation, disability, language, religion, political or other opinion,
national or social origin, birth or other status.
We
should note that the universality of human rights does not in any way threaten
the rich diversity of individuals or of different cultures. Universality is not
synonymous with uniformity. Diversity requires a world where everyone is equal,
and equally deserving of respect. Human rights serve as minimum standards
applying to all human beings; each state and society is free to define and
apply higher and more specific standards. For example, in the field of
economic, social and cultural rights we find the obligation to undertake steps
to achieve progressively the full realization of these rights, but there is no
stipulated position on raising taxes to facilitate this. It is up to each
country and society to adopt such policies in the light of their own
circumstances.
Examples
of Human Rights
As
adapted from (Nowak, 2005: 2), they are as follows:
• Right to life
• Freedom from torture and cruel, inhuman or
degrading treatment or punishment
• Freedom from slavery, servitude and forced
labour
• Right to liberty and security of person
• Right of detained persons to be treated
with humanity
• Freedom of movement
• Right to a fair trial
• Prohibition of retroactive criminal laws
• Right to recognition as a person before
the law
• Right to privacy
• Freedom of thought, conscience and
religion
• Freedom of opinion and expression
• Prohibition of propaganda for war and of
incitement to national, racial or religious hatred
• Freedom of assembly
• Freedom of association
• Right to marry and found a family
• Right to take part in the conduct of
public affairs, vote, be elected and have access to public office
• Right to equality before the law and
non-discrimination
In
the area of economic, social and cultural Human Rights
• Right to work
• Right to just and favourable conditions of
work
• Right to form and join trade unions
• Right to social security
• Protection of the family
• Right to an adequate standard of living,
including adequate food, clothing and housing
• Right to health
• Right to education
In
the area of collective Human Rights
• Right of peoples to:
• Self-determination
• Development
• Free use of their wealth and natural
resources
• Peace
• A healthy environment
Other
collective Human Rights:
• Rights of national, ethnic, religious and
linguistic minorities
• Rights of indigenous peoples.
Meaning of Human Rights
The concept of human rights is very elusive
and slippery. It has been conceptualized variously by different scholars. It
means one thing for the natural law theorists and another for the positivists.
Its conceptualization is always color with the ideological orientation of an
individual behind the conceptualization.
Hence, the history of human rights is
replete with attempts to conceptualize its real meaning, leaving mankind with
critical debates as what is meant by human rights. To start with, there is an
imperative need to clarify the meaning of the word “right” (Agundu, 2009).
Rights are due entitlements that individuals lay claims to. They are mostly
natural endowment. 18 In political parlance the concept of “human rights”
includes all the freedoms the individual can claim on the sole basis of his or
her humanity, rights which are safeguarded by society on ethical grounds. Human
rights are rights that people are born with and to which everyone has equal
entitlement regardless of gender, ethnic origin or beliefs.
They are an essential principle in the organization
of modern society, and the very basis of peaceful cohabitation at the national
and international levels, in the community and in the family (Federal
Department of Foreign Affairs (FDFA) 2008, 3). The concept of human rights is
the result of a long and continuing process of development that has not yet
reached its conclusion. It has its roots in the philosophy of the ancient
Greeks and in the religious concept that “all men are equal in the eyes of God”.
Together with the secular tradition of natural rights – human rights have their
roots in human nature and the inherent dignity of humanity – the concept of
human rights has progressively developed as an ethical standard through the
ages (FDFA, 2008, 6).
Human beings are born equal in dignity and
rights. These are moral claims which are inalienable and inherent in all
individuals by virtue of their humanity alone, irrespective of caste, colour,
creed, and place of birth, sex, cultural difference or any other consideration.
These claims are articulated and formulated in what is today known as human
rights. Human rights are sometimes referred to as fundamental rights, basic
rights, inherent rights, natural rights and birth rights. Human rights are not
just abstract values such as liberty, equality, and security. They are rights,
entitlements that ground particular social practices to realize those values.
Human rights claims express not mere
aspirations, suggestions, requests, or laudable ideas but rights-based demands.
And in contrast to other grounds on which goods, services, and opportunities
might be demanded - for example, justice, utility, divine donation, contract,
or beneficence - human rights are owed to every human being, as a human being
(Donnelly, 2005).
Basic Principles of Human Rights
The basic principles of Human Rights are as
follows. Human rights are universal “Human rights are foreign to no culture and
native to all nations; they are universal.” (Kofi Annan, Secretary-General of
the United Nations, Address at the University of Tehran on Human Rights Day, 10
December 1997 cited in Nowak, 2005).
Human rights are held by all persons
equally, universally and forever. Human rights are universal: they are always
the same for all human beings everywhere in the world. You do not have human
rights because you are a citizen of any country but because you are a member of
the human family. This means children have human rights as well as adults
(Compasito, ND: 15). Human rights are universal because they are based on every
human being’s dignity, irrespective of race, colour, sex, ethnic or social
origin, religion, language, nationality, age, sexual orientation, disability or
any other distinguishing characteristic. Since they are accepted by all States
and peoples, they apply equally and indiscriminately to every person and are
the same for everyone everywhere (Nowak, 2005).
Human
rights are inalienable: Human rights are inalienable: you
cannot lose these rights any more than you can cease to be a human being
(Compasito, ND: 15). Human rights are inalienable insofar as no person may be
divested of his or her Human rights save under clearly defined legal
circumstances. For instance, a person’s right to liberty may be restricted if
he or she is found guilty of a crime by a court of law (Nowak, 2005: 4).
Human rights are indivisible and interdependent: Human rights are indivisible: no-one can take away a right because it is ‘less important’ or ‘non-essential’. Human rights are interdependent: together human rights form a complementary framework. For example, your ability to participate in local decision making is directly affected by your right to express yourself, to associate with others, to get an education and even to obtain the necessities of life (Compasito, ND: 15).
Human rights are
indivisible and interdependent. Because each human right entails and depends on
other human rights, violating one such right affects the exercise of other
human rights. For example, the right to life presupposes respect for the right
to food and to an adequate standard of living. The right to be elected to
public office implies access to basic education. The defense of economic and
social rights presupposes freedom of expression, of assembly and of
association. Accordingly, civil and political rights and economic, social and
cultural rights are complementary and equally essential to the dignity and
integrity of every person. Respect for all rights is a prerequisite to
sustainable peace and development (Nowak, 2005: 4).
The principle of non-discrimination
Some of the worst human rights violations have
resulted from discrimination against specific groups. The right to equality and
the principle of non-discrimination, explicitly set out in international and
regional human rights treaties, are therefore central to human rights. The
right to equality obliges States to ensure observance of human rights without
discrimination on any grounds, including sex, race, colour, language, religion,
political or other opinion, national, ethnic or social origin, membership of a
national minority, property, birth, age, disability, sexual orientation and
social or other status. More often than not, the discriminatory criteria used
by States and non-State actors to prevent specific groups from fully enjoying
all or some human rights are based on such characteristics (Nowak, 2005) Human
rights reflect basic human needs. They establish basic standards without which
people cannot live in dignity. To violate someone’s human rights is to treat
that person as though he or she were not a human being. To advocate human
rights is to demand that the human dignity of all people be respected
(Compasito, ND: 15). In claiming these human rights, everyone also accepts responsibilities:
to respect the rights of others and to protect and support people whose rights
are abused or denied. Meeting these responsibilities means claiming solidarity
with all other human beings. All people everywhere have the same human rights which
no one can take away. This is the basis of freedom, justice and peace in the
world (UDHR, 1948). All human rights are universal, indivisible, interdependent
and interrelated. The international community must treat human rights globally
in a fair and equal manner, on the same footing, and with the same emphasis.
While the significance of national and regional particularities and various
historical, cultural and religious backgrounds must be borne in mind, it is the
duty of States, regardless of their political, economic and cultural systems,
to promote and protect all human rights and fundamental freedoms (World
Conference on Human Rights, Vienna 1993, paragraph 5).
The
principles of equality, universality and non-discrimination do not preclude
recognising that specific groups whose members need particular protection
should enjoy special rights. This accounts for the numerous human rights
instruments specifically designed to protect the rights of groups with special
needs, such as women, aliens, stateless persons, refugees, displaced persons,
minorities, indigenous peoples, and children, persons with disabilities,
migrant workers and detainees. Group-specific human rights, however, are
compatible with the principle of universality only if they are justified by
special (objective) reasons, such as the group’s vulnerability or a history of
discrimination against it. Otherwise, special rights could amount to privileges
equivalent to discrimination against other groups (Nowak, 2005).
0 Comments