CHAPTER TWO CONCEPTUAL ANALYSIS OF HUMAN RIGHT 2.0.0 INTRODUCTION Human right as it is understood today has evolved over the centuries. Though the word "Human Rights" seems to have a modern face, human rights are old as human civilization. It is the universal believe, that every person by virtue of humanity is entitled to certain natural rights, this is well established throughout the history of mankind and it formed the underlying principle of Human rights. The concept of human rights can be traced to specific landmark documents, such as the code of Hammurabi, Magna Carta, the French Déclaration des Droits de l 'Homme et du Citoyen (the French Declaration on the Rights of Man and the citizen), and The American Bill of Rights. Although all of
been those belonging to the tradition of the Law of Nature. These show human rights depend directly on the natural order and are subject to a universal moral low, superior to positive law Present day human rights notions show human rights do not rest on nature but represent human requests historically defined and morally and politically justifiable by means of a non-naturalistic theory. History shows human rights were a vindication of freedom against the established power and as social economical demands. A clear understanding of the relationship between human rights and morality is best uncovered through the two main types of human rights moral theories the naturalistic and non-naturalistic one. 1.1.2.
Human rights can only include claims that are recognised as fundamental to a political community’s member’s humanity in Waters’ opinion. In short, Waters says that specific rights will be granted dependent on specific historical conditions. According to Waters, human rights are a product of particular balances of political interests. He emphasises the distinct difference between human rights discourse and human rights institutions. Human rights were made to benefit the bourgeois class, in his opinion.
Human rights are universal Human rights are based on the principle of respect of the individual. It also is a rights are inherent to all human being that whatever the nationality, place of residence, national or ethic origin, sex, religion, color, language,etc. Those right are indivisible and interdependent. People are all equally in human right and without any discrimination.Universal human rights are expressed by law. In this case, human rights law is responsibility by governments to act in certain ways.
A human rights are using in institution to protect the human of dead. The use of human rights is frameworks to restore the violators. There are the subfields which reflects on anthropological methodologies and theories as well as social and political relate question of our time. The human rights of theory and practice have come to form the foundation for a variety of initiatives which is including international development for examples community conflict resolution, gender equality, truth, education, civil society projects, and the protection of children, cross-culture and comparative perceptions. It also draws upon debates that have infused classic political and ethical theory: the nature of the just society; the rights of individuals and of collectives; the forms and content of democracy; the nature of social rights and social obligations.
They are not granted by a body or an institution, however institutions should enforce them (Cassin quote). Human rights concern all aspects of existence of the human being, physical and intellectual, as individuals and as part of a community of humans. Some of these rights were justified in different pretexts; such as the right of property, right of free expression, and the right of access to information , bearing in mind the different outlook to these rights in different legal
The main argument of this article comprises theories and social concepts of justice and defines implicit human obligations. Normative beliefs are sculpted by the idea of prerogative rights, which overlook the human responsibility to the well-being of all people in society. Simone Weil infers that the use of human rights objectifies what is given and allocated to an individual instead of reifying human accountability and impartiality to one another. Human rights that are specified to the individuals based on status in a community sets a negative framework of selfishness and unjust behavior that ultimately involves the absence of pure justice. According to Simone Weil, justice should be united with responsibility and obligation, which can be
Introduction Human rights are understood as rights which belong to an individual as a consequence of being human and for no other reason. Hence human rights are the rights people are entitled to simply because they are human beings, irrespective of their citizenship, nationality, race, ethnicity, language, gender, sexuality, or abilities; human rights become enforceable when they are codified as Conventions, Covenants, or Treaties, or as they become recognized as Customary International Law. No one needs to possess a qualification in order to enjoy their human rights. It is important that one exercise their human rights otherwise they would feel like their “rights” are being infringed upon. Human rights are mandated to protect citizens and to ensure that all citizens are catered for.
These rights, which include the rights to life, rights to self-determination, rights to equality of rights without discrimination, among several other rights, are characterized by their universality; they apply to all human beings, regardless of their race, sex, sexual orientation, or nationality (United Nations General Assembly, 1948). The notion of the universality of human rights, however, is a subject of various heated debates, which began during the World Conference on Human Rights in Vienna, Austria, on June 1993 (Kirchschläger, 2011). Several states, headed by People’s Republic of China, Syria, Cuba, and Iran, argued that the interpretation of human rights should be left to each state’s discretion, and that the so-called ‘universality’ of human rights is merely an attempt to impose Western values and to interfere with the internal affairs of other states in the name of the protection of human rights (Riding, 1993). The Singaporean Minister for Foreign Affair, Mr Wong Kan Seng, warned that, “Universal recognition of the ideal of human rights can be harmful if universalism is used to deny or mask the reality of diversity.” He was backed up by the Foreign Minister of the People’s
2. Understanding the Concept on Rights As Birshan (1998) rightly put in his article titled “What is Natural about Natural Rights?” it is critical for one to first understand the principle of rights before one can support either of the divergent views on natural rights theories. A full appreciation of the concept on rights will enable one to meaningfully contribute to the whole discourse on natural rights theories. According to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) of 1948 the concept of rights is generally defined as basic entitlements or freedom a human being should have. In essence, rights are a necessity to ensure that human beings co-exist peacefully together, and it is critical for all human authorities, particularly governments to respect and guarantee such rights to promote sustainable