Content deleted Content added
fix referencing errors due to edits by User:Thenightaway |
Added link to support further reference, as human rights discussed in article |
||
| (44 intermediate revisions by 9 users not shown) | |||
Line 5:
{{Use dmy dates|date=May 2024}}
[[File:Magna Carta.jpg|upright=1.15|thumb|right|''[[Magna Carta]]'' or "Great Charter" was one of the world's first documents containing commitments by a [[sovereign]] to his people to respect certain legal rights.]]
{{Rights|By claimant}} {{Discrimination sidebar|expanded=Countermeasures}}
'''Human rights''' are [[Morality|moral]] principles or [[Social norm|norms]]<ref name="StanfordEncy">James Nickel, with assistance from Thomas Pogge, M.B.E. Smith, and Leif Wenar, 13 December 2013, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, [http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rights-human/ Human Rights] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190805003237/https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rights-human/ |date=5 August 2019 }}. Retrieved 14 August 2014</ref>
The doctrine of human rights has been highly influential within [[international law]] and global and regional institutions.<ref name=twsUnitedNations/> The precise meaning of the term ''[[Rights|right]]'' is controversial and
Many of the basic ideas that animated the [[human rights movement]] developed in the aftermath of the [[Second World War]] and the events of [[the Holocaust]],<ref name="twsGaryJBass" /> culminating in the adoption of the [[Universal Declaration of Human Rights]] in Paris by the [[United Nations General Assembly]] in 1948.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Simmons |first=Beth A. |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=EfQfAwAAQBAJ |title=Mobilizing for Human Rights: International Law in Domestic Politics |date=2009 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=978-1139483483 |pages=23 |language=en}}</ref> Ancient peoples did not
== History ==
{{Main|History of human rights
Many of the basic ideas that animated the [[human rights movement]] developed in the aftermath of the [[Second World War]] and the events of [[the Holocaust]],<ref name=twsGaryJBass/> culminating in the adoption of the [[Universal Declaration of Human Rights]] in Paris by the [[United Nations General Assembly]] in 1948.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Simmons |first=Beth A. |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=EfQfAwAAQBAJ |title=Mobilizing for Human Rights: International Law in Domestic Politics |date=2009 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=978-1139483483 |pages=23 |language=en}}</ref>
Line 22:
The true forerunner of human rights discourse was the concept of [[Natural and legal rights|natural rights]], which first appeared as part of the medieval [[natural law]] tradition. It developed in new directions during the European [[Age of Enlightenment|Enlightenment]] with such philosophers as [[John Locke]], [[Francis Hutcheson (philosopher)|Francis Hutcheson]], and [[Jean-Jacques Burlamaqui]], and featured prominently in the political discourse of the [[American Revolution]] and the [[French Revolution]].<ref name=twsGaryJBass/> From this foundation, the modern human rights arguments emerged over the latter half of the 20th century,{{sfnp|Moyn|2010|p=8}} possibly as a reaction to slavery, torture, genocide, and war crimes.<ref name=twsGaryJBass/>
The medieval [[natural law]] tradition was heavily influenced by the writings of [[Paul the Apostle|St Paul's]] early Christian thinkers such as [[Hilary of Poitiers|St Hilary of Poitiers]], [[Ambrose|St Ambrose]], and [[Augustine of Hippo|St Augustine]].<ref>{{cite book|first=A. J.|last=Carlyle|title=A History of Medieval Political Theory in the West|volume=1|page=83|url=https://archive.org/details/ahistorymedival00carlgoog|location=New York|publisher=G.P. Putnam's Sons|year=1903|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160608004930/https://archive.org/details/ahistorymedival00carlgoog|archive-date=8 June 2016}}</ref> Augustine was among the earliest to examine the legitimacy of the laws of man, and attempt to define the boundaries of what laws and rights occur naturally based on wisdom and conscience, instead of being arbitrarily imposed by mortals, and if people are [[An unjust law is no law at all|obligated to obey laws that are unjust]].<ref>{{cite web| url = https://lawexplores.com/the-philosophy-of-law-in-the-writings-of-augustine/#Fn23| title = Augustine on Law and Order — Lawexplores.com}}</ref>
The [[Kouroukan Fouga]] was the constitution of the [[Mali Empire]] in [[West Africa]]. It was composed in the 13th century, and was one of the very first charters on human rights. It included the "right to life and to the preservation of physical integrity" and significant protections for women.<ref>{{Citation |last=Adewale |first=Adeyinka |title=Pre-colonial Political Order in Africa |date=2023 |work=Reimaging Africa: Lifting the Veil of Ignorance |pages=9–38 |editor-last=Adewale |editor-first=Adeyinka |url=https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-031-40360-6_2 |access-date=2024-10-05 |place=Cham |publisher=Springer Nature Switzerland |language=en |doi=10.1007/978-3-031-40360-6_2 |isbn=978-3-031-40360-6 |last2=Schepers |first2=Stefan |editor2-last=Schepers |editor2-first=Stefan}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |url=https://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=y2AFmBOiLRAC&oi=fnd&pg=PA334&dq=kouroukan+fouga+human+rights&ots=uUFt36r84p&sig=20vLqAi8628broJcqD57WN1OL3M#v=onepage&q&f=false |title=Frontiers of Language and Teaching, Vol.2: Proceedings of the 2011 International Online Language Conference (IOLC 2011) |publisher=Universal-Publishers |isbn=978-1-61233-559-9 |language=en}}</ref>{{Rp|page=334}}
Spanish scholasticism insisted on a subjective vision of law during the 16th and 17th centuries: Luis de Molina, Domingo de Soto and Francisco Vitoria, members of the School of Salamanca, defined law as a moral power over one's own.50 Although they maintained at the same time, the idea of law as an objective order, they stated that there are certain natural rights, mentioning both rights related to the body (right to life, to property) and to the spirit (right to freedom of thought, dignity). The jurist Vázquez de Menchaca, starting from an individualist philosophy, was decisive in the dissemination of the term ''iura naturalia''. This natural law thinking was supported by contact with American civilizations and the debate that took place in Castile about the just titles of the conquest and, in particular, the nature of the indigenous people. In the Castilian colonization of America, it is often stated, measures were applied in which the germs of the idea of Human Rights are present, debated in the well-known [[Valladolid Debate]] that took place in 1550 and 1551. The thought of the School of Salamanca, especially through Francisco Vitoria, also contributed to the promotion of European natural law.
Line 85 ⟶ 87:
==Promotion strategies==
=== Paradigms of implementation ===
[[Charles Beitz]] proposes a typology of six paradigms of action that agents, such as human rights agencies, international organizations, individual states, and [[Non-governmental organization|NGOs]], could use to enforce human rights: (1) accountability, (2) inducement, (3) assistance, (4) domestic contestation and engagement, (5) compulsion, and (6) external adaptation.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Beitz |first=Charles |title=The Idea of Human Rights |publisher=Oxford University Press |year=2009 |location=New York |pages=33}}</ref>
===Military force===
{{Seealso|R2p|Peacekeeping}}
[[Responsibility to protect]] refers to a doctrine for [[United Nations]] member states to intervene to protect populations from atrocities. It has been cited as justification in the use of recent military interventions. An example of an intervention that is often criticized is the [[2011 military intervention in Libya|2011 military intervention]] in the [[First Libyan Civil War]] by [[NATO]] and [[Qatar]] where the goal of preventing atrocities is alleged to have taken upon itself the broader mandate of [[Regime change|removing]] the target government.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1= Akbarzadeh|first1= Shahram|last2= Saba|first2= Arif |date=2020|title= UN paralysis over Syria: the responsibility to protect or regime change?|journal=International Politics|volume=56|issue=4|pages=536–550|doi=10.1057/s41311-018-0149-x|s2cid= 150004890|issn = 1384-5748}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|last1=Emerson|first1=Michael|date=1 December 2011|title=The responsibility to protect and regime change|publisher=Centre for European Policy Studies|url=https://aei.pitt.edu/33004/1/Dec_ME_on_R2P.pdf|access-date=4 May 2022|archive-date=6 June 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220606232728/https://aei.pitt.edu/33004/1/Dec_ME_on_R2P.pdf|url-status=live}}</ref>
===Economic actions===
Line 153 ⟶ 158:
==Regional human rights regimes==
{{see also
In over 110 countries, [[national human rights institutions]] (NHRIs) have been set up to protect, promote or monitor human rights with jurisdiction in a given country.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.nhri.net/|title=National Human Right Institutions Forum – An international forum for researchers and practitioners in the field of national human rights|access-date=6 September 2007|archive-url=http://webarchive.loc.gov/all/20020915131117/http://www.nhri.net/|archive-date=15 September 2002|url-status=dead}}</ref> Although not all NHRIs are compliant with the Paris Principles,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.nhri.net/2007/List_Accredited_NIs_Nov_2007.pdf|title=Chart of the Status of National Institutions|publisher=National Human Rights Institutions Forum|quote=Accredited by the International Cooordinating Committee of National Institutions for the Promotion of Human Rights <br />In accordance with the Paris Principles and the ICC Sub-Committee Rules of Procedure, the following classifications for accreditation are used by the ICC:<br /><br />A: Compliance with the Paris Principles;<br />A(R): Accreditation with reserve – granted where insufficient documentation is submitted to confer A status;<br />B: Observer Status – Not fully in compliance with the Paris Principles or insufficient information provided to make a determination;<br />C: Non-compliant with the Paris Principles. |date=November 2007|access-date=6 January 2008|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080216052314/http://www.nhri.net/2007/List_Accredited_NIs_Nov_2007.pdf |archive-date=16 February 2008|url-status=dead}}</ref> the number and effect of these institutions is increasing.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.huridocs.org/|title=HURIDOCS|access-date=24 April 2019|archive-date=20 April 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190420124835/https://www.huridocs.org/|url-status=live}}</ref> The [[Paris Principles (human rights standards)|Paris Principles]] were defined at the first International Workshop on National Institutions for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights in Paris on 7–9 October 1991, and adopted by United Nations Human Rights Commission Resolution 1992/54 of 1992 and the General Assembly Resolution 48/134 of 1993. The Paris Principles list a number of responsibilities for national institutions.<ref>"National Human Rights Institutions – Implementing Human Rights", Executive Director Morten Kjærum, The Danish Institute for Human Rights, 2003. {{ISBN|8790744721}}, p. 6</ref>
Line 239 ⟶ 244:
{{blockquote|text=The ideal of free human beings enjoying civil and political freedom and freedom from fear and want can only be achieved if conditions are created whereby everyone may enjoy his civil and political rights, as well as his social, economic and cultural rights|source=''International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic Social and Cultural Rights'', 1966}}
This is held to be true because without civil and political rights the public cannot assert their economic, social and cultural rights. The [[freedom from fear]] and the freedom of want is essential to this by allowing a communities population to pursue endeavors without international or state interference. Similarly, without livelihoods and a working society, the public cannot assert or make use of civil or political rights (known as the ''full belly thesis'').
Although accepted by the signatories to the UDHR, most of them do not in practice give equal weight to the different types of rights. Western cultures have often given priority to civil and political rights, sometimes at the expense of economic and social rights such as the right to work, to education, health and housing. For example, in the United States there is no [[Universal health care|universal access to healthcare]] free at the point of use.{{sfnp|Light|2002}} That is not to say that Western cultures have overlooked these rights entirely (the welfare states that exist in Western Europe are evidence of this). Similarly, the ex Soviet bloc countries and Asian countries have tended to give priority to economic, social and cultural rights, but have often failed to provide civil and political rights.
Another categorization, offered by [[Karel Vasak]], is that there are ''[[three generations of human rights]]'': first-generation civil and political rights (right to life and political participation), second-generation economic, social and cultural rights (right to subsistence) and third-generation solidarity rights (right to peace, right to clean environment). Out of these generations, the third generation is the most debated and lacks both legal and political recognition. This
{{blockquote|text=If every possible human rights element is deemed to be essential or necessary, then nothing will be treated as though it is truly important.{{sfnp|Alston|2005|p=807}}|author=Philip Alston}}
Line 276 ⟶ 281:
[[Michael Ignatieff]] has argued that cultural relativism is almost exclusively an argument used by those who wield power in cultures which commit human rights abuses, and that those whose human rights are compromised are the powerless.{{sfnp|Ignatieff|2001|p=68}} This reflects the fact that the difficulty in judging universalism versus relativism lies in who is claiming to represent a particular culture. Although the argument between universalism and relativism is far from complete, it is an academic discussion in that all international human rights instruments adhere to the principle that human rights are universally applicable. The [[2005 World Summit]] reaffirmed the international community's adherence to this principle:
{{blockquote|text=The universal nature of human rights and freedoms is beyond question.|source=2005 World Summit, paragraph 120}}Human rights that depend on an [[Individualism|individualist]] orientation have been criticised as unsuited to [[Communitarianism|communally]] orientated societies, which critics say makes individual human rights non-universal.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Cruft |first=Rowan |date=2005 |title=Human Rights, Individualism and Cultural Diversity |url=http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13698230500187151 |journal=Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy |language=en |volume=8 |issue=3 |pages=265–287 |doi=10.1080/13698230500187151 |issn=1369-8230}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last=Chemhuru |first=Munamato |date=2018-12-01 |title=African Communitarianism and Human Rights: Towards a Compatibilist View |url=https://www.berghahnjournals.com/view/journals/theoria/65/157/th6515704.xml |journal=Theoria |language=en-US |volume=65 |issue=157 |pages=37–56 |doi=10.3167/th.2018.6515704 |issn=0040-5817}}</ref>
===Universal jurisdiction vs state sovereignty===
Line 306 ⟶ 311:
{{see also|Human rights inflation}}
Critics of the view that human rights are universal argue that human rights are a Western concept that "emanate from a European, [[Judeo-Christian]], and/or Enlightenment heritage (typically labeled Western) and cannot be enjoyed by other cultures that don't emulate the conditions and values of 'Western' societies."<ref>{{Cite web |last1=Shaheed |first1=Ahmed |last2=Richter |first2=Rose Parris |date=17 October 2018 |title=Is 'Human Rights' a Western Concept? |url=https://theglobalobservatory.org/2018/10/are-human-rights-a-western-concept/ |access-date=11 August 2022 |website=IPI Global Observatory |archive-date=10 July 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220710161631/https://theglobalobservatory.org/2018/10/are-human-rights-a-western-concept/ |url-status=live }}</ref> Right-wing critics of human rights argue that they are "unrealistic and unenforceable norms and inappropriate intrusions on state sovereignty", while left-wing critics of human rights argue that they fail "to achieve – or prevents better approaches to achieving – progressive goals".<ref>{{Cite web |last=Silk |first=James |date=23 June 2021 |title=What do we really talk about when we talk about human rights? |url=https://www.openglobalrights.org/what-do-we-really-talk-about-when-we-talk-about-human-rights/ |access-date=11 August 2022 |website=OpenGlobalRights |archive-date=11 August 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220811025818/https://www.openglobalrights.org/what-do-we-really-talk-about-when-we-talk-about-human-rights/ |url-status=live }}</ref>
Related forms of skepticism include the notion that an effective enforcement capacity is lacking, and that even when it exists, it is applied selectively. More basically, how one ought to enforce a particular right is sometimes unclear. Another form of skepticism suggests that satisfying certain human rights is not feasible in current or foreseeable conditions.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Beitz |first=Charles |title=The Idea of Human Rights |publisher=Oxford University Press |year=2009 |location=New York |pages=3-5}}</ref>
==See also==
Line 351 ⟶ 358:
* {{cite book|author-link=Mary Ann Glendon|last=Glendon|first=Mary Ann|year=2001|title=A World Made New: Eleanor Roosevelt and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights|publisher=Random House of Canada Ltd.|isbn=0375506926}}
* Gorman, Robert F. and Edward S. Mihalkanin, eds. ''Historical Dictionary of Human Rights and Humanitarian Organizations'' (2007) [https://www.amazon.com/Historical-Humanitarian-Organizations-Dictionaries-International/dp/0810855488/ excerpt]
* Houghton
* {{cite book|author-link=Michael Ignatieff|last=Ignatieff|first=Michael|year=2001|title=Human Rights as Politics and Idolatry|location=Princeton & Oxford|publisher=Princeton University Press|isbn=0691088934}}
* Ishay, Micheline. ''The History of Human Rights: From Ancient Times to the Era of Globalization'' (U of California Press, 2008) [https://www.amazon.com/History-Human-Rights-Ancient-Globalization/dp/0520256417/ excerpt]
Line 407 ⟶ 414:
{{International Criminal Law|state=collapsed}}
{{Family rights}}
{{Western culture}}{{Human rights}}
{{International human rights legal instruments}}
{{International human rights organizations}}
Line 415 ⟶ 421:
{{International Criminal Court}}
{{Charity}}
{{Discrimination}}
{{Portal bar|Politics|Law|Switzerland}}
{{authority control}}
| |||