Human Rights and Practices (Study Material)

 Human Rights and Practices

Origin of Human Rights on International Level

Mesopotamia: A long time ago, in a place called Mesopotamia, there were some basic rules that people followed to keep things fair and peaceful. One famous set of rules was written down by a king named Hammurabi. It was called the Code of Hammurabi. This code had rules for things like buying and selling, taking care of families, and making sure everyone was treated fairly. For example, if someone hurt another person, they would get punished, but the punishment couldn't be worse than the harm they caused. This code also protected people who were weak or in need, like widows and orphans, making sure they were treated fairly.

Egypt: In ancient Egypt, they had a belief called "ma'at," which meant living in a balanced and fair way. It was like a guide for how to treat others and live a good life. They believed in things like honesty, fairness, and treating others kindly. There were also writings called the "Instructions of Amenemope," which talked about being a good person and doing the right thing. These teachings helped shape how people in ancient Egypt thought about fairness and justice.

Greece: In ancient Greece, there were wise people called philosophers who liked to think and talk about important questions. They wondered about things like what makes a good life and how people should treat each other. Two famous philosophers were Plato and Aristotle. Plato wrote a book called the Republic, where he imagined a perfect society where everyone was treated fairly and had equal opportunities. Aristotle wrote about ethics, which is about what's right and wrong. He believed that being fair and kind to others was key to living a good life.

Rome: In ancient Rome, they had a big empire with lots of rules and laws. They believed in having written laws that everyone had to follow. One important set of laws was called the Twelve Tables. These laws covered many aspects of life, like property rights, family matters, and how to deal with criminals. They wanted to make sure that everyone, no matter how rich or poor, was treated fairly under the law.

The Magna Carta: In England in the year 1215, there was a document called the Magna Carta. It was like a contract between the king and the nobles. The Magna Carta said that even the king had to follow certain rules and couldn't do whatever he wanted. It protected the rights of the nobles and gave them a say in how the country was run. This was a big step towards having laws that applied to everyone, not just the rulers.

These ancient ideas and documents were the beginnings of what we now call human rights. They helped shape the way we think about fairness, justice, and treating others with respect. The Magna Carta was a very important document made in England a long time ago, in the year 1215. It was like a big agreement between the king of England and a group of powerful nobles. The nobles were unhappy with the king because he was doing things they didn't like, such as raising taxes too high and treating them unfairly.

So, they got together and forced the king to agree to the Magna Carta. This document said that even the king had to follow certain rules and couldn't just do whatever he wanted. It protected the rights of the nobles and gave them more say in how the country was run. It also said that everyone, including the king, had to obey the law and couldn't be punished unfairly.

The Magna Carta was a big deal because it was one of the first times that a ruler's power was limited by law. It helped set the stage for modern ideas about rights and freedoms, and it's seen as an important step towards the development of democracy and the rule of law.

Time period

Mesopotamia: The Code of Hammurabi, originating from ancient Mesopotamia, was created around 1754 BCE during the Babylonian Empire.

Egypt: The teachings of ma'at and texts like the Instructions of Amenemope are from ancient Egypt, dating back to the New Kingdom period (around 1550–1070 BCE).

Greece: The philosophical discussions of Plato and Aristotle took place during ancient Greece's Classical period, roughly from the 5th to the 4th century BCE.

Rome: The Twelve Tables, foundational laws of ancient Rome, were created around 450 BCE during the Roman Republic era.

The Magna Carta: The Magna Carta was signed in 1215 CE in England, during the medieval period.

These time periods span thousands of years, from ancient civilizations to medieval Europe, showing the evolution of ideas about fairness, justice, and the rights of individuals over time.

The Cyrus Cylinder (539 B.C.): The Cyrus Cylinder is a very old clay object with some writing on it. It was made around 539 B.C., which is a really, really long time ago. It was created by a powerful leader named Cyrus the Great.

Here's the special event: Cyrus conquered a place called Babylon, and after he won, he wrote down some rules on the cylinder. These rules were kind of like a promise to treat the people he conquered fairly and nicely. He said they could practice their own religions and go back to their homes if they wanted to. This was a big deal because usually when people won wars back then, they were really mean to the people they beat.

So, the Cyrus Cylinder is important because it shows that even thousands of years ago, some leaders believed in treating people with respect and letting them have their own beliefs and freedoms. It's one of the earliest examples of standing up for human rights and being fair to everyone, no matter where they come from or what they believe in.

United States Declaration of Independence (1776):

This was a document written by American colonists to declare their independence from British rule.

It stated that all people have certain "unalienable rights," including life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

The Declaration of Independence emphasized that governments should protect these rights, and if they fail to do so, the people have the right to change or abolish the government.

Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen (1789):

This document was adopted during the French Revolution and influenced by the ideas of the Enlightenment.

It stated that all men are born free and equal in rights, and it declared the rights of citizens to liberty, property, security, and resistance to oppression.

The Declaration of the Rights of Man aimed to establish the principles of equality, justice, and individual liberty as the foundation of government.

English Bill of Rights (1689):

This was a landmark document in England that limited the powers of the monarchy and established the rights of Parliament and the people.

It affirmed the right to petition the government, the right to bear arms for self-defense, and protections against excessive bail and cruel and unusual punishment.

The English Bill of Rights laid the groundwork for constitutional monarchy and the rule of law in England.

US Constitution and Bill of Rights (1791):

 

The US Constitution is the supreme law of the United States, establishing the framework of government and protecting individual rights.

The Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments to the Constitution, guarantees fundamental rights such as freedom of speech, religion, and the press, as well as the right to a fair trial and protection against unreasonable searches and seizures.

These documents reflect the principles of democracy, rule of law, and protection of individual liberties that are central to the American political system.

Together, these documents played a crucial role in shaping the concept of human rights, emphasizing the importance of individual freedoms, equality before the law, and limitations on government power. They have served as models for subsequent declarations and constitutions around the world.

Origin of Human Rights on National Level

Ancient India:

 

In ancient India, the concept of human rights was deeply rooted in the country's cultural and philosophical heritage. Ancient texts such as the Vedas, Upanishads, and epics like the Ramayana and Mahabharata emphasized principles of righteousness, non-violence, and equality. The idea of dharma, which encompassed moral and ethical duties, promoted the well-being of all beings and advocated for treating others with respect and compassion. King Ashoka, during his reign, implemented policies that prioritized social welfare and religious tolerance, setting an early example of a ruler upholding human rights.

 

Medieval India:

 

During the medieval period, India witnessed the rule of various dynasties, including the Mughals. While there were advancements in areas like art, architecture, and governance, the concept of human rights faced challenges under certain rulers. However, rulers like Akbar promoted religious tolerance and social justice through policies like Din-E-Ilahi. Despite these efforts, the rights of individuals were sometimes compromised due to political instability and conflicts.

 

Modern India:

 

The modern period in India was marked by British colonial rule, which significantly impacted the concept of human rights. The struggle for independence led by figures like Mahatma Gandhi emphasized principles of non-violence, civil disobedience, and social justice. India's Constitution, adopted in 1950, enshrined fundamental rights such as equality before the law, freedom of speech and expression, and protection against discrimination. Additionally, various legislative measures have been enacted to address social issues and protect the rights of marginalized communities.

 

Key Provisions and Legislative Measures:

 

India's Constitution incorporates principles of human rights outlined in international agreements and treaties. Legislative measures such as the Protection of Human Rights Act, National Commission for Minorities Act, and Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act aim to safeguard human rights and promote social justice. These laws reflect India's commitment to upholding human rights standards and ensuring equality and dignity for all its citizens.

 

In summary, the concept of human rights in India has evolved over time, influenced by cultural traditions, historical events, and legal frameworks. It remains a cornerstone of Indian democracy, emphasizing the principles of equality, justice, and dignity for all individuals.

Development of Human Rights in Contemporary India

The Constitution of India, particularly in Part III, embodies a comprehensive set of fundamental rights accessible to Indian citizens. This approach aimed to translate the principles laid out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) into legally enforceable rights within the country. Articles 14-30 in Part III delineate various rights for citizens, while Part IV incorporates Directive Principles, which provide additional guidelines for the state to ensure the welfare of its people.

Initially, the judiciary in India took a rigid approach in handling cases. However, over time, there was a shift towards a more flexible and subjective approach, epitomized by the concept of “Audi Alteram Partem.” "listen to the other side" or "let the other side be heard as well". This shift is particularly evident in the interpretation of Article 21, which pertains to the Right to Life and Personal Liberty.

Several landmark judgments offer insights into the history and development of human rights in contemporary India:

 

In the case of A.K. Gopalan v State of Madras, the interpretation of Article 21 was narrowly construed, almost reducing the right to life to mere animal existence. However, the pivotal case of Maneka Gandhi v Union of India expanded the scope of Article 21, linking it to other fundamental rights such as equality and freedom, thereby broadening the concept of the Right to Life to include an individual’s culture, tradition, and protection against potential rights violations.

 

Similarly, in the case of Kharak Singh v State of UP, the question of including the Right to Privacy under Article 21 was debated. The petitioner argued against the recording of detained individuals' names, citing it as an infringement of privacy rights.

 

In D.K. Basu v State of Bengal, a case dealing with custodial deaths, the Supreme Court laid down guidelines for the treatment of detainees, highlighting the need to safeguard human rights, particularly in vulnerable situations like police custody.

The case of Olga Tellis v Bombay Municipal Corporation further linked the Right to Life with the Right to Livelihood, emphasizing that livelihood is integral to an individual’s quality of life and should not be separated from the Right to Life.

India's Constitution also prioritizes the welfare of women and children, as evidenced by significant cases such as:

In Unni Krishnan v State of AP, compulsory primary education for children was established, reflecting the commitment to education as a fundamental right.

In the People’s Union of Civil Liberties v Union of India case, child laborers were immediately released with compensation, addressing the exploitation of children.

In Public at Large v State of Maharashtra, measures were taken to protect children from sexual exploitation, underscoring the importance of safeguarding vulnerable populations.

In Vishaka v State of Rajasthan, guidelines were established to prevent sexual harassment of women in the workplace, highlighting the need to ensure a safe and equal work environment.

In recent times, landmark cases like Naz Foundation v Govt. of NCT of Delhi have reaffirmed the judiciary’s commitment to upholding human rights. The striking down of Section 377, which criminalized consensual homosexual relationships, and the recognition of women’s Right to Religion in the Sabarimala case are significant milestones in protecting individual freedoms and promoting equality.

Despite these advancements, challenges persist, particularly in regions like Jammu and Kashmir, where human rights violations have been reported. The government's actions, such as the revocation of the region's special status and subsequent restrictions, have raised concerns about arbitrary arrests and limitations on freedoms.

The Protection of Human Rights Act (PHRA) advocates for the establishment of Human Rights Commissions at both the Central and State levels, empowering these bodies to address violations and ensure justice. However, the effectiveness of these commissions has been debated, with calls for greater accountability and action in addressing ongoing human rights issues.

In conclusion, while India has made significant strides in advancing human rights, there remain challenges that require continued vigilance and action to protect the rights and dignity of all individuals.

 

Human Rights: Rights and Duties

International Human Rights: Balancing Rights and Duties

The concept of human rights is often understood as a set of inherent entitlements that every individual possesses simply by virtue of being human. These rights are regarded as universal, meaning they apply to everyone regardless of their background, beliefs, or any other status. However, the relationship between rights and duties is a complex and multifaceted one, with various perspectives on how these concepts should be balanced.

Arguments for the Interdependence of Rights and Duties:

• Respecting the Rights of Others: One of the core arguments in favor of linking rights and duties is that enjoying our own rights hinges on respecting the rights of others. For instance, the right to freedom of expression cannot exist without the corresponding duty to respect the dignity and reputation of others.

Opens in a new windowwww.wkrg.com

Group of people holding signs and chanting slogans at a human rights protest

• Promoting Social Responsibility: Recognizing duties alongside rights fosters a sense of social responsibility and encourages individuals to consider how their actions impact others and the community as a whole. This can contribute to building a more just and equitable society.
• Preventing Misuse of Rights: Framing rights within the context of duties can help prevent their misuse or exploitation. For example, the right to freedom of assembly does not justify inciting violence or hatred against others.

Arguments for Distinguishing Rights and Duties:

• Focus on Individual Rights: Some argue that emphasizing duties can detract from the core focus of human rights, which is to protect the fundamental rights and freedoms of individuals. They believe that duties should be seen as arising from respecting these rights, rather than being prerequisites for enjoying them.
• Potential for Abuse: Linking duties too closely to rights can create a situation where individuals are denied their rights based on perceived failures to fulfill their duties. This can be particularly problematic in contexts where power imbalances exist.
• Cultural Specificity: The concept of duties can vary significantly across different cultures and societies. Imposing a universal set of duties alongside rights can risk overlooking these cultural variations and potentially infringing on cultural rights.

Finding the Balance:

The relationship between rights and duties remains an ongoing debate within human rights discourse. There is no easy answer, as the appropriate balance will likely vary depending on the specific context and rights in question. However, recognizing the interconnectedness of these concepts is crucial for promoting a comprehensive understanding of human rights and their effective implementation in the real world.

Here are some additional points to consider:

• The language used to describe duties is important. Instead of framing them as obligations or restrictions, they can be presented as positive contributions to a just and peaceful society.
• Open and inclusive dialogue involving diverse perspectives is essential for finding a balanced approach that respects both individual rights and collective well-being.
• The specific duties associated with different rights may need to be carefully defined and contextualized to avoid potential for misuse or infringement on other rights.

By fostering a nuanced understanding of the relationship between rights and duties, we can work towards a future where human rights are upheld and protected for all.

Defining Rights and Duties in International Human Rights Law

International Human Rights Law (IHRL) forms the foundation for global understanding and protection of individual rights. It recognizes a wide range of inherent, inalienable rights and duties, shaping perspectives on their relationship.

Core Human Rights:

IHRL documents like the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and various human rights treaties define and protect civil and political rights, economic, social, and cultural rights, and collective rights. Some key examples include:

Civil and Political Rights:

• Right to life, liberty, and security of person
• Freedom from torture and cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment
• Freedom from slavery and forced labor
• Right to freedom of expression, opinion, and assembly
• Right to privacy

Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights:

• Right to adequate standard of living, food, and housing
• Right to work and fair working conditions
• Right to education and access to cultural life
• Right to health and social security

Collective Rights:

• Right to self-determination
• Right to development
• Right to peace

Corresponding Duties:

While IHRL emphasizes individual rights, it also acknowledges corresponding duties. These are not explicitly outlined in every document but emerge from principles like respect for others, social responsibility, and contributing to a just society. Some examples include:

• Duty to respect the rights of others: Exercising your right to free speech doesn't justify hate speech or inciting violence.
• Duty to contribute to society: Enjoying the right to education comes with the responsibility to participate actively in learning and civic life.
• Duty to protect the environment: The right to a healthy environment necessitates responsible utilization of resources and sustainability efforts.

Balancing Rights and Duties:

Finding the perfect balance between rights and duties is complex and ongoing. IHRL strives to:

• Protect individual rights as the foundation for human dignity and freedom.
• Promote social responsibility through duties that contribute to a just and peaceful society.
• Avoid imposing undue restrictions on rights under the guise of duties.

Importance of Context:

Understanding the specific context and cultural nuances is crucial. Duties associated with rights may vary across situations, cultures, and evolving interpretations of IHRL.

Example: Freedom of assembly carries the duty to conduct it peacefully. However, defining "peaceful" might differ in societies with diverse histories and political struggles.

Continuous Dialogue:

Open and inclusive dialogue with diverse perspectives is essential for navigating the intricate relationship between rights and duties in IHRL. By acknowledging complexities and fostering understanding, we can work towards a future where individual rights are upheld alongside collective well-being.

Remember: This is a broad overview. Specific rights and duties can have detailed nuances and limitations outlined in specific IHRL documents and interpretations.

 

Human Rights perspective define Relationship between Rights and Duties

The relationship between rights and duties in the international human rights perspective is complex and multifaceted, with differing interpretations and ongoing discussions. Here's a breakdown of key points:

Interdependence:

• Complementary roles: Many view rights and duties as inseparable. Enjoying your rights without respecting others' rights creates imbalance. For example, freedom of speech comes with the duty to avoid hate speech.
• Promoting responsibility: Recognizing duties fosters social responsibility, encouraging individuals to consider their actions' impact on others and contribute to a just society.
• Preventing misuse: Duties can prevent rights' misuse or exploitation. Freedom of assembly doesn't justify inciting violence.

Distinction:

• Focus on individual rights: Some argue duties shouldn't overshadow the core focus of protecting individual rights and freedoms. Duties should arise from respecting these rights, not be prerequisites for enjoying them.
• Potential for abuse: Linking duties too closely to rights could create situations where individuals are denied rights based on perceived failures to fulfill duties, especially in contexts with power imbalances.
• Cultural sensitivity: Duties vary across cultures. Imposing a universal set of duties might disregard cultural values and infringe on cultural rights.

Balance and Nuance:

• Context matters: The appropriate balance between rights and duties depends on the specific context and rights in question.
• Language matters: Framing duties as positive contributions to a just society encourages participation rather than viewing them as restrictions.
• Open dialogue: Continuous dialogue with diverse perspectives is crucial to finding a balance that respects both individual rights and collective well-being.
• Careful definition: Duties associated with different rights need careful definition and contextualization to avoid misuse or infringement on other rights.

International Human Rights Law (IHRL):

• Core rights: IHRL documents like the UDHR and human rights treaties define and protect various rights across civil, political, economic, social, cultural, and collective domains.
• Corresponding duties: While not explicitly outlined, duties like respecting others' rights, contributing to society, and protecting the environment emerge from principles like respect, responsibility, and justice.
• Focus on upholding individual rights: The primary aim of IHRL is to protect individual rights as the foundation for human dignity and freedom.
• Promoting social responsibility: IHRL encourages responsible social behavior through implicit and explicit duties within its framework.
• Avoiding undue restrictions: IHRL strives to balance rights protection with avoiding excessive restrictions on rights under the guise of duties.

Remember: This is a broad overview. Specific rights and duties can have detailed nuances and limitations outlined in specific IHRL documents and interpretations. The relationship between rights and duties remains an ongoing discussion within the human rights field, with no one-size-fits-all answer. Recognizing its complexity and fostering thoughtful analysis are crucial for upholding human rights in a nuanced and meaningful way.