Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Raggz (talk | contribs) at 10:39, 6 January 2008 (→Human rights vs national security: OR deletion, see talk). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Human rights refers to "the basic rights and freedoms to which all humans are entitled" They include civil and political rights, such as the right to life and liberty, freedom of thought and expression, and equality before the law, and social, cultural and economic rights, such as the right to participate in culture, the right to work, and the right to education.

All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

— Article 1 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights

The modern human rights movement originates in World War II, but the concept can be identified in all major religions, cultures and philosophies. Ancient Hindu law (Manu Smriti), Confucianism, the Qu'ran and the Ten Commandments all outline some of the rights now included in the UDHR. The concept of natural law, guaranteeing natural rights despite varying human laws and customs, can be traced back to Ancient Greek philosophers, while Enlightenment philosophers suggest a social contract between the rulers and the ruled. The African concept of ubuntu is a cultural view of what it is to be human. Modern human rights thinking is descended from these many traditions of human values and beliefs.

History of human rights

Human rights in the ancient world

While it is known that the reforms of Urukagina of Lagash, the earliest known legal code (c. 2350 BC), must have addressed the concept of rights to some degree, the actual text of his decrees has not yet been found. The oldest legal codex extant today is the Neo-Sumerian Code of Ur-Nammu (ca. 2050 BC). Several other sets of laws were also issued in Mesopotamia, including the Code of Hammurabi (ca. 1780 BC), one of the most famous examples of this type of document. It shows rules, and punishments if those rules are broken, on a variety of matters, including women's rights, children's rights and slave rights.

The prefaces of these codes invoked the Mesopotamian gods for divine sanction. Societies have often derived the origins of human rights in religious documents. The Vedas, the Bible, the Qur'an and the Analects of Confucius are also among the early written sources that address questions of people's duties, rights, and responsibilities.

Persian Empire

The Achaemenid Persian Empire of ancient Iran established unprecedented principles of human rights in the 6th century BC under Cyrus the Great. After his conquest of Babylon in 539 BC, the king issued the Cyrus cylinder, discovered in 1879 and recognized by many today as the first human rights document. The cylinder declared that citizens of the empire would be allowed to practice their religious beliefs freely. It also abolished slavery, so all the palaces of the kings of Persia were built by paid workers in an era where slaves typically did such work. These two reforms were reflected in the biblical books of Chronicles, Nehemiah, and Ezra, which state that Cyrus released the followers of Judaism from slavery and allowed them to migrate back to their land. The cylinder now lies in the British Museum, and a replica is kept at the United Nations Headquarters.

In the Persian Empire, citizens of all religions and ethnic groups were also given the same rights, while women had the same rights as men. The Cyrus cylinder also documents the protection of the rights to liberty and security, freedom of movement, the right of property, and economic and social rights.

Maurya Empire

The Maurya Empire of ancient India established unprecedented principles of civil rights in the 3rd century BC under Ashoka the Great. After his brutal conquest of Kalinga in circa 265 BC, he felt remorse for what he had done, and as a result, adopted Buddhism. From then, Ashoka, who had been described as "the cruel Ashoka" eventually came to be known as "the pious Ashoka". During his reign, he pursued an official policy of nonviolence (ahimsa) and the protection of human rights, as his chief concern was the happiness of his subjects. The unnecessary slaughter or mutilation of animals was immediately abolished, such as sport hunting and branding. Ashoka also showed mercy to those imprisoned, allowing them outside one day each year, and offered common citizens free education at universities. He treated his subjects as equals regardless of their religion, politics or caste, and constructed free hospitals for both humans and animals. Ashoka defined the main principles of nonviolence, tolerance of all sects and opinions, obedience to parents, respect for teachers and priests, being liberal towards friends, humane treatment of servants, and generosity towards all. These reforms are described in the Edicts of Ashoka.

In the Maurya Empire, citizens of all religions and ethnic groups also had rights to freedom, tolerance, and equality. The need for tolerance on an egalitarian basis can be found in the Edicts of Ashoka, which emphasize the importance of tolerance in public policy by the government. The slaughter or capture of prisoners of war was also condemned by Ashoka. Slavery was also non-existent in ancient India.

Early Islamic Caliphate

Many reforms in human rights took place under Islam between 610 and 661, including the period of Muhammad's mission and the rule of the four immediate successors who established the Rashidain Caliphate. Historians generally agree that Muhammad preached against what he saw as the social evils of his day, and that Islamic social reforms in areas such as social security, family structure, slavery, and the rights of women and ethnic minorities improved on what was present in existing Arab society at the time. For example, according to Bernard Lewis, Islam "from the first denounced aristocratic privilege, rejected hierarchy, and adopted a formula of the career open to the talents." John Esposito sees Muhammad as a reformer who condemned practices of the pagan Arabs such as female infanticide, exploitation of the poor, usury, murder, false contracts, and theft. Bernard Lewis believes that the egalitarian nature of Islam "represented a very considerable advance on the practice of both the Greco-Roman and the ancient Persian world."

Muhammad made it the responsibility of the Islamic government to provide food and clothing, on a reasonable basis, to captives, regardless of their religion. If the prisoners were in the custody of a person, then the responsibility was on the individual. Lewis states that Islam brought two major changes to ancient slavery which were to have far-reaching consequences. "One of these was the presumption of freedom; the other, the ban on the enslavement of free persons except in strictly defined circumstances," Lewis continues. The position of the Arabian slave was "enormously improved": the Arabian slave "was now no longer merely a chattel but was also a human being with a certain religious and hence a social status and with certain quasi-legal rights."

Esposito states that reforms in women's rights affected marriage, divorce, and inheritance. Women were not accorded with such legal status in other cultures, including the West, until centuries later. The Oxford Dictionary of Islam states that the general improvement of the status of Arab women included prohibition of female infanticide and recognizing women's full personhood. "The dowry, previously regarded as a bride-price paid to the father, became a nuptial gift retained by the wife as part of her personal property." Under Islamic law, marriage was no longer viewed as a "status" but rather as a "contract", in which the woman's consent was imperative. "Women were given inheritance rights in a patriarchal society that had previously restricted inheritance to male relatives." Annemarie Schimmel states that "compared to the pre-Islamic position of women, Islamic legislation meant an enormous progress; the woman has the right, at least according to the letter of the law, to administer the wealth she has brought into the family or has earned by her own work." William Montgomery Watt states that Muhammad, in the historical context of his time, can be seen as a figure who testified on behalf of women’s rights and improved things considerably. Watt explains: "At the time Islam began, the conditions of women were terrible - they had no right to own property, were supposed to be the property of the man, and if the man died everything went to his sons." Muhammad, however, by "instituting rights of property ownership, inheritance, education and divorce, gave women certain basic safeguards." Haddad and Esposito state that "Muhammad granted women rights and privileges in the sphere of family life, marriage, education, and economic endeavors, rights that help improve women's status in society."

Sociologist Robert Bellah (Beyond belief) argues that Islam in its seventh-century origins was, for its time and place, "remarkably modern...in the high degree of commitment, involvement, and participation expected from the rank-and-file members of the community." This because, he argues, that Islam emphasized on the equality of all Muslims, where leadership positions were open to all. Dale Eickelman writes that Bellah suggests "the early Islamic community placed a particular value on individuals, as opposed to collective or group responsibility."

Magna Carta

Magna Carta is an English charter originally issued in 1215. Magna Carta was the most significant early influence on the extensive historical process that led to the rule of constitutional law today. Magna Carta influenced the development of the common law and many constitutional documents, such as the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights, and is considered one of the most important legal documents in the history of democracy.

Magna Carta was originally written because of disagreements amongst Pope Innocent III, King John and the English barons about the rights of the King. Magna Carta required the King to renounce certain rights, respect certain legal procedures and accept that his will could be bound by the law. It explicitly protected certain rights of the King's subjects, whether free or fettered — most notably the writ of habeas corpus, allowing appeal against unlawful imprisonment.

For modern times, the most enduring legacy of Magna Carta is considered the right of habeas corpus. This right arises from what are now known as clauses 36, 38, 39, and 40 of the 1215 Magna Carta. The Magna Carta also included the right to due process:

No Freeman shall be taken or imprisoned, or be disseised of his Freehold, or Liberties, or free Customs, or be outlawed, or exiled, or any other wise destroyed; nor will We not pass upon him, nor condemn him, but by lawful judgment of his Peers, or by the Law of the Land. We will sell to no man, we will not deny or defer to any man either Justice or Right.

— Clause XXIX of the Magna Carta

Human rights in early modern era

The conquest of the Americas in the 16th century by the Spanish resulted in vigorous debate about human rights in Spain. The debate from 1550-51 between Las Casas and Juan Ginés de Sepúlveda at Valladolid was probably the first on the topic of human rights in European history. Several 17th and 18th century European philosophers, most notably John Locke, developed the concept of natural rights, the notion that people possess certain rights by virtue of being human. Though Locke believed natural rights were derived from divinity since humans were creations of God, his ideas were important in the development of the modern notion of rights. Lockean natural rights did not rely on citizenship nor any law of the state, nor were they necessarily limited to one particular ethnic, cultural or religious group.

Two major revolutions occurred that century in the United States (1776) and in France (1789). The Virginia Declaration of Rights of 1776 sets up a number of fundamental rights and freedoms. The later United States Declaration of Independence includes concepts of natural rights and famously states "that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." Similarly, the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen defines a set of individual and collective rights of the people. These are held to be universal - not only to French citizens but to all men without exception.

1800AD to World War I

Philosophers such as Thomas Paine, John Stuart Mill and Hegel expanded on the theme of universality during the 18th and 19th centuries. In 1831 William Lloyd Garrison wrote in a newspaper called The Liberator that he was trying to enlist his readers in "the great cause of human rights" so the term human rights probably came into use sometime between Paine's The Rights of Man and Garrison's publication. In 1849 a contemporary, Henry David Thoreau, wrote about human rights in his treatise On the Duty of Civil Disobedience which was later influential on human rights and civil rights thinkers. United States Supreme Court Justice David Davis, in his 1867 opinion for Ex Parte Milligan, wrote "By the protection of the law, human rights are secured; withdraw that protection and they are at the mercy of wicked rulers or the clamor of an excited people."

Many groups and movements have managed to achieve profound social changes over the course of the 20th century in the name of human rights. In Western Europe and North America, labour unions brought about laws granting workers the right to strike, establishing minimum work conditions and forbidding or regulating child labour. The women's rights movement succeeded in gaining for many women the right to vote. National liberation movements in many countries succeeded in driving out colonial powers. One of the most influential was Mahatma Gandhi's movement to free his native India from British rule. Movements by long-oppressed racial and religious minorities succeeded in many parts of the world, among them the civil rights movement, and more recent diverse identity politics movements, on behalf of women and minorities in the United States.

The foundation of the International Committee of the Red Cross, the 1864 Lieber Code and the first of the Geneva Conventions in 1864 laid the foundations of International humanitarian law, to be further developed following the two World Wars.

Between World War I and World War II

The League of Nations was established in 1919 at the negotiations over the Treaty of Versailles following the end of World War I. The League's goals included disarmament, preventing war through collective security, settling disputes between countries through negotiation, diplomacy and improving global welfare. Enshrined in its Charter was a mandate to promote many of the rights which were later included in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

The League of Nations had mandates to support many of the former colonies of the Western European colonial powers during their transition from colony to independent state.

Established as an agency of the League of Nations, and now part of United Nations, the International Labour Organization also had a mandate to promote and safeguard certain of the rights later included in the UDHR:

the primary goal of the ILO today is to promote opportunities for women and men to obtain decent and productive work, in conditions of freedom, equity, security and human dignity.

— Report by the Director General for the International Labour Conference 87th Session

After World War II

Rights in War and the Geneva Conventions

As a result of efforts by Henry Dunant, the founder of the International Committee of the Red Cross, the Geneva Conventions came into being between 1864 and 1949. The conventions safeguard the human rights of individuals involved in conflict, and follow on from the 1899 and 1907 Hague Conventions, the international community's first attempt to define laws of war. Despite first being framed before World War II, the conventions were revised as a result of World War II and readopted by the international community in 1949.

The Geneva Conventions are:

• First Geneva Convention "for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field" (first adopted in 1864, last revision in 1949)
• Second Geneva Convention "for the Amelioration of the Condition of Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at Sea" (first adopted in 1949, successor of the 1907 Hague Convention X)
• Third Geneva Convention "relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War" (first adopted in 1929, last revision in 1949)
• Fourth Geneva Convention "relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War" (first adopted in 1949, based on parts of the 1907 Hague Convention IV)

In addition, there are three additional amendment protocols to the Geneva Convention:

• Protocol I (1977): Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts. As of 12 January 2007 it had been ratified by 167 countries.
• Protocol II (1977): Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of Non-International Armed Conflicts. As of 12 January 2007 it had been ratified by 163 countries.
• Protocol III (2005): Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Adoption of an Additional Distinctive Emblem. As of June 2007 it had been ratified by 17 countries and signed but not yet ratified by an additional 68 countries.

All four conventions were last revised and ratified in 1949, based on previous revisions and partly on some of the 1907 Hague Conventions. Later conferences have added provisions prohibiting certain methods of warfare and addressing issues of civil wars. Nearly all 200 countries of the world are "signatory" nations, in that they have ratified these conventions. The International Committee of the Red Cross is the controlling body of the Geneva conventions (see below).

Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Appalled by the barbarism of World War II, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (abbreviated UDHR) is a non-binding declaration adopted by the United Nations General Assembly (A/RES/217, 1948-12-10 at Palais de Chaillot, Paris). The UDHR urged member nations to promote a number of human, civil, economic and social rights, asserting these rights are part of the "foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world". The declaration was the first international legal effort to limit the behavior of states and press upon them duties to their citizens following the model of the rights-duty duality.

...recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world

— Preamble to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948

The UDHR was researched and written by a committee of international experts on human rights, including representatives from all continents and all major religions, and drawing on consultation with leaders such as Mahatma Gandhi. Canadian Law professor John Humphrey, one of the primary authors of the UDHR, ensured that it includes both civil and political rights and economic, social and cultural rights. It was predicated on the assumption that basic human rights are indivisible and that the different types of rights listed are inextricably linked. Though this principle was not opposed by any member states at the time of adoption (the declaration was adopted unanimously, with the abstention of the Soviet bloc, Apartheid South Africa and Saudi Arabia), this principle was later subject to significant challenges.

The onset of the Cold War soon after the UDHR was conceived brought to the fore divisions over the inclusion of both econonic and social rights and civil and political rights in the declaration. Capitalist states tended to place strong emphasis on civil and political rights (such as freedom of association and expression), and were reluctant to include economic and social rights (such as the right to work and the right to join a union). Socialist states placed much greater importance on economic and social rights and argued strongly for their inclusion.

The authors of the UDHR and many states wanted to go beyond the declaration of rights and create legal covenants which would put greater pressure on states to follow human rights norms. Because of the divisions over which rights to include, and because some states refused to ratify any treaties including certain rights (for example, the US refused to ratify any treaty including legally enforceable economic and social rights). Despite the Soviet bloc and a number of developing countries arguing strongly for the inclusion of all rights in a so-called Unity Resolution, the rights enshrined in the UDHR were split into two separate covenants, allowing states to adopt some rights and derogate others. Though this allowed the covenants to be created, it subverted the principle that all rights are linked which was central to the UDHR.

Although the UDHR is a non-binding resolution, it is now considered to be part of international customary law.

Template:Articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Human Rights Treaties

In 1966, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) were adopted by the United Nations, between making the rights contained in the UDHR binding on all states. However they only came into force in 1976 when they were ratified by a sufficient number of countries (despite achieving the ICCPR, a covenant including no economic or social rights, the US only ratified the ICCPR in 1992). The ICESCR commits 155 state parties to work toward the granting of economic, social, and cultural rights (ESCR) to individuals.

Since then numerous other treaties (pieces of legislation) have been offered at the international level. They are generally know as human rights instruments. Some of the most significant are:

• Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (adopted 1948, entry into force: 1951)
• Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD) (adopted 1966, entry into force: 1969)
• Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) (entry into force: 1981)
• United Nations Convention Against Torture (CAT) (adopted 1984, entry into force: 1984)
• Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) (adopted 1989, entry into force: 1989)
• International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families (ICRMW) (adopted 1990)
• Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) (entry into force: 2002)

International bodies

The United Nations

The United Nations (UN) is the only multilateral governmental agency with universally accepted international jurisdiction for universal human rights legislation. All UN organs have advisory roles to the United Nations Security Council and the United Nations Human Rights Council, and there are numerous committees within the UN with responsibilities for safeguarding different human rights treaties. The most senior body of the UN with regard to human rights is the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. The United Nations has an international mandate to:

...achieve international co-operation in solving international problems of an economic, social, cultural, or humanitarian character, and in promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion.

— Article 1-3 of the United Nations Charter

Human Rights Council

The United Nations Human Rights Council, created at the 2005 World Summit to replace the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, has a mandate to investigate violations of human rights. As a charter body, the Human Rights Council ranks along the Security Council as a principal organ of the United Nations. 47 of the 191 member states sit on the council, elected by cimple majority in a secret ballot of the United Nations General Assembly. Members serve a maximum of six years and may have their membership suspended for gross human rights abuses. The Council is based in Geneva, and meets three times a year; with additional meetings to respond to urgent situations.

Independent experts (rapporteurs) are retained by the Council to investigate alleged human rights abuses.

The Human Rights Council and the Security Council may both refer cases to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) or the International Criminal Court (ICC), even if the issue being referred is outside the normal jurisdiction of the courts. The ICJ is the principle judicial organ of the United Nations.

Other UN Bodies

A modern interpretation of the original Declaration of Human Rights was made in the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action adopted by the World Conference on Human Rights in 1993. The degree of unanimity over these conventions, in terms of how many and which countries have ratified them varies, as does the degree to which they are respected by various states. The UN has set up a number of treaty-based bodies to monitor and study human rights, under the leadership of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (UNHCHR).

• The Human Rights Committee promotes participation with the standards of the ICCPR. The eighteen members of the committee express opinions on member countries and make judgements on individual complaints against countries which have ratified the treaty. The judgements are not legally binding.

• The Committee on Economic, Cultural and Social Rights monitors the ICESCR and makes general comments on ratifying countries performance. It does not have the power to receive complaints.

• The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination moniters the CERD and conducts regular reviews of countries' performance. It can make judgements on complaints, but these are not legally binding. It issues warnings to attempt to prevent serious contraventions of the convention.

• The Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women monitors the CEDAW. It receives states' reports on their performance and comments on them, and can make judgements on complaints against countries which have opted into the 1999 Optional Protocol.

• The Committee Against Torture monitors the CAT and receives states' reports on their performance every four years and comments on them. It may visit and inspect individual countries with their consent.

• The Committee on the Rights of the Child monitors the CRC and makes comments on reports submitted by states every five years. It does not have the power to receive complaints.

• The Committee on Migrant Workers was established in 2004 and monitors the ICRMW and makes comments on reports submitted by states every five years. It will have the power to receive complaints of specific violations only once ten member states allow it.

International Committee of the Red Cross

Under the 1949 Geneva Conventions the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) has legal status as a non-governmental sovereign entity. It has a mandate to be the controlling authority of International Humanitarian Law.

The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) is an impartial, neutral, and independent organization whose exclusively humanitarian mission is to to protect the lives and dignity of victims of war and internal violence and to provide them with assistance.

— Mission of ICRC

The ICRC directs and coordinates international relief and works to promote and strengthen humanitarian law and universal humanitarian principles. The core tasks of the Committee, which are derived from the Geneva Conventions and its own statutes, are the following:

• to monitor compliance of warring parties with the Geneva Conventions
• to organize nursing and care for those who are wounded on the battlefield
• to supervise the treatment of prisoners of war and make confidential interventions with detaining authorities
• to help with the search for missing persons in an armed conflict (tracing service)
• to organize protection and care for civil populations
• to act as a neutral intermediary between warring parties

The ICRC drew up seven fundamental principles in 1965 that were adopted by the entire Red Cross Movement. They are humanity, impartiality, neutrality, independence, volunteerism, unity, and universality.

Although the ICRC has no powers to enforce the rights enshrined in the Geneva Conventions, its statements carry significant force, and few countries or warring parties deny the ICRC access to the individuals it exists to protect. Doing so has a significant effect on public opinion and international standing and can be taken as an implicit admission of wrongdoing. The initial refusal of the United States to admit the ICRC to its detention facility at Guantanamo Bay drew considerable international condemnation.

Regional human rights

There are many regional agreements and organizations promoting and governing human rights.

Africa

The African Union (AU) is a supranational union consisting of fifty-three African states.. Established in 2001, the AU's purpose is to help secure Africa's democracy, human rights, and a sustainable economy, especially by bringing an end to intra-African conflict and creating an effective common market.

The African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights (ACHPR) is a quasi-judicial organ of the African Union tasked with promoting and protecting human rights and collective (peoples') rights throughout the African continent as well as interpreting the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights and considering individual complaints of violations of the Charter. The Commission has three broad areas of responsibility:

• Promoting human and peoples' rights
• Protecting human and peoples' rights
• Interpreting the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights

In pursuit of these goals, the Commission is mandated to "collect documents, undertake studies and researches on African problems in the field of human and peoples, rights, organise seminars, symposia and conferences, disseminate information, encourage national and local institutions concerned with human and peoples' rights and, should the case arise, give its views or make recommendations to governments" (Charter, Art. 45).

With the creation of the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights (under a protocol to the Charter which was adopted in 1998 and entered into force in January 2004), the Commission will have the additional task of preparing cases for submission to the Court's jurisdiction. In a July 2004 decision, the AU Assembly resolved that the future Court on Human and Peoples' Rights would be integrated with the African Court of Justice.

The Court of Justice of the African Union is intended to be the “principal judicial organ of the Union” (Protocol of the Court of Justice of the African Union, Article 2.2). Although it has not yet been established, it is intended to take over the duties of the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights, as well as act as the supreme court of the African Union, interpreting all necessary laws and treaties. The Protocol establishing the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights entered into force in January 2004 but its merging with the Court of Justice has delayed its establishment. The Protocol establishing the Court of Justice will come into force when ratified by 15 countries.

There are many countries in Africa accused of human rights violations by the international community and NGOs

Americas

The Organization of American States (OAS) is an international organization, headquartered in Washington, D.C., United States. Its members are the thirty-five independent states of the Americas. Over the course of the 1990s, with the end of the Cold War, the return to democracy in Latin America, and the thrust toward globalization, the OAS made major efforts to reinvent itself to fit the new context. Its stated priorities now include the following:

• Strengthening democracy
• Working for peace
• Protecting human rights
• Combating corruption
• The rights of Indigenous Peoples
• Promoting sustainable development

The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (the IACHR) is an autonomous organ of the Organization of American States, also based in Washington, D.C. Along with the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, based in San José, Costa Rica, it is one of the bodies that comprise the inter-American system for the promotion and protection of human rights. The IACHR is a permanent body which meets in regular and special sessions several times a year to examine allegations of human rights violations in the hemisphere. Its human rights duties stem from three documents:

• the OAS Charter
• the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man
• the American Convention on Human Rights

The Inter-Americal Court of Human Rights was established in 1979 with the purpose of enforcing and interpreting the provisions of the American Convention on Human Rights. Its two main functions are thus adjudicatory and advisory. Under the former, it hears and rules on the specific cases of human rights violations referred to it. Under the latter, it issues opinions on matters of legal interpretation brought to its attention by other OAS bodies or member states.

Asia

There are no Asia-wide organisations or conventions to promote or protect human rights. Countries vary widely in their approach to human rights and their record of human rights protection.

The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) is a geo-political and economic organization of 10 countries located in Southeast Asia, which was formed in 1967 by Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore and Thailand. The organisation now also includes Brunei Darussalam, Vietnam, Laos, Myanmar and Cambodia. Its aims include the acceleration of economic growth, social progress, cultural development among its members, and the promotion of regional peace

The South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) is an economic and political organization of eight countries in Southern Asia, representing almost 1.5 billion people. It was established in 1985 by India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Maldives and Bhutan. In April 2007, at the Association's 14th summit, Afghanistan became its eighth member.

The Cooperation Council for the Arab States of the Gulf (CCASG) is a trade bloc involving the six Arab states of the Persian Gulf, with many economic and social objectives. Created in 1981, the Council comprises the Arabian Gulf states of Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.

The Asia Cooperation Dialogue (ACD) is a body created in 2002 to promote Asian cooperation at a continental level, helping to integrate the previously separate regional organizations of political or economical cooperation. The main objectives of the ACD are as follows:

• To promote interdependence among Asian countries in all areas of cooperation by identifying Asia's common strengths and opportunities which will help reduce poverty and improve the quality of life for Asian people whilst developing a knowledge-based society within Asia and enhancing community and people empowerment;
• To expand the trade and financial market within Asia and increase the bargaining power of Asian countries in lieu of competition and, in turn, enhance Asia's economic competitiveness in the global market;
• To serve as the missing link in Asian cooperation by building upon Asia's potentials and strengths through supplementing and complementing existing cooperative frameworks so as to become a viable partner for other regions;
• To ultimately transform the Asian continent into an Asian Community, capable of interacting with the rest of the world on a more equal footing and contributing more positively towards mutual peace and prosperity.

None of the above organisations have a specific mandate to promote or protect human rights, but each has some human rights related economic, social and cultural objectives.

A number of Asian countries are accused of serious human rights abuses by the international community and human rights organisations .

Europe

The Council of Europe, founded in 1949, is the oldest organisation working for European integration. It is an international organisation with legal personality recognised under public international law and has observer status with the United Nations. The seat of the Council of Europe is in Strasbourg in France. The Council of Europe is responsible for both the European Convention on Human Rights and the European Court of Human Rights. These institutions bind the Council's members to a code of human rights which, though strict, are more lenient than those of the United Nations charter on human rights. The Council also promotes the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages and the European Social Charter. Membership is open to all European states which seek European integration, accept the principle of the rule of law and are able and willing to guarantee democracy, fundamental human rights and freedoms.

The Council of Europe is separate from the European Union, but the latter is expected to accede to the European Convention and potentially the Council itself. The EU also has a separate human rights document; the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.

The European Convention on Human Rights defines and guarantees since 1950 human rights and fundamental freedoms in Europe. All 47 member states of the Council of Europe have signed this Convention and are therefore under the jurisdiction of the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. In order to prevent torture and inhuman or degrading treatment (Article 3 of the Convention), the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture was established.

The European Court of Human Rights is the only international court with jurisdiction to deal with cases brought by individuals (rather than states).

Oceania

There are no regional approaches or agreements on human rights for Oceania, but most countries have a well-regarded human rights record.

Australia is the only western democracy with no constitutional or legislative bill of rights, but a number of laws have been enacted to protect human rights and the Constitution of Australia has been found to contain certain implied rights by the High Court. However, Australia has been criticised at various times for its immigration policies, treatment of asylum seekers, and treatment of its indigenous population.

Philosophies of human rights

Rights
Theoretical distinctions
Claim rights and liberty rights Individual and group rights Natural rights and legal rights Negative and positive rights
Human rights
Civil and political Economic, social and cultural Three generations
Rights by beneficiary
Accused Animals Autistic Children Consumers Creditors Deaf Disabled Elders Family Farmers Fetuses Humans Indigenous Intersex Kings LGBT Transgender Men Minorities Parents Fathers Mothers Patients Peasants Plants Prisoners Robots States Students Victims Women Workers Youth
Other groups of rights
Assembly Association Asylum Civil liberties Clothing Development Digital Education Fair trial Food Free migration Health Healthy environment Housing Linguistic Movement Property Repair Reproductive Rest and leisure Security Self defense Self-determination of people Sexuality Speech Water and sanitation
v t e

Several theoretical approaches have been advanced to explain how and why human rights become part of social expectations.

One of the oldest Western philosophies on human rights is that they are a product of a natural law, stemming from different philosophical or religious grounds.

Other theories hold that human rights codify moral behavior which is a human social product developed by a process of biological and social evolution (associated with Hume). Human rights are also described as a sociological pattern of rule setting (as in the sociological theory of law and the work of Weber). These approaches include the notion that individuals in a society accept rules from legitimate authority in exchange for security and economic advantage (as in Rawls) - a social contract.

Natural rights

Natural law theories base human rights on a “natural” moral, religious or even biological order which is independent of transitory human laws or traditions.

Socrates and his philosophic heirs, Plato and Aristotle, posited the existence of natural justice or natural right (dikaion physikon, δικαιον φυσικον, Latin ius naturale). Of these, Aristotle is often said to be the father of natural law, although evidence for this is due largely to the interpretations of his work of Thomas Aquinas.

The development of this tradition of natural justice into one of natural law is usually attributed to the Stoics.

Some of the early Church fathers sought to incorporate the until then pagan concept of natural law into Christianity. Natural law theories have featured greatly in the philosophies of Thomas Aquinas, Francisco Suárez, Richard Hooker, Thomas Hobbes, Hugo Grotius, Samuel von Pufendorf, and John Locke.

In the Seventeenth Century Thomas Hobbes founded a contractualist theory of legal positivism on what all men could agree upon: what they sought (happiness) was subject to contention, but a broad consensus could form around what they feared (violent death at the hands of another). The natural law was how a rational human being, seeking to survive and prosper, would act. It was discovered by considering humankind's natural rights, whereas previously it could be said that natural rights were discovered by considering the natural law. In Hobbes' opinion, the only way natural law could prevail was for men to submit to the commands of the sovereign. In this lay the foundations of the theory of a social contract between the governed and the governor.

Hugo Grotius based his philosophy of international law on natural law. He wrote that "even the will of an omnipotent being cannot change or abrogate" natural law, which "would maintain its objective validity even if we should assume the impossible, that there is no God or that he does not care for human affairs." (De iure belli ac pacis, Prolegomeni XI). This is the famous argument etiamsi daremus (non esse Deum), that made natural law no longer dependent on theology.

John Locke incorporated natural law into many of his theories and philosophy, especially in Two Treatises of Government. Locke turned Hobbes' prescription around, saying that if the ruler went against natural law and failed to protect "life, liberty, and property," people could justifiably overthrow the existing state and create a new one.

The Belgian philosopher of law Frank van Dun is one among those who are elaborating a secular conception of natural law in the liberal tradition. There are also emerging and secular forms of natural law theory that define human rights as derivative of the notion of universal human dignity.

The term "human rights" has replaced the term "natural rights" in popularity, because the rights are less and less frequently seen as requiring natural law for their existence.

Social contract

The Swiss-French philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau suggested the existence of a hypothetical social contract where a group of free individuals agree for the sake of the common good to form institutions to govern themselves. This echoed the earlier postulation by Thomas Hobbes that there is a contract between the government and the governed - and led to John Locke's theory that a failure of the government to secure rights is a failure which justifies the removal of the government.

International equity expert Paul Finn has echoed this view:

the most fundamental fiduciary relationship in our society is manifestly that which exists between the community (the people) and the state, its agencies and officials.

— Paul Finn

The relationship between government and the governed in countries which follow the English common law tradition is a fiduciary one. In equity law, a politician's fiduciary obligations are not only comprised of duties of good faith and loyalty, but also include duties of skill and competence in managing a country and it's people. Originating from within the Courts of Equity, the fiduciary concept exists to prevent those holding positions of power from abusing their authority. The fiduciary relationship between government and the governed arises from the governments ability to control people with the exercise of its power. In effect, if a government has the power to abolish any rights, it is equally burdened with the fiduciary duty to protect such an interest because it would benefit from the exercise of its own discretion to extinguish rights which it alone had the power to dispose of.

Reciprocity

The Golden Rule, or the ethic of reciprocity states that one must do unto others as one would be treated themselves; the principle being that reciprocal recognition and respect of rights ensures that one's own rights will be protected. This principle can be found in all the world's major religions in only slightly differing forms, and was enshrined in the "Declaration Toward a Global Ethic" by the Parliament of the World's Religions in 1993.

Other theories of human rights

The philosopher John Finnis argues that human rights are justifiable on the grounds of their instrumental value in creating the necessary conditions for human well-being. Interest theories highlight the duty to respect the rights of other individuals on grounds of self-interest:

Human rights law, applied to a State's own citizens serves the interest of states, by, for example, minimizing the risk of violent resistance and protest and by keeping the level of dissatisfaction with the government manageable

— Niraj Nathwani in Rethinking refugee law

The biological theory considers the comparative reproductive advantage of human social behavior based on empathy and altruism in the context of natural selection.

Concepts in human rights

Indivisibility and categorization of rights

The most common categorization of human rights is to split them into civil and political rights, and economic, social and cultural rights.

Civil and political rights are enshrined in articles 3 to 21 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and in the ICCPR. Economic, social and cultural rights are enshrined in articles 22 to 28 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and in the ICESCR. The UDHR included both economic, social and cultural rights and civil and political rights because it was based on the principle that the different rights could only successfully exist in combination:

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

— 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. 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 signaturies 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 access to healthcare free at the point of use. 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.

Opponents of the indivisibility of human rights argue that economic, social and cultural rights are fundamentally different from civil and political rights and require completely different approaches. Economic, social and cultural rights are argued to be:

• positive, meaning that they require active provision of entitlements by the state (as opposed to the state being required only to prevent the breach of rights)
• resource-intensive, meaning that they are expensive and difficult to provide
• progressive, meaning that they will take significant time to implement
• vague, meaning they cannot be quantitatively measured, and whether they are adequately provided or not is difficult to judge
• ideologically divisive/political, meaning that there is no consensus on what should and shouldn't be provided as a right
• socialist, as opposed to capitalist
• non-justiciable, meaning that their provision, or the breach of them, cannot be judged in a court of law
• aspirations or goals, as opposed to real 'legal' rights

Similarly civil and political rights are categorized as:

• negative, meaning the state can protect them simply by taking no action
• cost-free
• immediate, meaning they can be immediately provided if the state decides to
• precise, meaning their provision is easy to judge and measure
• non-ideological/non-political
• capitalist
• justiciable
• real 'legal' rights

In The No-Nonsense Guide to Human Rights Olivia Ball and Paul Gready argue that for both civil and political rights and economic, social and cultural rights it is easy to find examples which do not fit into the above categorisation. Amongst several others, they highlight the fact that maintaining a judicial system, a fundamental requirement of the civil right to due process before the law and other rights relating to judicial process, is positive, resourse-intensive, progressive and vague, while the social right to housing is precise, justiciable and can be a real 'legal' right.

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 categorisation is at odds with the indivisibility of rights, as it implicitly states that some rights can exist without others. Prioritisation of rights for pragmatic reasons is however a widely accepted neccessity. Human rights expert Philip Alston argues:

If every possible human rights element is deemed to be essential or necessary, then nothing will be treated as though it is truly important.

— Philip Alston

He, and others, urge caution with prioritisation of rights:

...the call for prioritizing is not to suggest that any obvious violations of rights can be ignored.

— Philip Alston

Priorities, where necessary, should adhere to core concepts (such as reasonable attempts at progressive realization) and principles (such as non-discrimination, equality and participation.

— Olivia Ball, Paul Gready

Some human rights are said to be "inalienable rights." The term inalienable rights (or unalienable rights) refers to "a set of human rights that are fundamental, are not awarded by human power, and cannot be surrendered."

The adherence to the principle of indivisibility by the international community was reaffirmed in 1995:

All human rights are universal, indivisible and interdependent and related. The internationl community must treat human rights globally in a fair and equal manner, on the same footing, and with the same emphasis

— Vienna Declaration and Program of Action, World Conference on Human Rights, 1995]]

This statement was again endorsed at the 2005 World Summit in New York (paragraph 121).

Universalism vs cultural relativism

The UDHR enshrines, by definition, rights that apply to all humans equally, whichever geographical location, state, race or culture they belong to.

Proponents of cultural relativism suggest that human rights are not all universal, and indeed conflict with some cultures and threaten their survival.

Rights which are most often contested with relativistic arguments are the rights of women. For example Female genital mutilation occurs in different cultures in Africa, Asia and South America. It is not mandated by any religion, but has become a tradition in many cultures. It is considered a violation of women's and girl's rights by much of the international community, and is outlawed in some countries.

Universalism has been described by some as cultural, economic or political imperialism. In particular, the concept of human rights is often claimed to be fundamentally rooted in a politically liberal outlook which, although generally accepted in Europe, Japan or North America, is not necessarily taken as standard elsewhere.

For example, in 1981, the Iranian representative to the United Nations, Said Rajaie-Khorassani, articulated the position of his country regarding the Universal Declaration of Human Rights by saying that the UDHR was "a secular understanding of the Judeo-Christian tradition", which could not be implemented by Muslims without trespassing the Islamic law. The former Prime Ministers of Singapore, Lee Kuan Yew, and of Malaysia, Mahathir bin Mohamad both claimed in the 1990s that Asian values were significantly different from western values and included a sense of loyalty and foregoing personal freedoms for the sake of social stability and prosperity, and therefore authoritarian government is more appropriate in Asia than democracy. This view is countered by Mahathirs former deputy:

To say that freedom is Western or unAsian is to offend our traditions as well as our forefathers, who gave their lives in the struggle against tyranny and injustices.

— A Ibrabim in his keynote speech to the Asian Press Forum title Media and Society in Asia, 2 December 1994

and also by Singapore's opposition leader Chee Soon Juan who states that it is racist to assert that Asians do not want human rights.

An appeal is often made to the fact that influential human rights thinkers, such as John Locke and John Stuart Mill, have all been Western and indeed that some were involved in the running of Empires themselves.

Relativistic arguments tend to neglect the fact that modern human rights are new to all cultures, dating back no further than the UDHR in 1948. They also don't account for the fact that the UDHR was drafted by people from many different cultures and traditions, including a US Roman Catholic, a Chinese Confucian philosopher, a French zionist and a representative from the Arab League, amongst others, and drew upon advice from thinkers such as Mahatma Gandhi.

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 who's human rights are compromised are the powerless. 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:

The universal nature of human rights and freedoms is beyond question.

— 2005 World Summit, paragraph 120

State and non-state actors

Human rights have traditionally been considered the responsibility of the State, but they are increasingly also considered the responsibility of other organisations, such as companies, NGOs, political parties, informal groups, and of individuals - all known as non-State actors. Non-State actors can also commit human rights abuses, but are not subject to human rights law other than International Humanitarian Law, which applies to all.

Multi-national companies play an increasingly large role in the world, and are responsible for a large number of human rights abuses. Although the legal and moral environment surrounding the actions of governments is reasonably well developed, that surrounding multi-national companies is both controversial and ill-defined. Multi-national companies' primary responsibility is to their shareholders, not to those affected by their actions. Such companies are often larger than the economies of the states in which they operate, and can wield significant economic and political power. No international treaties exist to specifically cover the behavior of companies with regard to human rights, and national legislation is very variable. Jean Ziegler, Special Rapporteur of the UN Commission on Human Rights on the right to food stated in a report in 2003:

the growing power of transnational corporations and their extension of power through privatization, deregulation and the rolling back of the State also mean that it is now time to develop binding legal norms that hold corporations to human rights standards and circumscribe potential abuses of their position of power.

— Jean Ziegler

In August 2003 the Human Rights Commission's Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights produced draft Norms on the responsibilities of transnational corporations and other business enterprises with regard to human rights. These were considered by the Human Rights Commission in 2004, but have no binding status on corporations and are not monitored.

Theory of value and property

Henry of Ghent articulated the theory that every person has a property interest in their own body. John Locke uses the word property in both broad and narrow senses. In a broad sense, it covers a wide range of human interests and aspirations; more narrowly, it refers to material goods. He argues that property is a natural right and it is derived from labour." In addition, property precedes government and government cannot "dispose of the estates of the subjects arbitrarily." To deny valid property rights according to Locke is to deny human rights. The British philosopher had significant impacts upon the development of the Government of the UK and was central to the fundamental founding philosophy of the United States of America. Karl Marx later critiqued Locke's theory of property in his Theories of Surplus Value, seeing the beginnings of a theory of surplus value in Locke's works. In Locke's Second Treatise he argued that the right to own private property was unlimited as long as nobody took more than they could use without allowing any of their property to go to waste and that there were enough common resources of comparable quality available for others to create their own property. Locke did believe that some would be more "industrious and rational" than others and would amass more property, but believed this would not cause shortages. Though this system could work before the introduction of money, Marx argued in Theories of Surplus Value that Locke's system would break down and claimed money was a contradiction of the law of nature on which private property was founded.

Reproductive rights

Reproductive rights are a subset of human rights relating to sexual reproduction and reproductive health, often held to include the right to control one's reproductive functions, such as the right to reproduce (as in opposition to compulsory sterilization and forced contraception), as well as the right to not reproduce (including support for access to birth control and abortion), the rights to privacy, medical coverage, contraception, family planning and protection from discrimination, harassment and gender-oriented harm.

International discourse on reproductive rights first began with the United Nation's 1968 International Conference on Human Rights. The sixteenth article of the Proclamation of Tehran states, "Parents have a basic human right to determine freely and responsibly the number and the spacing of their children." Reproductive rights advocates work to secure affordable access to abortion, contraception, as well as education about contraception and sexually transmitted infections, and freedom from coerced sterilization and contraception, for both men and women. In addition, reproductive rights advocates endeavor to protect all women from harmful gender-based practices. Examples include cultural practices such as female genital cutting, or FGC, as well as state, customary and religious laws that contribute to women's political and economic disenfranchisment.

Human rights law

Legal instruments and jurisdiction

The human rights enshrined in the United Nations Charter, the UDHR, the Geneva Conventions and the various enforced treaties of the United Nations are fully enforceable in law.

There exist a number of internationally recognized organisations with worldwide mandate or jurisdiction over certain aspects of human rights:

• The International Court of Justice is the United Nations' primary judiciary body. It has worldwide jurisdiction and like all UN organs, is directed by the Security Council. The ICJ settles disputes between nations.
• The International Criminal Court, is the body responsible for investigating and punishing war crimes, and Crimes against humanity when such occur within its jurisdiction, with a mandate to bring to justice perpetrators of war crimes or crimes against humanity that occurred before its creation in 2002. Normally national law safeguards human rights and punish those who breach human rights legislation, it has primary jurisdiction by complementarity. Only when all local remedies have been exhausted might the ICC have jurisdiction.

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. Not all of them are compliant with the United Nations advisory standards as set out in the 1993 Paris Principles, but the number and effect of these institutions is increasing.

Universal jurisdiction is a controversial principle in international law whereby states claim criminal jurisdiction over persons whose alleged crimes were committed outside the boundaries of the prosecuting state, regardless of nationality, country of residence, or any other relation with the prosecuting country. The state backs its claim on the grounds that the crime committed is considered a crime against all, which any state is authorized to punish. The concept of universal jurisdiction is therefore closely linked to the idea that certain international norms are erga omnes, or owed to the entire world community, as well as the concept of jus cogens. In 1993 Belgium passed a law of universal jurisdiction to give its courts jurisdiction over crimes against humanity in other countries. The principle is supported by Amnesty International and other human rights organisations as they believe certain crimes pose a threat to the international community as a whole and the community has a moral duty to act, but others, including Henry Kissinger (who was accused of war crimes by one commentator)), argue that state sovereignty is paramount, because breaches of rights committed in other countries are outside states' sovereign interest and because states could use the principle for political reasons. The ICC and ICJ have universal jurisdiction when all local remedies have been exhausted, although the ICC cannot try crimes committed before 2002. The creation of the ICC reduced calls for more national universal jurisdiction laws. Commentators' positions in the argument for and against intervention and the use of force by states are influenced by whether they believe human rights are largely a legal or moral duty and whether they are of more cosmopolitan or nationalist persuasion.

A deconstructionist critique has been levied at the discourse of human rights by scholars of the field of critical legal studies. They argue that the logic of human rights discourse is often circular and internally inconsistent, allowing for it to be easily manipulable. For example, human rights law attempts to create strict, formally realizable rules at the same time as creating the broad standards of an equitable system.

Human rights violations

Human rights violations occur when any state or non-state actor breaches any of the terms of the UDHR or other international human rights or humanitarian law.

Human rights abuses are monitored by United Nations committees, national institutions and governments and by many independent non-governmental organizations, such as Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, World Organisation Against Torture, Freedom House, International Freedom of Expression Exchange and Anti-Slavery International. These organisations collect evidence and documentation of human rights abuses and apply pressure to promote human rights.

Only a very few countries do not commit significant human rights violations, according to Amnesty International. In their 2004 human rights report (covering 2003) the Netherlands, Norway, Denmark, Iceland and Costa Rica are the only (mappable) countries that did not violate at least some human rights significantly.

War crimes and crimes against humanity, including genocide, are breaches of International humanitarian law.

Human rights in the future

With the advances of technology, medicine, and human philosophy, the status quo of human rights thinking is constantly challenged. New, unforeseen possibilities and events occur, which can affect existing rights or potentially require new ones.

There is no current universal human right to water, binding or not, enshrined by the United Nations or any other multilateral body. In November 2002, the United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights issued a non-binding comment affirming that access to water was a human right:

the human right to water is indispensable for leading a life in human dignity. It is a prerequisite for the realization of other human rights.

— United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights

This principle was reaffirmed at the 3rd and 4th World Water Forums in 2003 and 2006. This marks a departure from the conclusions of the 2nd World Water Forum in The Hague in 2000, which stated that water was a commodity to be bought and sold, not a right. There are calls from many NGOs and politicians to enshrine access to water as a binding human right, and not as a commodity.

Human rights of intrauterine or unborn babies have been a controversial subject. The point at which a new person is alive as an idividual, and the point at which that person becomes conscious, are disputed by pro-life and pro-choice groups on particular. Those who are pro-life believe that the moment of conception is the moment of a new individual life coming into being and therefore that individual has equal rights to any other person. Others, including many pro-choice groups, argue that until the point at which that life is viable (or could survive alone), the rights of that person are secondary to those of the mother. This topic has become more controversial as the advancement of medical science makes it a possibility to save the life of younger and younger babies.

The onset of global warming and a heightened knowledge of environmentalism has created potential conflicts between different human rights. Human rights ultimately require a working ecosystem and healthy environment, but the granting of certain rights to individuals may damage these. In the area of environmental rights, the responsibiliities of multi-national companies, so far relatively unaddressed by rights legislation, is of paramount consideration.

Future technological advances, such as the possibility of mass space travel, the advances in the internet and the possibility of access to huge amounts of information, and others, all raise the possibility of new rights.

See also

• List of human rights organisations
• Global governance
• Human Responsibilities
• Freedom (political)
• Discrimination

Notes

1. Houghton Miffin Company (2006)
2. "Universal Declaration of Human Rights adopted by General Assembly resolution 217 A (III) of 10 December 1948".
3. Ball, Gready (2007) p.14
4. Robertson, Merrills (1996)
5. Chauhan, O.P. (2004).
6. Amartya Sen (1997)
7. Arrian, Indica, "This also is remarkable in India, that all Indians are free, and no Indian at all is a slave. In this the Indians agree with the Lacedaemonians. Yet the Lacedaemonians have Helots for slaves, who perform the duties of slaves; but the Indians have no slaves at all, much less is any Indian a whore."
8. Alexander (1998), p.452
9. ^ Lewis (1998) Cite error: The named reference "LewisNYRB" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).
10. Watt (1974), p.234
11. Robinson (2004) p.21
12. Haddad, Esposito (1998), p. 98
13. "Ak̲h̲lāḳ", Encyclopaedia of Islam Online
14. Joseph, Najmabadi (2007). Chapter: p.293. Gallagher, Nancy. Infanticide and Abandonment of Female Children
15. ^ Esposito (2005) p. 79 Cite error: The named reference "Espos" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).
16. Maududi (1967), Introduction of Ad-Dahr, "Period of revelation", pg. 159
17. Lewis (1994) chapter 1
18. Jones, Lindsay. p.6224
19. ^ Esposito (2004), p. 339
20. ^ Khadduri (1978)
21. Schimmel (1992) p.65
22. Maan, McIntosh (1999)
23. Haddad, Esposito (1998) p.163
24. McAuliffe (2005) vol. 5, pp. 66-76. “Social Sciences and the Qur’an”
25. Mayer (2000) p. 110
26. "Ex Parte Milligan, 71 U.S. 2, 119. (full text)" (PDF). December 1866. Retrieved 2007-12-28. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
27. Eleanor Roosevelt: Address to the United Nations General Assembly 10 December 1948 in Paris, France
28. Glendon (2001)
29. Ball, Gready (2007) p.34
30. Ball, Gready (2007) p.35
31. Ball, Gready (2007) p.35
32. Ball, Gready
33. This does not include the Vatican, which although recognised as an independent state, is not a member of the UN
34. Ball, Gready (2007) p.37
35. Ball, Gready (2007) p.92
36. "United Nations Rights Council Page". United Nations News Page.
37. Terlingen, Yvonne (9 July 2007). "The Human Rights Council: A New Era in UN Human Rights Work?". Retrieved 2007-12-29. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
38. Ball, Gready (2007) p.95
39. The Security Council referred the human rights situation in Darfur in Sudan to the ICC despite the fact that Sudan has a functioning legal system
40. "International Court of Justice homepage".
41. "ICRC: The Mission". 7 May 2006. Retrieved 2007-12-29. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
42. "The Statutes of the ICRC". Retrieved 2007-12-29.
43. Forsythe (2005) p.161
44. "ICRC: The Fundamental Principles". 1 January 1995. Retrieved 2007-12-28. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
45. ICRC Operational Update, 26 July 2004
46. "UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: Human dignity denied. Torture and accountability in the 'war on terror'". Amnesty International. Retrieved 2007-12-28.
47. "AU Member States". African Union. Retrieved 2008-01-03.
48. "AU in a Nutshell". Retrieved 2008-01-03.
49. ^ "Mandate of the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights". Retrieved 2008-01-03.
50. "PROTOCOL TO THE AFRICAN CHARTER ON HUMAN AND PEOPLES` RIGHTS ON THE ESTABLISHMENT OF AN AFRICAN COURT ON HUMAN AND PEOPLES` RIGHTS". Retrieved 2008-01-03.
51. "PROTOCOL OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE AFRICAN UNION" (PDF). African Union.
52. "Open Letter to the Chairman of the African Union (AU) seeking clarifications and assurances that the Establishment of an effective African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights will not be delayed or undermined" (PDF). Amnesty International. 5 August 2004. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
53. "African Court of Justice". African International Courts and Tribunals. Retrieved 2008-01-03.
54. "Human Rights Watch Africa". Retrieved 2008-01-03.
55. "OAS Key Issues". Retrieved 2008-01-03.
56. "Directory of OAS Authorities". Organization of American States. Retrieved 2008-01-03.
57. "What is the IACHR?". Inter-Americal Commission on Human Rights. Retrieved 2008-01-03.
58. "Inter-American Court on Human Rights homepage". Inter-American Court on Human Rights. Retrieved 2008-01-03.
59. ^ "Overview ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHEAST ASIAN NATIONS". Retrieved 2008-01-03.
60. Bangkok Declaration. Wikisource. Retrieved March 14, 2007
61. "South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation homepage". Retrieved 2008-01-03.
62. "The Concept and Foundations and Objectives of the CCASG". Retrieved 2008-01-03.
63. ^ "About the Asia Cooperation Dialogue". Asia Cooperation Dialogue. Retrieved 2008-01-03.
64. "Charter of CCASG". Retrieved 2008-01-03.
65. "Human Rights Watch Asia". Retrieved 2008-01-03.
66. "Council of Europe Human Rights". Council of Europe. Retrieved 2008-01-04.
67. "Social Charter". Council of Europe. Retrieved 2008-01-04.
68. "The Council of Europe in Brief". Retrieved 2008-01-04.
69. Juncker, Jean-Claude (11 April 2006). "Council of Europe - European Union: "A sole ambition for the European Continent"" (PDF). Council of Europe. Retrieved 2008-01-04. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
70. ^ "Historical Background to the European Court of Human Rights". European Court of Human Rights. Retrieved 2008-01-04.
71. "About the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture". European Committee for the Prevention of Torture. Retrieved 2008-01-04.
72. Shellens (1959)
73. Jaffa (1979)
74. Sills (1968, 1972) Natural Law
75. van Dun, Frank. "Natural Law". Retrieved 2007-12-28.
76. Kohen (2007)
77. Weston, Burns H. "Human Rights". Encyclopedia Britannica Online, p. 2. Retrieved 2006-05-18.
78. Salevao (2005) p.76
79. Salevao (2005) p.76
80. Fagan, Andrew (2006). "Human Rights". The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved 2008-01-01.
81. Finnis (1980)
82. Nathwani (2003) p.25
83. Arnhart (1998)
84. Clayton, Schloss (2004)
85. Paul, Miller, Paul (2001): Arnhart, Larry. Thomistic Natural Law as Darwinian Natural Right p.1
86. Light (2002)
87. Scott (1989
88. Ball, Gready (2007) p.37
89. Alston (2005)
90. Alston (2005)
91. Ball, Gready. (2007) p.42
92. Littman (1999)
93. Ball, Gready (2007) p.25
94. Chee, S.J. (3 July 2003). Human Rights: Dirty Words in Singapore. Activating Human Rights and Diversity Conference (Byron Bay, Australia). {{cite book}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
95. Tunick (2006)
96. Beate (2005)
97. Ball, Gready (2007) p.34
98. Ignatief, M. (2001) p.68
99. "Corporations and Human Rights". Human Rights Watch. Retrieved 2008-01-03.
100. "Transnational corporations should be held to human rights standards - UN expert". UN News Centre. 13 October 2003. Retrieved 2008-01-03. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
101. "Norms on the responsibilities of transnational corporations and other business enterprises with regard to human rights". UN Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights. Retrieved 2008-01-03.
102. "REPORT TO THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COUNCIL ON THE SIXTIETH SESSION OF THE COMMISSION (E/CN.4/2004/L.11/Add.7)" (PDF). United Nations Commission on Human Rights. p. 81. Retrieved 2008-01-03.
103. Tierney (1997)
104. http://en.wikipedia.org/John_Locke
105. Vaughn (1978)
106. ^ Freedman (1993) "The first comprehensive statement of human rights, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1948, failed to mention reproductive rights at all. It was not until 20 years later, at the international human rights conference held in Teheran in 1968, that human reproduction became a subject of international legal concern. The Final Act of the Teheran conference included a provision stating "Parents have a basic human right to decide freely and responsibly on the number and spacing of their children and a right to adequate education and information in this respect (United Nations, 1968)"
107. ^ Cook, Fathalla (1996) "The Declaration and Platform for Action adopted by 187 UN member states in Beijing reaffirm the Cairo Programme's definition of reproductive health , but advance women's wider interests: The human rights of women include their right to have control over and decide freely and responsibly on matters related to their sexuality, including sexual and reproductive health, free of coercion, discrimination and violence. Equal relationships between women and men in matters of sexual relations and reproduction, including full respect for the integrity of the person, require mutual respect, consent and shared responsibility for sexual behavior and its consequences ...."
108. ^ Amnesty International USA (2007). "Stop Violence Against Women: Reproductive rights" (HTML). SVAW. Amnesty International USA. Retrieved 2007-12-08. Reproductive rights - access to sexual and reproductive healthcare and autonomy in sexual and reproductive decision-making - are human rights; they are universal, indivisible, and undeniable. These rights are founded upon principles of human dignity and equality, and have been enshrined in international human rights documents. Reproductive rights embrace core human rights, including the right to health, the right to be free from discrimination, the right to privacy, the right not to be subjected to torture or ill-treatment, the right to determine the number and spacing of one's children, and the right to be free from sexual violence. Reproductive rights include the recognition of the basic right of all couples and individuals to decide freely and responsibly the number, spacing and timing of their children, and the right to have the information and means to implement those decisions free from discrimination, coercion, and violence. Reproductive rights also include the right to the highest standards of sexual and reproductive healthcare.
109. "ICJ homepage".
110. "The Resource Part II: The International Human Rights System". United Nations. Retrieved 2007-12-31.
111. National Human Rights Institutions Forum is the official portal for the National Human Rights Institutions and show a list of 119 institutions that can be found at
112. HURIDOCS has developed extensive methodologies for monitoring and documenting human rights violations, and more resources can be found at Human Rights Tools
113. Hitchens (2002)
114. Duncan Kennedy, "The Critique of Rights in Critical Legal Studies"
115. Amnesty International Report 2004. Amnesty International. 2004. ISBN 0862103541.
116. Sutherland, Ben (17 March 2003). "Water forum no 'talking shop'". BBC News. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
117. "2003 International Year of Water website press kit". United Nations Department of Public Information. Retrieved 2007-12-28.

References

• Amnesty International (2004). Amnesty International Report. Amnesty International Publications. ISBN 0862103541 ISBN 1-887204-40-7
• Alexander, Fran (ed) (1998). Encyclopedia of World History. Oxford University Press. ISBN 0198602235
• Alston, Philip (2005). "Ships Passing in the Night: The Current State of the Human Rights and Development Debate seen through the Lens of the Millennium Development Goals". Human Rights Quarterly. Vol. 27 (No. 3) p.807
• Arnhart, Larry (1998). Darwinian Natural Right: The Biological Ethics of Human Nature SUNY Press. ISBN 0791436934
• Ball, Olivia; Gready, Paul (2007). The No-Nonsense Guide to Human Rights. New Internationalist. ISBN 1-904456-45-6
• Barzilai, Gad. (2003). Communities and Law: Politics and Cultures of Legal Identities. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. ISBN 0472113151
• Chauhan, O.P. (2004). Human Rights: Promotion and Protection. Anmol Publications PVT. LTD. ISBN 812612119X.
• Cook, Rebecca J.; Fathalla, Mahmoud F. (September 1996). "Advancing Reproductive Rights Beyond Cairo and Beijing". International Family Planning Perspectives Vol.22 (No.3): p.115-121
• Davenport, Christian (2007a). State Repression and the Domestic Democratic Peace. New York: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0521864909
• Davenport, Christian (2007b). State Repression and Political Order. Annual Review of Political Science.
• Donnelly, Jack. (2003). Universal Human Rights in Theory & Practice. 2nd ed. Ithaca & London: Cornell University Press. ISBN 0801487765
• Ellerman, David (2005). Helping People Help Themselves: From the World Bank to an Alternative Philosophy of Development Assistance. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. ISBN 0472031422
• Esposito, John L. (2004). The Oxford Dictionary of Islam. Oxford University Press. ISBN 0195125592
• Esposito, John L. (2005). Islam: The Staight Path. Oxford University Press. ISBN 0195182669
• Finnis, John (1980). Natural Law and Natural Rights Oxford: Clarendon Press. ISBN 0198761104
• Forsythe, David P. (2000). Human Rights in International Relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. International Progress Organization. ISBN 3-900704-08-2
• Forsythe, David P. (2005). The Humanitarians: The International Committee of the Red Cross Cambidge University Press. ISBN 0521848288
• Freedman, Lynn P.; Isaacs, Stephen L. (Jan-Feb 1993). "Human Rights and Reproductive Choice". Studies in Family Planning Vol.24 (No.1): p.18-30
• Ignatieff, Michael (2001). Human Rights as Politics and Idolatry. Princeton & Oxford: Princeton University Press. ISBN 0691088934
• Glendon, Mary Ann (2001). A World Made New: Eleanor Roosevelt and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Random House of Canada Ltd. ISBN 0375506926
• Haddad, Yvonne Yazbeck; Esposito, John L. (1998) Islam, Gender, and Social Change. Oxford University Press US. ISBN 0195113578
• Hitchens, Christopher (2002). The Trial of Henry Kissinger. Verso. ISBN 1859843980
• Houghton Miffin Company (2006). The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language. Houghton Miffin. ISBN 0618701737
• Jaffa, Harry V. (1979). Thomism and Aristotelianism; A Study of the Commentary by Thomas Aquinas on the Nicomachean Ethics Greenwood Press. ISBN 0313211493 (reprint of 1952 edition published by University of Chicago Press)
• Jahn, Beate (2005). "Barbarian thoughts: imperialism in the philosophy of John Stuart Mill". Review of International Studies 13-06-2005 31: 599-618 Cambridge University Press
• Jones, Lindsay. Encyclopedia of religion, second edition. ISBN 0-02-865742-X
• Joseph, Suad; Najmabadi, Afsaneh (eds) (2007). Encyclopedia of Women & Islamic Cultures. Brill Publishing. ISBN 9004128182
• Kennedy, Duncan (1982). Legal Education and the Reproduction of Hierarchy. Journal of Legal Education Vol.32 (No. 591)
• Khadduri, Majid (1978). "Marriage in Islamic Law: The Modernist Viewpoints". American Journal of Comparative Law Vol. 26 (No. 2): pp. 213-218.
• Köchler, Hans (1981). The Principles of International Law and Human Rights. hanskoechler.com
• Köchler, Hans. (1990). "Democracy and Human Rights". Studies in International Relations, XV. Vienna: International Progress Organization.
• Kohen, Ari (2007). In Defense of Human Rights: A Non-Religious Grounding in a Pluralistic World. Routledge. ISBN 0415420156 , ISBN 978-0415420150
• Landman, Todd (2006). Studying Human Rights. Oxford and London: Routledge ISBN 0-415-32605-2
• Lewis, Bernard (1992). Race and Slavery in the Middle East: An Historical Enquiry. Oxford University Press. ISBN 0195053265
• Lewis, Bernard (21 January 1998). "Islamic Revolution". The New York Review of Books Vol.34 (Nos. 21 & 22)
• Light, Donald W. (2002). "A Conservative Call For Universal Access To Health Care" Penn Bioethics Vol.9 (No.4) p.4-6
• Littman, David (1999). "Universal Human Rights and 'Human Rights in Islam'". Midstream Magazine Vol. 2 (no.2) pp. 2-7
• Maan, Bashir; McIntosh, Alastair (1999). "Interview with William Montgomery Watt" The Coracle Vol. 3 (No. 51) pp. 8-11.
• Mayer, Henry (2000). All on Fire: William Lloyd Garrison and the Abolition of Slavery. St Martin's Press. ISBN 0312253672
• McAuliffe, Jane Dammen (ed) (2005). Encyclopaedia of the Qur'an: vol 1-5 Brill Publising. ISBN 9004147438. ISBN 978-9004147430
• McLagan, Meg (2003) "Principles, Publicity, and Politics: Notes on Human Rights Media". American Anthropologist. Vol. 105 (No. 3). pp. 605-612
• Hershock, Peter D; Ames, R.T.; Stepaniants, M. (eds). Technology and Cultural Values on the Edge of the Third Millennium. (Selected papers from the 8 th East-West Philosophers Conference). Honolulu: U of Hawai’i Press, 2003. 209-221.
  • Möller, Hans-Georg (2003). How to Distinguish Friends from Enemies: Human Rights Rhetoric and Western Mass Media.
• Nathwani, Niraj (2003). Rethinking Refugee Law. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. ISBN 9041120025
• Paul, Ellen Frankel; Miller, Fred Dycus; Paul, Jeffrey (eds) (2001). Natural Law and Modern Moral Philosophy Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0521794609
• Clayton, Philip; Schloss, Jeffrey (2004). Evolution and Ethics: Human Morality in Biological and Religious Perspective Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing. ISBN 0802826954
• Robertson, Arthur Henry; Merrills, John Graham (1996). Human Rights in the World: An Introduction to the Study of the International Protection of Human Rights. Manchester University Press. ISBN 0719049237.
• Salevao, Lutisone (2005). Rule of Law, Legitimate Governance and Develoment in the Pacific. ANU E Press. ISBN 1920942556
• Scott, C. (1989). "The Interdependence and Permeability of Human Rights Norms: Towards a Partial Fusion of the International Covenants on Human Rights". Osgood Law Journal Vol. 27
• Sills, David L. (1968, 1972) International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. MacMillan.
• Shellens, Max Salomon. 1959. "Aristotle on Natural Law." Natural Law Forum 4, no. 1. Pp. 72–100.
• Schimmel, Annemarie (1992). Islam: An Introduction. SUNY Press. ISBN 0791413276
• Sen, Amartya (1997). Human Rights and Asian Values. ISBN 0-87641-151-0.
• Shute, Stephen & Hurley, Susan (eds.). (1993). On Human Rights: The Oxford Amnesty Lectures. New York: BasicBooks. ISBN 046505224X
• Steiner, J. & Alston, Philip. (1996). International Human Rights in Context: Law, Politics, Morals. Oxford: Clarendon Press. ISBN 019825427X
• Sunga, Lyal S. (1992) Individual Responsibility in International Law for Serious Human Rights Violations, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. ISBN 0792314530
• Tahir-ul-Qadri, Muhammad (2005), Huquq al Insania fil Islam (Human Rights in Islam). Minhaj Publishers. 365-M-Model
• Tierney, Brian (1997). The Idea of Natural Rights: Studies on Natural Rights, Natural Law, and Church Law. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing. ISBN 0802848540
• Tunick, Mark (2006). "Tolerant Imperialism: John Stuart Mill's Defense of British Rule in India". The Review of Politics 27-10-2006 68: 586-611 Cambridge University Press
• Vaughn, Karen I. (1978) "John Locke and the Labor Theory of Value" Journal of Libertarian Studies. Vol. 2 (No. 4) pp.311-326

External links

• United Nations- Universal Declaration of Human Rights
• United Nations- Human Rights
• Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights
• The Universal Human Rights Index of United Nations documents

• Human rights
• Law
• Philosophy
• Culture
• Society
• Politics
• Economics
• International relations