Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
An essay on universal declaration of human rights
An essay on universal declaration of human rights
Universal Declaration of human rights essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: An essay on universal declaration of human rights
International human rights law
To understand this debate it is first necessary to understand the mechanisms of international human rights instruments, and how universal human rights are currently being enforced. The international bill of rights consists of the Universal Declaration of Human rights (UDHR), The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, (ICESCR). The UDHR was adopted by the UN in 1948 after the horrors of world war 2. (United Nations) It sets out fundamental, innate rights of which all humans are entitled (United Nations). The UDHR is what is referred to as ‘soft law’, and therefor is not legally binding. However, it inspired the international
…show more content…
Nations who have signed and ratified these treaties expected to hold up their values. Rights are split between the ICCPR and ICESCR depending on where the responsibility of the right falls. Civil and political rights or ‘negative’ rights, are associated with liberalism (Douzinas, 2008). Negative rights require people to refrain from doing things and are the responsibilities of all individuals and organisations. Some rights under the ICCPR include, the right to freedom of expression (Article 19), and freedom of religion (Art. 18). Social and cultural or ‘positive’ rights, are associated with the socialist tradition. (Douzinas, 2008). Positive rights require people and organisations to take action, and are usually the responsibility of governments to insure. Some of the rights under the ICESCR include, the right to work under under just and favourable conditions (Art. 7), and the right to an adequate standard of living (Art. 11) Both of these treaties were adopted by the UN in …show more content…
Modern human rights have their origins in western religion culture and philosophy. Human rights rose out of the European concept of natural law - the idea that certain laws exist and are obeyed naturally. Early humans rights laws arose from Western wars and revolutions, most notably: The American declaration of independence (1776) and the French declaration of the rights of man and citizen (1789). Both of which were reactions to governments who can be seen to of abused their power and ignored the welfare of their citizens, through heavy taxation, starvation and unfair treatment of the poor. It is important to note that "throughout history, slavery, extermination of indigenous populations and colonial atrocities had been repeatedly committed by the west.” However, the concept of universal human rights formed when “Europeans tried to exterminate other Europeans…and humanity was split into victims and perpetrators.” It is clear that the Second world war - one of histories most systemic cases of abuse of a religious group (Jews in Germany) lead to the establishment of international human rights laws like the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
In “Four Human Rights Myths” Susan Marks discusses several conceptions (or misconceptions according to her) about human rights. She begins her paper with a case study of the 2011 London riots and how distinctively different is their coverage by the British prime minister and two scholars.
The issue of human rights has arisen only in the post-cold war whereby it was addressed by an international institution that is the United Nation. In the United Nation’s preamble stated that human rights are given to all humans and that there is equality for everyone. There will not be any sovereign states to diminish its people from taking these rights. The globalization of capitalism after the Cold War makes the issue of human rights seems admirable as there were sufferings in other parts of the world. This is because it is perceived that the western states are the champion of democracy which therefore provides a perfect body to carry out human rights activities. Such human sufferings occur in a sovereign state humanitarian intervention led by the international institution will be carried out to end the menace.
Before any legislation could be implemented, a definition of human rights had to be compiled and accepted. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) was approved in 1948 by th...
A long time ago the way individuals were treated within a state was the states responsibility and it didn’t matter to any other states. Nowadays, what happens in different states is heard throughout the globe and is watched very carefully. This is because discrimination and negative actions against a specific group of people or individuals by state authorities is strongly looked down upon by the international community. Though human rights is an important issue many different organizations and religions have come up with their own ideas/concepts on what human rights is and means. For example, one idea of human rights can be seen through John Locke and liberal political theorists; this idea suggests that individuals in the international system are equal and their natural rights take priority over international and national law. These natural rights consist of political and civil rights like freedom of speech, religion, and that everyone deserves protection. These rights according to the liberal perspective are known as first-generation rights. There are two other basic types of human rights and they include second and third generation human rights. Second-generation human rights can also be known as socioeconomic human rights. The concept of second-generation human rights is a product of the radicalism and socialism. According to radicals, the state should provide social and economic rights for individuals
One of the main reasons why human rights have been put in place is to protect the public life and public space of every individual being. One fundamental characteristic of human rights is that they are equal rights; they are aimed at providing protection to every person in an equal way. These rights have been entrenched through laws that are passed by states and international conventions. Human rights laws have evolved over time, and have been shaped by several factors, including philosophical theories in the past. This paper looks at the theories of two philosophers, Emmanuel Kant and John Stuart Mills, and how their teachings can be used to explain the sources of human rights. Kant’s moral philosophy is very direct in its justification of human rights, especially the ideals of moral autonomy and equality as applied to rational human beings. John Stuart Mills’ theory of utilitarianism also forms a solid basis for human rights, especially his belief that utility is the supreme criterion for judging morality, with justice being subordinate to it. The paper looks at how the two philosophers qualify their teachings as the origins of human rights, and comes to the conclusion that the moral philosophy of Kant is better than that of Mills.
Human rights have been developing as a concept throughout the history of humans. Human rights have been present in several nations throughout history including in Ancient Greece as Natural Law, 1689 in the English Bill of Rights, 1776 in the American Declaration of Independence and 1788 in the French Revolution’s Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen. It was not until recently in 1948 that the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights was created as an international concept in response to the genocide of European Jews by Hitler.
States ratify human right treaties to enter into agreements and commit each other to respect, protect and fulfill human rights obligations. However, the adherence to human rights treaties is not ensured by the same principle of reciprocity instead to ensure compliance, collective monitoring and enforcement mechanisms were introduced.8 International organizations and treaty ...
Human rights are regarded as the keystone of modernity. There are various international bills to entrench the modern ideas of human rights, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). Human beings are entitled to civil and political rights against violation by the state, as long as the social, economic and cultural rights.
On December 10th 1948, the General Assembly adopted a Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This declaration, although not legally binding, created “a common standard of achievement for all people and all nations.to promote respect for those rights and freedoms” (Goodhart, 379). However, many cultures assert that the human rights policies outlined in the declaration undermine cultural beliefs and practices. This assertion makes the search for universal human rights very difficult to achieve. I would like to focus on articles 3, 14 and 25 to address how these articles could be modified to incorporate cultural differences, without completely undermining the search for human rights practices.
While on one hand there is a growing consensus that human rights are universal on the other exist critics who fiercely oppose the idea. Of the many questions posed by critics revolve around the world’s pluri-cultural and multipolarity nature and whether anything in such a situation can be really universal.
Members of The United Nations have a duty “to maintain international peace…in conformity with the principles of justice and international law.”[1] China, a core member of the United Nations since its formation in 1945, fails to comply with international human rights’ norms set forth by The United Nations Charter. This failure is noticeably prevalent in the practices of the Chinese Legal System. Its judicial proceedings in handling peaceful, political dissenters fail to provide the minimum protection of human rights guaranteed to all through international law. By examining accounts of Tibetans detained for such peaceful protests, this paper will set out to highlight the discrepancies between Chinese enforcement of international law in theory and in practice. Before this paper goes any further, the notion of international law must be explained. Providing a better understanding of international law will make easier the task of highlighting China’s struggles with enforcing such standards.
Rights have been and continue to be violated across the world on both massive and miniscule scales. With rights violations being a constant issue, it is necessary, although it may be difficult, to determine which violations are human rights violations. Two aspects are crucial in this process: universality and paramountcy. Although practicability is also set forth as a criterion by Maurice Cranston, it is not as crucial when determining which acts violate human rights, or when they came into existence. This is due to the fact that when trying to distinguish between rights and human rights, almost all rights, not just specifically human rights, can, in some way, be practicable. For this reason, practicability, for the purpose of this essay, is
The doctrine of human rights were created to protect every single human regardless of race, gender, sex, nationality, sexual orientation and other differences. It is based on human dignity and the belief that no one has the right to take this away from another human being. The doctrine states that every ‘man’ has inalienable rights of equality, but is this true? Are human rights universal? Whether human rights are universal has been debated for decades. There have been individuals and even countries that oppose the idea that human rights are for everybody. This argument shall be investigated in this essay, by: exploring definitions and history on human rights, debating on whether it is universal while providing examples and background information while supporting my hypothesis that human rights should be based on particular cultural values and finally drawing a conclusion.
The role that globalization plays in spreading and promoting human rights and democracy is a subject that is capable spurring great debate. Human rights are to be seen as the standards that gives any human walking the earth regardless of any differences equal privileges. The United Nations goes a step further and defines human rights as,
The universal declaration of human rights declared that all people have equal rights, regardless of race, gender, religion, language, culture, birth status, national origin, or opinion. We are all equally entitled to our human rights without discrimination. Universal human rights are often expressed and guaranteed by law, in the forms of treaties, customary international law, general principles and other sources of international law. International human rights law lays down obligations of Governments to act in certain ways or to refrain from certain acts, in order to promote and protect human rights and fundamental freedoms of individuals or groups. (ohchr.org) The universality of human rights is a concept that allows everyone to have the same basic human rights no matter where the location. If that concept is true then why are people being tortured and ostracized. Why are people still afraid of going against their leaders, fearing that they will be found and killed. It is because some leaders