GP - Unit 2

Human Rights
Syllabus - website for notes ( has 12 lessons- fully done) - [Link]
[Link]

-
 CONTENT

Nature and evolution of human rights Definitions of human rights

• Notions such as inalienability, universality, indivisibility, equality, justice, liberty

The UN’s The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948), Developments in human rights over time and space

• Human rights milestones, eg civil and political rights, economic, social and cultural rights, gender rights, children’s rights, indigenous people’s
rights, refugee rights

• Internationalization of human rights, eg universal jurisdiction, international humanitarian law, Human rights laws and treaties
 Human Rights and the Core Topics

Sovereignty is not the only core topic relevant to our study of Rights and Justice; power, legitimacy, and interdependence also play important roles.

Power
Those who hold political power have the authority to create, enforce, and interpret laws that define and protect human rights. The nature of political
power often determines the extent to which rights are upheld or violated within a society. The application of justice, including judicial processes and law
enforcement, relies on political power. For justice to be fair and effective, those in power must act with integrity and without bias.

Legitimacy
A legitimate government is more likely to be respected by its citizens and the international community, enhancing its ability to protect human rights.
Conversely, a lack of legitimacy can lead to resistance and human rights abuses. Legitimacy also ensures that the justice system is trusted and accepted
by the population. When people believe in the legitimacy of their legal and political institutions, they are more likely to support and comply with laws and
judicial decisions related to human rights.

Interdependence
Human rights issues in one country can affect others, prompting international cooperation and intervention. For instance, global human rights
organizations rely on interdependence to address violations and promote universal standards. Interdependence also facilitates international justice
through treaties, agreements, and institutions. It allows for the sharing of good practices, resources, and support in implementing justice across borders.
For example, international courts and tribunals depend on the cooperation of multiple states to function effectively.
The way in which the core topics are intertwined is exemplified well in the context of the United Nations Human Rights Council. The UNHRC exemplifies
how political power, legitimacy, sovereignty, and interdependence converge. The Council, comprised of sovereign states, uses its political power to
address human rights issues. Its legitimacy stems from international recognition and adherence to human rights norms. The interdependent nature of
states within the UNHRC facilitates cooperation and accountability in human rights protection.
 Nature and evolution of human rights

Definitions of human rights

• Notions such as inalienability, universality, indivisibility,

equality, justice, liberty

The UN’s The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948),

CONTENT Developments in human rights over time and space

• Human rights milestones, eg civil and political rights,

economic, social and cultural rights, gender rights,
children’s rights, indigenous people’s rights, refugee rights

• Internationalization of human rights, eg universal

jurisdiction, international humanitarian law, Human rights
laws and treaties
Human rights are considered by many to be the natural or moral entitlement to
do, have, or be free from something. Human rights are commonly considered
to be universal, meaning that they are applicable to all humans, regardless of
culture. There are two types of human rights.

Positive rights refer to things that humans should have or be given. They
often require an outside agency or entity to provide a service (e.g. the state).
These are typically entitlements, like healthcare, education and food.

Negative rights refer to things that humans should be free from. They
discourage, limit or prevent the actions of an outside agency (e.g. government,
other humans) that cause harm to a person. These are typically freedoms, like
speech, security, and mobility.
• Human rights are moral principles or norms, which describe certain standards of human behavior,
and are regularly protected as legal rights in municipal and international law.
• Whereas 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...
— 1st sentence of the Preamble to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
• All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.
— Article 1 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights

NT
E
E

L
L
I

U
I
BL

DE

SA
AB

I
SI

EN

ER
N
VI

IE

EP

IV
DI

AL

UN
RD
IN

IN

1 1 2

TE
3
IN
 Indivisibility (means no hierarchy in status of rights)
• The principle of their indivisibility recognizes that no human right is inherently inferior to any other.
Economic, social and cultural rights must be respected, protected and realized on an equal footing with
civil and political rights.
• The principle of their interdependence recognizes the difficulty (and, in many cases, the impossibility) of
realizing any one human right in isolation. For instance, it is futile to talk of the right to work without a
certain minimal realization of the right to education. Similarly, the right to vote may seem of little
importance to somebody with nothing to eat or in situations where people are victimized because of their
skin colour, sex, language or religion.
• Taken together, the indivisibility and interdependence principles mean that efforts should be made to
realize all human rights together
• 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 indivisibility and interdependence of all human rights has been confirmed by the 1993 Vienna
Declaration and Programme of Action:
All human rights are universal, indivisible and interdependent and related. The international community
must treat human rights globally in a fair and equal manner, on the same footing, and with the same
emphasis.
— Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action, World Conference on Human Rights, 1993
This statement was again endorsed at the 2005 World Summit in New York (paragraph 121).
Justice
John Rawls – Theory of Justice

● Central Idea: Justice as fairness.

● Original Position & Veil of Ignorance:
○ Imagine designing society without knowing your place in it.
○ Ensures impartiality and fairness.
● Two Principles of Justice:
○ Equal basic liberties for all (freedom of speech, religion, political participation).
○ Social and economic inequalities are acceptable only if:
○ They benefit the least advantaged (Difference Principle).
○ Positions are open to all under fair equality of opportunity.
● Goal: Create a system where fairness overrides luck of birth or social status.

The Difference Principle is Rawls’ way of reconciling inequality with fairness: society can allow differences in
wealth and power, but only if those differences lift up the least advantaged. It’s a principle designed to make sure
that no one is left behind, even in a competitive system.

Eg. Progressive Taxation: Higher earners pay more taxes, which fund welfare programs. For example, Scandinavian
countries use steep progressive taxes to finance universal education and healthcare.
Nozick’s View on Justice

● Entitlement Theory: Justice depends on whether holdings (property, wealth) are acquired and
transferred fairly. If so, any resulting distribution—no matter how unequal—is just.
● Three Principles:
1. Justice in acquisition – how people first acquire holdings (e.g., land, resources).
2. Justice in transfer – voluntary exchange or gifts.
3. Rectification of injustice – correcting past wrongs (e.g., theft, fraud).
● Minimal State: Nozick defends a “night-watchman” state limited to protecting individuals
against force, theft, and fraud. Any state that goes beyond this (e.g., redistributing wealth) violates
rights.
● Critique of Redistribution: Taxation for redistributive purposes is likened to forced labor, since
it takes the fruits of someone’s labor without consent.

[Link] Charity: Philanthropy by individuals (e.g., Bill Gates donating to global health causes) is
just because it’s voluntary, unlike taxation. Rectification of Injustice: Land restitution programs (e.g.,
returning property to Indigenous communities) align with Nozick’s principle of correcting past wrongs.
Lets Lock’e’ it in
Describe John Rawls’ thought experiment, the “veil of
ignorance”. How does this relate to the concept of justice(in
connection to Human rights)?

Reflection: What theory of justice do you agree with the

most? Do you agree more with John Rawls or with Robert
Nozick? Explain your answer with some reasons.
 Different Perspectives on Rights

LIBERALISM
There are rights we possess simply because we are human. Human rights exist
independently of whether or not society accepts them. This is a traditional view of rights,
and the UDHR exemplifies this school of thought. This viewpoint is very much concerned
with the rights of the individual. Liberals see laws and codification as essential methods for
ensuring that human rights are met.
Marxists
tend to reject the idea of 'natural rights' and see our conception of human rights as coming
from social agreements. They argue that capitalism is a system designed to maximize
profit at the expense of workers' rights. Modern human rights instruments make no attempt
to change the structural causes of abuse and exploitation in a capitalist society.
‘Human rights have purely instrumental value in the political culture; they provide a useful tool
for propaganda, nothing more.’
Noam Chomsky, 'The possibility of humanitarian intervention’
 16TH-18TH CENTURY
• As the reformation caught on and ecclesiastical authority was shaken and challenged by
rationalism, political philosophers argued for new bases of natural right.
• Thomas Hobbes posed the first major assault in 1651 on the divine basis of natural right by
describing a State of Nature in which God did not seem to play any role.
• However, the divine basis of natural right was still pursued for more than a century after Hobbes
published his Leviathan.
• 17th-century English philosopher John Locke discussed natural rights.
• In Britain in 1689, the English Bill of Rights made illegal a range of oppressive governmental
actions.
• John Locke wrote a strong defence of natural rights in the late 17th century with the publication
of his Two Treatises on Government, but his arguments were filled with references to what God
had ordained or given to mankind.
• Locke had a lasting influence on political discourse that was reflected in both the American
Declaration of Independence and France's Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen,
passed by the Republican Assembly after the revolution in 1789.
• The French declaration proclaimed 17 rights as "the natural, inalienable and sacred rights of
man".
• The issue of universal rights was introduced by Spanish clerics, such as Francisco de Vitoria
and Bartolomé de Las Casas.
• In the Valladolid debate, argued with Las Casas, who argued in favour of equal rights to
freedom from slavery for all humans regardless of race or religion.

• Marx denounced rights as a fabrication of bourgeois society, in which the individual was
divorced from his or her society; rights were needed in capitalist states in order to provide
protection from the state.
• Two major revolutions, in the United States (1776) and in France (1789), leading to the United
States Declaration of Independence and the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the
Citizen respectively.
•
Thomas Hobbes and John Locke both lived through some of the most difficult times
in English history. The English Civil War, the Interregnum and Glorious Revolution,
and the Restoration all happened during their lifetimes. In their adolescence and
young adulthood, both men experienced firsthand the instability of social
institutions. They saw the speed with which political systems may crumble. They
witnessed the ease with which an ancient nation may plunge into violence.

Their personal life experiences also impacted Hobbes' and Locke's political views.
Both men came from families of modest means and both studied at the famed Oxford
University. Despite these similarities, they would embrace very different views on
important issues, especially about human nature and the best and most appropriate
form of government.
Locke, Second Treatise of Government,Chapter II)
“The state of nature has a law of nature to govern it, which obliges every one: and reason, which is
that law, teaches all mankind, who will but consult it, that being all equal and independent, no one
ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty, or possessions: for men being all the workmanship
of one omnipotent, and infinitely wise maker; all the servants of one sovereign master, sent into the
world by his order, and about his business; they are his property, whose workmanship they are,
made to last during his, not one another’s pleasure: and being furnished with like faculties,
sharing all in one community of nature, there cannot be supposed any such subordination among
us, that may authorize us to destroy one another… Every one, as he is bound to preserve himself,
and not to quit his station wilfully, so by the like reason, when his own preservation comes not in
competition, ought he, as much as he can, to preserve the rest of mankind, and may not, unless it be
to do justice on an offender, take away, or impair the life, or what tends to the preservation of the
life, the liberty, health, limb, or goods of another”
1. According to Locke, who enforces natural law in the state of nature?
2. In Locke’s view, what are the differences between the state of nature and the state of war?
John Locke (1632–1704)
Two Treatises of Government

• 17th century England saw escalating conflicts between the monarchy and the Parliament that resulted in
bloody civil wars. It was also a period characterised by religious tensions between rival Christian
denominations of Protestants, Catholics and Anglicans. In 1649 CE, the then monarch Charles I was
defeated and executed by Parliamentarians. They established an English republic which survived till the
restoration of monarchy under Charles II in 1660 CE.
• This, however, did not end the conflict as the monarchy and the Parliament continued to clash till the
Glorious Revolution of 1688 CE which lasted from 1688 CE to 1689 CE. It saw the overthrow of the
Catholic monarch James II who was replaced by his protestant daughter Mary and her husband William.
More importantly, the new monarch signed the Bill of Rights which gave the Parliament unprecedented
powers and this event is now generally considered as a key milestone in the establishment of a
Constitutional Monarchy in England.
• LOCKE is a central figure in Western liberal political philosophy.
1. men are by nature free and equal against claims that God had made all people naturally subject to a
monarch. He argued that people have rights, such as the right to life, liberty, and property that have a
foundation of independent of the laws of any particular society.
2. Locke used the claim that men are naturally free and equal as part of the justification for understanding
legitimate political government as the result of a social contract where people in the state of nature
conditionally transfer some of their rights to the government in order to better ensure the stable,
comfortable enjoyment of their lives, liberty, and property.
 Hobbes
Thomas Hobbes was born in 1588, the son of an Anglican vicar. After receiving his doctorate
from Oxford, he closely engaged with the English court. He worked with William Cavendish,
who would eventually serve as King Charles I's chief financier. Hobbes himself served for a time
as the mathematics tutor to the young prince and heir to the British throne, Charles II.

Hobbes' ties with the English court inspired his staunch royalist views. In fact, during the
interregnum period following the execution of Charles I and preceding Charles II's coronation
and the restoration of the British monarchy, Hobbes was forced to flee to Europe. England,
during this period, was not safe for royalists.

While in Europe, Hobbes continued to write philosophical and political works. Among the most
significant was his 1651 work, Leviathan. This book presented Hobbes' ideas on the state of
nature, on human nature, and on the power and authority of the monarchy.
 • Hobbes is the founder of the modern tradition of individual rights,
• the first philosopher to replace fully the concept of justice with the idea of rights
• however, some attribute Locke’s work as having more influence on the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights.
• Hobbes believed that the social contract meant investing some power in the hands of the ruler, whose
power would be used to protect his citizens' human rights.
• Hobbes believed that humans were to use their reason to leave the state of nature and submit to the
absolute authority of the monarch.

Unlike Hobbes,
Locke believed individuals are naturally endowed with these rights (to life, liberty, and
property)
Hence, in contrast to Hobbesian natural right,
1. Lockean natural rights framework imposes higher obligations on others and
2. gives less liberty for its holders, because of the existence of natural law.
Lockean natural rights of life, liberty and property are different from the Hobbesian natural right of
self-preservation in several ways. Hobbesian natural right does not impose any obligation on others
towards the holder of the right. This is so because Hobbes sees the state of nature as lawless with
no sovereign to enforce any obligation. In contrast, Locke argues that natural law obligates that all
respect each other’s natural rights.
HOBBES (1588–1679)- need for a sovereign authority to uphold order
LOCKE (1632–1704) - prioritized individual rights and the rule of law
ROUSSEAU(1712–78) - importance of the general will in determining what is just and fair
 THE NATURAL RIGHTS THEORY
● The idea that a person has some fundamental, inalienable rights in comparison to a sovereign
State has its roots in the principles of natural law and natural rights, even though the term “human
rights” has its origins in international law, which is not older than World War II.
● Three key thinkers—Thomas Hobbes (1588–1679), John Locke (1632–1704), and Jean-Jacques
Rousseau (1712–1778)—developed the Natural Rights doctrine.
● The ‘Natural rights’ thesis was initially defended by Thomas Hobbes. He argued that no person
should ever be denied the right to life, which he had in the state of nature, in his renowned work
“Leviathan.” He said that, without exception, all people are equal.
● The concept was expanded upon by John Locke in his work, “Two Treatises of Government.” Every
human being has an inherent right to life, personal liberty, and property, he claimed, and no
government has the ability to violate these rights because people have always enjoyed them
regardless of the development of civil or political society.
● The greatest teacher of the natural law school is recognized as Rousseau. Rousseau wrote in his
well-known book, “The Social Contract,” “All men are born free but they are everywhere in chains.”
Men have the unalienable rights to liberty, equality, and fraternity, according to Rousseau.
● The French Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen was based on these ideas.
● The notion of natural rights was created by American revolutionary Thomas Paine, who did not
connect it to the social contract theory. He believed that because God himself gave rights to man,
they are inalienable. These rights are legitimate regardless of any nation’s legal system.
 FRENCH
DECLARATION
• We hold these truths to be
self-evident, 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.
-Declaration of the Rights of
Man and of the Citizen
approved by the National
Assembly of France, August 26,
1789
 19th century
• In the 19th century, human rights became a central concern over the issue of slavery.

• British Member of Parliament William Wilberforce, worked towards the abolition of the
Atlantic slave trade and abolition of slavery. This was achieved across the British Empire by
the Slave Trade Act 1807 and the Slavery Abolition Act 1833.

• 13th amendment, banning slavery, the 14th amendment, assuring full citizenship and civil
rights to all people born in the United States, and the 15th amendment, guaranteeing
African Americans the right to vote.

• In 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.

• The establishment 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.
 20TH CENTURY
• The League of Nations was established in 1919 at the negotiations over the
Treaty of Versailles following the end of World War I.
• At the 1945 Yalta Conference, the Allied Powers agreed to create a new body to
supplant the League's role. This was to be the United Nations.
• The United Nations now make up international humanitarian law and
international human rights law.
• Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam:
The CDHR was signed by member states of the OIC in 1990 at the 19th
Conference of Foreign Ministers held in Cairo, Egypt.
"All men are equal in terms of basic human dignity and basic obligations and
responsibilities, without any discrimination on the basis of race, colour, language,
belief, sex, religion, political affiliation, social status or other considerations. True
religion is the guarantee for enhancing such dignity along the path to human
integrity.
 positive rights and negative rights
positive negative
● require action from others, particularly the ● "liberties," - require others to abstain from
government, to provide certain benefits or interfering with individual actions.
services to individuals. ● Negative rights refers to the freedom from certain
● The state must provide access to positive things, like slavery, torture, and suppression.
rights, like food, housing, education, and ● These rights emphasize freedom from interference
healthcare. and are often enshrined in constitutional
● Examples include: Right to Education: The frameworks. Examples include:
government must ensure access to education Freedom of Speech: The government cannot restrict
for all citizens. individuals from expressing their opinions.
Right to Healthcare: Individuals may have a claim Freedom of Religion: Individuals have the right to
to healthcare services provided by the government. practice their religion without government
● liberals argue that the role of the state should be interference.
limited to protecting negative rights. They reject the ● Liberalists assert that negative rights are
notion of positive rights, as it imposes obligations on fundamental to ensuring personal freedom and
individuals to act in ways that may infringe on their autonomy. They argue that these rights are
negative rights, effectively forcing them to provide essential for a functioning society where individuals
assistance or resources to others. This is seen as a can pursue their own interests without coercion or
violation of personal liberty, as it forces individuals interference from others.
to act against their will or judgment. ● Realists argue that negative rights, which require
the state to refrain from interfering with individual
freedoms, are essential for protecting individual
autonomy.
 Karel Vasak - The "Generation Theory of Human Rights"
categorizes human rights into three
generations:
1. civil and political rights (first
generation),
2. economic, social, and cultural rights
(second generation), and
3. collective rights such as the right to
development and a healthy
environment (third generation).

This framework has both strengths and

limitations, particularly in the context of
promoting human rights in the developing
world.
 CLASSIFICATION
• At an international level the most common categorisation of human rights
has been to split them into civil and political rights, and economic, social
and cultural rights.
• However, there are three major classifications:

indivisibility
classification

categorization

Three generations
Three generations of human rights - Karel Vasak in 1979

Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights

Civil and Political Right: Rights that Collective / Solidarity Rights
(Second Dimension):Ensuring dignity
protect individual freedoms and
and basic needs for all. (Third Dimension)-Rights of groups,
participation in political life.
communities, and humanity as a whole.
Purpose: Safeguard individuals against Purpose: Promote equality and guarantee
abuse of power by the state and ensure a decent standard of [Link] right Purpose: Address global challenges
democratic [Link] -needs state intervention and protect collective interests.
Rights -no state intervention
Examples: Examples:
Examples:
○ Right to work and fair ○ Right to
• Right to life and liberty
wages self-determination
• Freedom of speech and
expression ○ Right to education ○ Right to development
• Right to vote and participate in ○ Right to health care and ○ Right to peace
governance social security ○ Right to a healthy
• Freedom from torture, arbitrary ○ Right to housing, food, and environment
arrest, or discrimination
cultural participation
 Three Generations of Human Rights:
• First Generation: Focus primarily on Civil (rights possessed by the citizens of a country) and
Political (right to participate in the politics of the country) rights. Primarily negative rights.
• Second Generation: Focus on Social and Economic rights; eg. The right to safe working conditions,
wage equal pay, education etc. These are a combination of positive and negative rights.
• Third Generation: Rights relating to individual and collective identities (culture). Eg. the right to
pursue one's belief, practice any religion, protection against any form of discrimination etc. These are
primarily positive rights.
The Fourth Generation of Human Rights: point of a fourth generation of human rights is to protect
human life in light of ongoing technological innovation.
[Link]
 GENERATION THEORY OF HUMAN RIGHTS
First-generation rights include such as freedom of speech, the right
to a fair trial, freedom of religion and voting rights.
● process goes back to the Magna Carta of 1215 - Signed by
King John of England, this document limited royal power and
established the principle that even the king is subject to the law.
It introduced early concepts of due process and protection from
arbitrary detention.
● English Bill of Rights (1689) - A landmark document that
reinforced parliamentary supremacy over the monarchy and
granted rights such as free elections, free speech in Parliament,
and protection from excessive bail and fines.
● They were pioneered by the United States Bill of Rights and
● in France by the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the
Citizen in the 18th century,
● They were first enshrined at the global level by the 1948 UDHR,
given status in international law in Articles 3 to 21
● And in the ICCPR - International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights.
● When first generation human rights are limited, this directly
limits second generation rights. Improving first generation
rights is the "causal link from first generation human rights to
improved socio-economic outcomes
 First-generation rights
First-generation rights focus on the civil and political rights that protect individuals liberty
from the state (see page vi for liberty' explanation). They are predominantly negative rights,
where the state steps back from the private sphere of an individual's life and allows the
individual to enjoy basic rights such as the right to life, liberty and property. Such rights are
also called natural rights, meaning that they are central to what it means to be a human and
therefore are inalienable and cannot be taken away.

Articles 3 to 21 of the UDHR and the 1966 ICCPR (International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights) are the core first-generation, or civil and political,
They include the rights to:
• Article 3 - life, liberty and property
• Article 5 - freedom from torture, cruel and degrading treatment
• Article 18 - freedom of religion
• Article 7 - equality for everyone before the law
• Article 22- freedom from arbitrary arrest and detention.
 Second-Generation Human Rights
● Are mostly Positive Rights and require governments to provide free education, adequate healthcare
and to protect the right of equal pay.
● These rights are sometimes referred to as "red" rights.
● covered by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and further embodied in Articles 22
to 27 of the Universal Declaration, and the ICESCR (International Covenant on Economic,Social,
and Cultural Rights 1966)
● They impose upon the government the duty to respect and promote and fulfill them, but this depends
on the availability of resources.
● No one has the direct right to housing and right to education. (In South Africa, for instance, the
right is not, per se, to housing, but rather "to have access to adequate housing," realized on a
progressive basis.
● Second-generation human rights are related to equality in terms of having the equal access to the
resources and opportunity. It was begun after the end of the World War II. They are
fundamentally economic, social and cultural in nature.
● Secondary rights would include a right to be employed,rights to housing and health care, as well as
social security and unemployment benefits.
●
International legal Frameworks

These rights are incorporated into various national and international legal frameworks, including:

● Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR, 1948) – Articles 22 to 27 highlight socio-economic and cultural rights.
● International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR, 1966) – Legally binds signatory nations to
protect socio-economic rights.
● Indian Constitution (Directive Principles of State Policy – DPSPs, Articles 38-51) – These principles guide the state in
promoting welfare policies, education, health, and economic justice.
 Key concept: Equality

● Equality is the idea that people are treated the same, without discrimination, and are allowed to enjoy the same opportunities.
● Second-generation rights focus on the economic, social and cultural rights that allow citizens to flourish within the state.
● This means the state actively provides public services in order to deliver rights to which every human being is entitled. This
generation of rights is aimed at delivering equality of opportunity for each citizen
● Articles 22 to 27 of the Universal Declaration and the 1966 ICESCR - International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural
Rights set out the core second-generation, or economic, social and cultural, rights. They include the rights to:
• free education up to secondary level
• work and to equal pay for equal work
• a standard of living adequate to the health and well-being of the individual and his or her family (including food, healthcare, clothing,
housing and social services)
• adequate rest and leisure.
● Clearly, less economically developed countries may protest that it is not possible to guarantee second-generation rights due to
limited resources, both human and financial.
● The United Nations takes this into account, and places an obligation of progressive realization upon states. This means that the
United Nations recognizes that realization of these rights 'can be hampered by a lack of resources and can be achieved only over
a period of time'.
● Consequently, states' compliance with second-generation rights takes into account the resources available and the progress that
states are making towards full protection of the rights.
 3rd -Generation Human Rights
● those rights that go beyond the mere civil and social, as expressed in many
progressive documents of international law, including the 1972 Stockholm Declaration of
the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, the 1992 Rio
Declaration on Environment and Development, and other pieces of generally aspirational
"softlaw."
● "third-generation human rights" remains largely unofficial, and thus houses an
extremely broad spectrum of rights, including:Group and collective rights-
1. Right to self-determination,
2. Right to economic and social development,
3. Right to a healthy environment,
4. Right to natural resources
5. Right to communicate and communication rights
6. Right to participation in cultural heritage
7. Rights to intergenerational equity and sustainability
Some countries have constitutional mechanisms for safeguarding third-generation
rights eg. the New Zealand Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment,
 1992 Rio Declaration on Environment and Development
(Earth Summit)

1972 Stockholm Declaration ● Sustainable development focus

● Precautionary principle
● Right to healthy environment = human right ● Polluter Pays Principle
● Environment ↔ Development link ● Common but Differentiated Responsibilities (CBDR)
● Global cooperation urged ● Public participation & info access
● State sovereignty + no harm principle
● Environmental education & participation Relevance:

Relevance: ● Framework for global environmental law

● Basis for UNFCCC, CBD, Agenda 21
Led to the creation of the United Nations ● Paris Agreement based on Rio principles (CBDR, sustainability)
Environment Programme (UNEP), which plays a
key role in global environmental monitoring and
support today.
 What are Third-generation rights?
● Considered collective human rights- Rights held by groups on the basis of identified
group characteristics.
● Less defined than the 1st/2nd generations as they apply to the global, international,
regional, national, and local levels (but not to the individual)-
● code the responsibilities and obligations that states/communities have to protect the
environment- Ex:- human beings are entitled to a healthy life in harmony with nature
● the right to development must be fulfilled so as to equitably meet developmental and
environmental needs of present and future generations (sustainable development)
● peace, development and environmental protection are interdependent and indivisible.
● the 1972 Stockholm Declaration on the Human Environment and the Declarations at the
1992 UN Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro are considered the ‘core’ expressions of such
rights
Do we need Fourth-Generation Human Rights

In the 21st century, rapid technological advancements have reshaped the way we live, work, and interact. As
societies become increasingly digital, new challenges and ethical dilemmas emerge, giving rise to what many
scholars call Fourth-Generation Human Rights. The fourth generation emphasizes the ethical and legal
implications of emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI), biotechnology, big data, and
cyberspace governance. As digital technologies become an inseparable part of our daily lives, these rights
seek to protect individuals from digital exploitation, privacy breaches, and algorithmic discrimination.
●
 Role of United Nations
The foundations of this body of law are the Charter of the
United Nations and the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights, adopted by the General Assembly in 1945 and
1948, respectively. Since then, the United Nations has
gradually expanded human rights law to encompass
specific standards for women, children, persons with
disabilities, minorities and other vulnerable groups, who
now possess rights that protect them from discrimination
that had long been common in many societies.
 International Human Rights Law
One of the great achievements of the United Nations is the
creation of a comprehensive body of human rights law—a
universal and internationally protected code to which all
nations can subscribe and all people aspire. The United
Nations has defined a broad range of internationally
accepted rights, including civil, cultural, economic, political
and social rights. It has also established mechanisms to
promote and protect these rights and to assist states in
carrying out their responsibilities.
• Human rights are founded on respect for the dignity and worth of each person;
• Human rights are universal, meaning that they are applied equally and without
discrimination to all people
• Human rights are inalienable, in that no one can have his or her human rights taken away
other than in specific situations for example, the right to liberty can be restricted if a
person is found guilty of a crime by a court of law;
• Human rights are indivisible, interrelated and interdependent, for the reason that it is
insufficient to respect some human rights and not others.
• In practice, the violation of one right will often affect the respect of several other rights.
All human rights should therefore be seen as having equal importance and of being
equally essential to respect for the dignity and worth of every person.
 CIVIL/SOCIAL
1. Article 3
POLITICAL 2. Article 4 ECONOMIC
1. Article 1 3. Article 5 1. Article 17
2. Article 2 4. Article 12 2. Article 22
3. Article 6 5. Article 13 3. Article 23
4. Article 7 6. Article 14 4. Article 25
5. Article 8 7. Article 16
6. Article 9 8. Article 18
7. Article 10 9. Article 19
8. Article 11 10. Article 20
9. Article 16 11. Article 24
10. Article 21 12. Article 26
13. Article 27
14. Article 28
15. Article 29
16. Article 30
Civil and political rights

The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and

its First Optional Protocol entered into force in 1976. The
Second Optional Protocol was adopted in 1989.

The Covenant deals with such rights as freedom of

movement; equality before the law; the right to a fair trial and
presumption of innocence; freedom of thought, conscience
and religion; freedom of opinion and expression; peaceful
assembly; freedom of association; participation in public
affairs and elections; and protection of minority rights. It
prohibits arbitrary deprivation of life; torture, cruel or
degrading treatment or punishment; slavery and forced
labour; arbitrary arrest or detention; arbitrary interference
with privacy; war propaganda; discrimination; and advocacy
of racial or religious hatred.
The monitoring of human rights can effectively be broken down to two types;

■ Institutional approach – states, international organizations, the UN human rights

framework (e.g. UNHRC, OHCHR)
■ Non-institutional approach – non-governmental organizations (e.g. Human Rights Watch,
International Committee of the Red Cross, Amnesty International), civil society activism
Universal Periodic Review mis
● Universal Periodic Review (UPR) is a United Nations Human Rights Council mechanism. It reviews all human
rights situations in all UN Member States.
● It is a peer review process: countries review each other’s human rights records.
● Aim: Improve human rights protection and ensure accountability.
● Process:
Before review: States submit national reports; UN and civil society provide input.
During review: Interactive dialogue in Geneva; states receive recommendations.
After review: States implement accepted recommendations; NGOs monitor progress.

Example:Nepal (2016 & 2021 Reviews) Transitional justice, caste discrimination, torture.

Recommendations: End impunity for conflict-era violations, criminalize torture, strengthen the National Human Rights
Commission.
Actions Taken:
● Torture criminalized in domestic law.
○ NHRC strengthened.
○ Civil registration improved.
Challenges:
○ Transitional justice mechanisms remain stalled.
○ Caste-based discrimination persists despite constitutional guarantees.
● Lesson: Strong commitments exist, but implementation gaps undermine progress.
Task -to be done in class

Follow the steps:

1. Pick a country → Find its most recent UPR “Outcome of review”
2. . Section II (Treaty obligations) → List the human rights treaties the country has
ratified.
3. Section IV (Human rights issues) → Choose 2 rights. For each:
○ Summarize findings (how well the country protects/enforces).
○ Note recommendations (what improvements are suggested).
4. Final outline →
● Treaties list.
● Right 1: findings + recommendations.
● Right 2: findings + recommendations
What distinguishes an instrument from a declaration is the process of signing and ratification?

■ Signing refers a state’s representatives agreeing to a treaty in person and signing the
document. This is usually a government minister like a minister of foreign affairs or foreign
secretary.
■ Ratification refers to the process of formally accepting the treaty in a state’s own
government. Usually this requires formal consent by a governing body (e.g. parliament,
congress, senate). Once a treaty is ratified by the national government the state will notify
the UN that it has formally accepted the treaty and it then becomes legally binding.
A signatory is a state (or party) that has signed a document to signify initial support and intent to follow it,
whereas a ratification - completing the formal domestic process required to make that treaty legally binding.
● Paris Agreement on Climate Change:
○ Signatories: In 2016, many countries (including the US under Obama) signed the agreement, indicating
support.
○ Ratifiers: Countries like China, the US (later), and EU member states ratified it, meaning they passed it
through their domestic legislative processes to become legally bound to its goals.
● The Rome Statute (International Criminal Court):
○ Signatory: The United States signed the treaty in 2000.
○ Withdrawal of Signature: In 2002, the US "unsigned" (withdrew its signature) from the treaty before it was ever
ratified, therefore never becoming bound by it.
● ratify: agree with agreement and also executing laws or policies
● CEDAW - Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women - us HAS NOT ratified it
 Refugees

Over the last 11 years, displacement numbers accelerated due to the Syrian civil war. One
out of every 10 refugees today has come from Afghanistan as part of a 40-year crisis. And
the roots of the current refugee crisis also owe much to the early 1960s: Between 1957
and 1962, 24 African countries achieved independence from European colonial rule. While
most of these transitions were peaceful, they also left the newly-sovereign nations on
shaky ground that led to decades of instability and violence.

read - Ngamba guarantees refugee team first Olympic medal

[Link]
FlbQIxMAABHRlkV8BDXb7cwCKYzroUSQ7dTllQYR_IIeNjTxQTd55Ygf_FsKi_riYrkg_aem
_EU00vkHHQePUsy6yMOttaw#:~:text=Ngamba%20moved%20to%20the%20UK,athlete
%20all%20around%20the%20world.%22
Refugee Crisis & Rights
A refugee crisis can refer to difficulties and dangerous situations in the
reception of large groups of forcibly displaced persons. These could be
either internally displaced, refugees, asylum seekers or any other huge
groups of migrants.
A crisis could occur within the country, while attempting to leave, or while on
the move to a safe country, or even after arrival in a country of asylum. A
situation can be called a crisis, either from the perspective of the forcibly
displaced persons, or from the perspective of the receiving state, or both.
United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) .
In 2021, assistance and protection was provided to more than 84 million forced displaced persons
worldwide, including refugees, asylum seekers, returnees, stateless persons and internally displaced
persons in the included
Providing emergency aid, shelter, water, sanitation and health care to refugees fleeing war in
countries such as Ukraine, Afghanistan, Syria and South Sudan
It advocates for the rights of refugees and worked with governments to ensure access to asylum
programs, prevent further exclusion (return to enforced persecution), and find lasting solutions
International Organization for Migration (IOM) .
More than 37 million migrants, including refugees and internally displaced persons, were supported
by 2021 through humanitarian assistance, protection, integration and voluntary return programmes
- provided emergency shelter, water, sanitation, healthcare, psychosocial support and protection to
refugees from crises such as Ukraine, Afghanistan and Syria
It works with national governments to strengthen migration governance and protect the rights of
vulnerable migrants
IOM - World Migration Report 2022 -
Impact of COVID-19: The pandemic severely disrupted migration patterns around the world,
causing "dramatic changes" in travel. Travel restrictions and border closures have led to a
significant increase in internal migration due to conflict, natural disasters, and epidemic-related
confinements (International Organization for Migration).

Global Immigration Growth: The number of international migrants will increase to 281 million by
2020, accounting for 3.6% of the world’s population. However, the pandemic has slowed the
growth of international migration compared to previous decades .

Internal migration: Internal migration increased dramatically, with millions of people forced to
flee their home countries due to conflict, environmental problems and COVID-19
Migrant workers: Approximately 169 million migrant workers represented international migrants.
Despite the recession, remittances sent home by migrants remained strong, reaching $702
billion by 2020.

Remittances: Despite global economic challenges, remittances have become an important

lifeline for many developing countries, demonstrating their importance in poverty reduction and
economic stability .
 class Task
1951 Geneva Convention on Refugees([Link]
and its 1967 Protocol strike the appropriate balance between the obligations of States
which host persons seeking asylum and those persons seeking protection from
ill-treatment.’ Discuss.
● UNHCR serves as the ‘guardian’ of the 1951 Convention and its 1967 Protocol.
● States are expected to cooperate in ensuring that the rights of refugees are respected and
protected
● The 1951 Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol are the key legal documents that form the
basis of the work of the UN Refugee Agency.
● 149 countries have ratified the 1951 Geneva Convention on Refugees, and 146 countries have
ratified its 1967 Protocol. ( Turkey, Madagascar, and the United States - have ratified the 1951
Convention but not its 1967 Protocol.) Research and give reasons
● Countries that have ratified these instruments are obligated to adhere to the principles set out in
them
Women’s Rights
Women's rights are the rights and entitlements claimed for women and girls
worldwide. They formed the basis for the women's rights movement in the
19th century and the feminist movements during the 20th and 21st centuries.
Gender Equality and Women’s Right

Gender equality is at the very heart of human rights and United Nations values.

Gender-based discrimination is prohibited under almost every human rights treaty.

Despite much progress made in securing women’s rights globally, millions of
women and girls continue to experience discrimination and violence, being denied
of their equality, dignity and autonomy, and even a life.

This discrimination and violence against women and girls, deeply rooted in the
fabric of societies, is persistent and systematic. And in recent years, there has
been a recurrence of scepticism against and denial of international standards
concerning women’s human rights, gender equality and gender-based violence,
while women and girls are increasingly raising voices to demand equality,
including through feminist movements.
A group of women’s human rights activists from various Islamic backgrounds has
developed a manual for women’s human rights education in Muslim societies (M.
Afkhami and H. Vaziri, Claiming our Rights: A Manual for Women’s Human Rights
Education in Muslim Societies (Bethesda, Sisterhood is Global Institute, 1996).
It covers a broad range of “rights situations” such as rights within the family,
autonomy in family planning decisions, rights to education and employment, and
rights to political participation.
Its interactive and interpretive exercises interweave excerpts from international
human rights agreements with verses from the Koran, sharia rules, stories, idioms
and personal experiences.
Article 1
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 2
Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this
Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex,
language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin,
property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made
on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the
country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent,
trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.

Article 3
Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.
 EXAM QUESTIONS
1. “People who are forced to move from their homes due to circumstances beyond their control remain vulnerable, despite developments in
human rights laws and treaties”. Examine this view. (Nov 19)
2. Discuss whether the politicisation of human rights has hindered their universal application. (May 19)
3. To what extent has the Universal Declaration of Human Rights provided the basis for contemporary political movements for social change? (Nov
17)
4. To what extent is the protection and enforcement of human rights in developing countries best pursued at the national level?
5. Justify the claim that the debate between universal rights and cultural relativism is useful for codifying and protecting human rights. (May 21)
6. “Human rights must be prioritized for successful development to occur in developing countries.”Discuss this view. (May 21)
7. “The evolution of human rights since 1948 has undermined the effectiveness of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.” To what extent do
you agree with this claim? (May 22)
8. Discuss whether environmental factors pose the greatest threat to human rights at both the national and international levels. (May 22)
9. “The most significant cause of human rights violations is conflict within states.” To what extent do you agree with this view? (Nov 23)
10. To what extent does the protection and enforcement of universal human rights depend on the achievement of a positive peace? (May 23)
11. The politicization of human rights leads to stronger protection of human rights'. Evaluate this view.(May 24)
12. To what extent do you agree with the claim that developments in human rights over time have led to greater equality? (May 24)
13.
14.
Indigenous Peoples rights
the rights of indigenous peoples to traditional lands are recognized in -
1. ILO Convention No. 169,
2. minority rights are recognized in article 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights, and
3. the right to self-determination is granted to all peoples in article 1 of both the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights.
4. Collective rights are reflected strongly in some regional human rights regimes. The African Charter
on Human and Peoples’ Rights, for example, defines “peoples’ rights” to embrace the right to
existence and self-determination, the right to economic, social and cultural development, and the
right to a general satisfactory environment favourable to their development.
There may often be obstacles to people claiming collective rights. The challenges are partly of a legal
kind, the problem of identifying who is entitled to claim what, and also of a political kind, with collective
rights in many situations being perceived as a threat to the interests of the majority or of individuals
within the group. The right to self-determination, for example, can raise difficult questions about the
control and use of resources, and hence is often a matter of heated debate.
 Upholding human rights
UPHOLDING Ensuring that individuals human
rights are upheld depends on the
HUMAN relationship between four core
responsibilities carried out by
RIGHTS international organizations, state.
civil society and others.

1. P
2. C
3. P
4. M
PROTECTION
Once set out in law, human rights need to be actively protected.
The most effective way is for independent courts to adjudicate on breaches of
human rights law. National courts are usually the only option for judicial protection,
except in the case of the European Court of Human Rights which acts as a court
of appeal for cases in member states of the Council of Europe.
CODIFICATION

Human rights need to be formalized in law. This can be done at international level
(for example, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights); at regional
level (for example, the European Convention on Human Rights); or at national
level (for example, the UK Human Rights Act 1998). Codification is no guarantee
of effective protection, but can provide a legal basis for protection to take place.
PROMOTION
Human rights need to be actively promoted both before and after they have been
effectively codified. This involves a wide range of groups from governments,
international organizations and civil society championing specific human rights.
Nation states may promote human rights and encourage other states to follow
their example through a positive track record of codification and enforcement.
NGOs such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty are high-profile promoters of
human rights, frequently highlighting gaps in codification and protection. For
example, the United States has advanced gay rights within their country and is
now seeking to promote the same rights in Africa.
MONITORING

Human rights need to be actively monitored by independent

bodies to ensure that governments are complying with their own national laws,
commitments they have made in international law, and international norms and
standards more generally. The UN Human Rights Council and the UN High
Commissioner for Human Rights, along with human rights NGOs, are the principal
actors in this area.
 CODIFICATION ● Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and
the process of codifying rights. The UDHR serves as a
UDHR (1948)
foundational document establishing universal human
rights standards. Although nonbinding, it has global
● Signed/Adopted by UN member states influence, shapes international norms and inspires
● Not legally binding → acts as a moral and normative binding treaties and national constitutions.
framework
● We will examine the steps involved in the codification
CEDAW (1979) of rights, from the initial lobbying efforts and adoption
of resolutions to the drafting, ratification, and
● States sign first (show intention)
implementation of declarations, conventions, and
● Becomes legally binding only after ratification
optional protocols. Additionally, we will highlight
● States can enter reservations, limiting certain
some of the major pieces of human rights legislation
obligations
that have emerged from this process. All of these
human rights frameworks contribute to the protection
and promotion of human rights.
99 countries - Signed CEDAW (showed intent)
189 countries - Ratified or acceded (Parties) (legally bound)
 The US case demonstrates that when states do not ratify human
rights treaties, international norms rely on voluntary compliance,
reinforcing realist arguments about state sovereignty overriding

Is there a
legal human rights commitments.

○ The US does not have to align domestic laws fully with

CEDAW standards.

challenge we see ○
○
It does not submit reports to the CEDAW Committee.
There is no international monitoring or enforcement
pressure.

when a country So consequences:

does not ratify ?

● Persistent gender gaps in areas such as paid maternity leave, equal
pay, and reproductive rights can continue without violating binding
international law.
● The US faces reputational criticism but no legal sanctions,
highlighting the limits of international human rights enforcement.
● Without ratification, the US lacks a formal, internationally monitored
● The United States signed CEDAW obligation to align domestic policies with global standards of gender
● but not ratified it, equality and to be overseen by the CEDAW Committee.
● so they are not legally bound by it, even though they ● This can result in inconsistent protections for women’s rights across
showed initial acceptance. states and at the federal level (e.g., healthcare access,
discrimination protections).

The US case highlights the realist–liberal divide: while realism explains

non-ratification through sovereignty and cost–benefit calculations,
liberalism emphasizes how binding commitments and institutions could
enhance women’s rights and global cooperation.
 Key Human Rights Treaties, Conventions, and Covenants

While often used interchangeably, some slight differences exist between treaties,
conventions, and covenants.

● Treaty: A formal agreement between two or more states that is legally binding
under international law. Treaties often cover a broad range of issues, including
human rights, and require ratification by the signatory states to be effective.
● Convention: A type of treaty that is generally open for adoption by the international
community and aims to address specific issues or themes, such as human rights or
environmental protection. Conventions often establish frameworks for cooperation
and standardize laws and practices among the participating states.
● Covenant: Similar to a treaty or convention, a covenant is a formal, legally binding
agreement between states. In the context of human rights, covenants are typically
more specific in the rights they address and often form part of international human
rights law, requiring ratification and adherence by the states involved.
What agreements make up the International Bill of Human Rights?
The International Bill of Human Rights includes the -
1. Universal Declaration of Human Rights,
2. the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
3. the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights.
 Covenants & International Bill of Human Rights.
● UDHR was an important milestone in 1948 BUT it is not a law.
● UDHR is a list of ideal human rights that should be worked towards by each country. This limitation
was recognized by the United Nations although it took them some time to address it.
● UDHR has no provision for enforcement because it is a declaration and not an instrument!
● In 1976 the UN and its member states created two treaties that are now a part of international human
rights law.
● These treaties are called the Human Rights Covenants and include;
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and
International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (ICESCR).
● UDHR+International Covenants (ICCPR+ICESCR)= International Bill of
HumanRights

● If you see this term, it is not really a separate treaty but just refers to UDHR and the Covenants.
Legally, there is no difference between a -
treaty,
a convention
or a covenant.
All are international legal instruments which, in international law, legally bind those States that choose to
accept the obligations contained in them by becoming a party in accordance with the final clauses of these
instruments.
• Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) - 1948
• Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD) - 1965
• International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) - 1966
• International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) - 1966
• Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) - 1979
• Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) - 1989
• Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment
(CAT) - 1984
• International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members
of Their Families (ICMW) - 1990
• Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) - 1998
• Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (CPED) - 2006
• Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) - 2006
 Ratification of human rights treaties
● Upon ratifying human rights treaties, states must refrain from rights violations,
protect individuals from abuses, and take positive actions to ensure rights are
enacted.
● Human Rights Council and human rights treaty bodies assist in enforcing human
rights legislation by monitoring state compliance with human rights
obligations.
● They investigate
violations,
provide recommendations, and
offer reports on state performance.
● Vienna Convention on Law of Treaties ensures the enforceability of international law
as it establishes the legal framework for treaty -
interpretation,
application, and
enforcement - ensuring that international agreements are binding and effectively
implemented.
Reconciling Indigenous Self-Determination with State Sovereignty
(Adapted from "Human Rights: Politics and Practice" by Michael Goodhart, pages 346-348)

Indigenous peoples see their right to exist as deeply connected to their right to self-determination. Since the late 20th century,
Indigenous movements have focused on achieving self-determination, which means having control over their own affairs.

There are three possible approaches to self-determination:

1. Accommodationists: These groups seek some level of self-determination within the existing state structures.
2. Autonomists: These groups want self-determination through independent institutions within the state. The UN
Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) supports this by recognizing the right to self-governance.
3. Secessionists: These groups aim to create independent states, but they are a minority among Indigenous peoples.
Most states view Indigenous claims to self-determination as threats to their territorial integrity and sovereignty. They often
interpret these claims as attempts to secede, even when that’s not the case.

Many Indigenous leaders believe the best results come from internal self-determination, similar to the autonomist approach.
They understand that pushing too hard for full independence can lead to prolonged conflicts with states.
Indigenous peoples generally seek rights within the state, such as:

● Establishing their own political and legal institutions.

● Being consulted about decisions that affect them.
● Benefiting from resource sharing.
● Giving prior informed consent before state decisions impacting them are implemented.
Despite the recognition of these rights by UNDRIP, many states still hesitate to fully respect them. Even in international agreements like the UN
Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), states often overlook Indigenous rights.

The traditional democratic state model, based on Western ideas of sovereignty, sees citizenship as universal and equal for everyone. This model often
clashes with the idea of granting autonomous self-government to Indigenous peoples. Many states have historically pushed for the assimilation of
Indigenous peoples as individual citizens, denying their group rights and autonomy.

Some liberal thinkers recognize that imposing a single model on everyone can violate values of tolerance and diversity. They argue for including
Indigenous peoples in decision-making and respecting their unique rights.

Canadian political philosopher suggests three types of rights to help Indigenous peoples achieve equal citizenship:

● Self-government rights like control over internal affairs, as seen in Nunavut, Canada.
● Polyethnic rights that protect traditional practices and stewardship of land, similar to some Indigenous title rights in Australia.
● Representation rights that ensure groups have a voice in state institutions on matters that directly affect them, like the Sami Parliaments in
Norway, Sweden and Finland.

Liberal democratic states often struggle with recognizing differentiated citizenship because it can conflict with universal, individual citizenship rights. For
example, allowing Indigenous self-government might lead to rules that discriminate against women or limit membership to certain descendants. This
would contradict the idea of universal human rights.
Writing Prompt
After reading this overview of the codification of Indigenous rights, read the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous
People (UNDRIP) and this article, particularly the section entitled “A Troubled Start,” and respond to the prompt, “examine the claim that the
United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People is a challenge to state sovereignty?”

Here is an interesting perspective on the use of the term "Indigenous," which may or may not raise further questions about UNDRIP.
Syrian War Criminals In Germany
“How a Syrian War Criminal Was Brought to Justice — in Germany,” The New York Times

[Link]

ICC - [Link]
Use the following sources to answer the following questions;
Source A: “About the ICC” The International Criminal Court

Source B: “What does the International Criminal Court do?” BBC News

Source C: United Nations Office on Genocide Prevention and the Responsibility to Protect

Source D: “I.C.C. Allows Afghanistan War Crimes Inquiry to Proceed, Angering U.S.,” New York Times

■ What is the Rome Statute? What did it do? When was it created?
■ How can the ICC arrest people it wants to put on trial?
■ What crimes is the ICC permitted to prosecute?
■ Who can the ICC bring an indictment against? In other words, who can be accused of a crime by the
ICC?
Source B: “What does the International Criminal Court do?” BBC News -
Aahana
■ What is the Rome Statute? What did it do? When was it created?
■ The Rome Statute is the treaty that established the International Criminal Court (ICC), which came into force on 1
July 2002. It created the ICC to prosecute individuals for genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes, and
has been ratified by 125 countries, including the UK and many European nations.
■ How can the ICC arrest people it wants to put on trial?
■ The ICC has no police force of its own. It relies on national police services to make arrests and transfer suspects
to The Hague.
■ What crimes is the ICC permitted to prosecute?
■ Genocide, Crimes against humanity and War crimes
■ Who can the ICC bring an indictment against? In other words, who can be accused of a crime by the ICC?
■ The ICC can indict individuals such as political leaders, including former Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir,
Russian President Vladimir Putin, Ivory Coast’s former President Laurent Gbagbo, and Israeli Prime Minister
Benjamin Netanyahu. It can also prosecute military leaders and commanders, such as Joseph Kony of the Lord’s
Resistance Army and Hamas commander Mohammed Deif. In essence, any individual responsible for genocide,
crimes against humanity, or war crimes can be accused by the court. (In short, the ICC holds individual leaders
and commanders personally responsible for the most serious international crimes, rather than blaming nations as
a whole.)
Source C: United Nations Office on Genocide Prevention and the
Responsibility to Protect -
 ■ What is the Rome Statute? What did it do? When was it created?
ANS- The Rome Statute is the treaty that established the International Criminal
Court (ICC).
It was created in 2002, and it laid the legal foundation for the court to prosecute
individuals for genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes.
Only crimes committed after 1 July 2002, the date when the statute came into
force, can be tried by the ICC.
As of now, 125 countries have ratified the Rome Statute.
Also
■ How can the ICC arrest people it wants to put on trial?
■ The ICC does not have its own police force.
■ It relies on national police services of member countries to arrest suspects
and transfer them to The Hague.
■ So, if a country refuses to cooperate, the ICC has limited enforcement power.
It’s a bit like issuing an arrest warrant without a sheriff — they need help from
local law enforcement.
Also pt.2
■ What crimes is the ICC permitted to prosecute?
The ICC can prosecute three main types of crimes:
● Genocide

● Crimes against humanity

● War crimes
These must have occurred after July 1, 2002, and the ICC only intervenes
when national authorities are unable or unwilling to prosecute those
responsible.
Also Adwika pt.3
■ Who can the ICC bring an indictment against? In other words, who can be accused of a crime by the
ICC?

The ICC can indict individuals, including heads of state, military leaders, and other officials, regardless of
rank or status.
Examples include:
● Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu

● Former Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir

● Russian President Vladimir Putin

● Rebel leaders like Joseph Kony

Basically, any person (not a country) can be held criminally responsible if there’s sufficient evidence.
1. What is the Rome Statute? What did it do? When was it created?
The Rome Statute is the founding treaty of the International Criminal Court (ICC), adopted in 1998, which defines the court’s
jurisdiction, structure, and the core international crimes it prosecutes. The court, based in the Dutch city of The Hague, was
established in 2002 to hold rouge leaders responsible for atrocities to account. The Rome Statute was created on July 17th
1998
2. How can the ICC arrest people it wants to put on trial?
The ICC relies on member states to arrest and surrender suspects, as it has no police force of its own.
3. What crimes is the ICC permitted to prosecute?
The ICC prosecutes genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression.
4. Who can the ICC bring an indictment against? In other words, who can be accused of
a crime by the ICC?
The ICC can indict individuals, including state leaders, military officials, or rebels, not entire states or organizations.
 Source B & D -
Source D: Source B:
The International Criminal Court (ICC) ruled that its The ICC, is a Dutch based court to hold rouge
chief can open an investigation into allegations of war leaders who are involved in war crimes. The
crimes in Afghanistan. The ICC collected evidence of
Roman Statute has been ratified by 125
systematic torture of prisoners by the Afghan
government forces and the United States military. In countries however the U.S. and Israel are not
order to arrest people for trial, the ICC must collect members of it. Recently, it issued an arrest for
evidence to prove crimes against humanity. In this Netanyahu (PM of Israel) and Hamas military
case, the ICC used various reports from the U.N. commander Mohammed Deif. USA is not a
which found that nearly 17,000 soldiers were killed by
the Taliban. However, proponents such as American member as it states that it’s soldiers may be
Officials argue that putting U.S on trial would threaten subject to baseless accusations.
American sovereignty. The ACLU (American Civil
Liberties Union’s Human Rights Project) goes against
Trump, representing 3 detainees that were actively
tortured by American forces. Against the Taliban, there
is the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights
Commissioner (AIHR) will advocate for the voices of the
victims. Although America is not part of the Roman
Statute, it can still be a subject to jurisdiction if the court is
investigating countries involved in the issue, in which
Afghanistan is.
 -Source B: “What does the International Criminal Court do?” BBC News
Source D: “I.C.C. Allows Afghanistan War Crimes Inquiry to Proceed, Angering U.S.,” New York Times

1. The rome statute is the treaty that established the ICC and was created in 2002. It
defines the court’s functions, jurisdiction, and the crimes it can prosecute. It gave the ICC
authority to act when antional system cannot deliver justice for higher order crimes such
as genocide, war crimes or crimes by the state.

2. The ICC relies on the cooperation of member govts to arrest and transfer suspects.

3. The ICC can bring an indictment against individuals, including military personnel,
government officials, and members of armed groups, who are accused of committing war
crimes, crimes against humanity, or genocide, regardless of their nationality.

4. The ICC can indict individuals, not states. Political leaders, military commanders etc. For
instance, the court has issued warrants for Vladimir Putin, Benjamin Netanyahu, the CIA,
US-forces and members of the US military.
 Source A and D (Kartik)
Source B: “I.C.C. Allows Afghanistan War Crimes Inquiry to Proceed,
Source A: “About the ICC” The International Criminal Court Angering U.S.,”
A permanent international court that investigates and where needed puts Germany’s commitment to prosecuting war crimes stems from its
individuals on trials for genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity. It is post World War II legal evolution, the Rome Statute’s integration into
primarily governed by the roman statute and is often called the court of “last German law, and the work of Syrian and German human rights
resort”. lawyers and NGOs. The evidence included the infamous Caesar
photographs documenting torture deaths in Syrian prisons.
Q1: How can the ICC arrest people it wants to put on trial?
The icc does not have any specific police force on its own and relies entirely on The final verdicts were:
the states to execute its arrest warrants.
Arrests mainly happen when the accused is found in a cooperating state or
Eyad al-Gharib – Found guilty of aiding and abetting torture of 30
when there is a UN Security Council Referral that requires cooperation.
people, sentenced to 4.5 years.
Q2: What crimes is the ICC permitted to prosecute?
Anwar Raslan – Found guilty of crimes against humanity, including
Genocide - Acts intended to destroy, in whole or in a part, a national, ethnic or
murder, torture, and sexual assault, sentenced to life imprisonment
religeous group.
(possible parole after 15 years).
Crimes against humanity - Widespread or systematic attacks directed towards
civilians.
Q1: What is the Rome Statute? What did it do? When was it
War crimes - Serious violations of the laws and customs of war.
created?
Crime of aggression - The planning, Initiation or execution of aggression by a
state’s leadership.
Definition: The Rome Statute is the treaty that established the
International Criminal Court (ICC).
Q3: Who can the ICC bring an indictment against?
The icc can indict any individual accused of committing one of four core crimes.
Purpose: It created a permanent international court to prosecute
This includes head of state, government officials, military leaders or civilians,
individuals for the world’s most serious crimes when national courts
official positions don't provide immunity.
are unwilling or unable to act.
A person can be indicted if:
The crime occured on the territory of a state party, or
Creation Date: Adopted on 17 July 1998 in Rome; entered into force
The accused is a national of a State party, or
on 1 July 2002.
The situation was referred to the ICC by the UNSC.
 ■ How can the ICC arrest people it wants to put on trial?

The rome statute is the treaty established the international crminal court
(ICC). it defines the court’s jursdication over genocide crimes against,
humanity, war crimes and the crime of agression. It was adopted on 17th
july 1998 and came into force on 1st July, 2002. The rome statute is the
foundational treaty for the ICC, outlining its structure, powers, and the
types of crimes it can prosecute. The statute defines the crimes that fall
under the ICC’s jurisdiction including genocide crimes, against humanity,
war crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of agression. It also
details the Court’s procedures including investigations, trials, and appeals.
Furthermore, establishes ther court’s procedures, including investigations,
trials, and appeals
Internationalization of human rights

Internationalization of human rights reflects the evolving nature of international norms

and the tensions between state sovereignty and universal principles.

human rights are sometimes leveraged or distorted for political gains. It critically
analyses the contentious concepts of the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) and the use
and effectiveness of sanctions in the realm of international politics.
This internationalization is rooted in the idea that certain fundamental rights and freedoms are inherent to all individuals,
irrespective of nationality, culture, or political system. It involves:

● Development of international human rights law: The adoption of instruments like the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights (UDHR), and subsequently, legally binding treaties such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), created a
framework for international human rights law.
● Establishment of international mechanisms: The creation of bodies like the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC),
treaty bodies, and special procedures aims to monitor human rights compliance and address violations globally.
● Transnational advocacy: The emergence of international non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and human rights
defenders plays a crucial role in advocating for human rights and holding states accountable.
 POLITICIZATION of human rights involves
● use of human rights for political gain,
Use of human rights for political gain: The case of Putin and the invasion of Ukraine
● humanitarian arguments, R2P
● responsibility to protect,
● use of sanctions.
Use of sanctions: North Korea
● States may selectively condemn violations by political rivals while downplaying or ignoring similar violations by
allies.
● Accusations of double standards arise when certain human rights issues are prioritized over others based on
political considerations rather than principled adherence to universal norms.
● Some actors are perceived as using the human rights agenda to advance their foreign policy interests or to exert
influence over other states.
● The principle of state sovereignty, while acknowledging states' right to self-governance, can also be a barrier to
intervention and accountability when human rights violations occur within a nation's borders
The Importance of Human Rights Protection of NGOs

1. Why Governments Sometimes Fail to Protect Rights?

2. Role of NGOs in the Protection of Human Rights in India
3. Challenges Faced by Human Rights NGOs in India
4. How do NGOs help protect human rights?
5. How You Can Support the Work of Human Rights NGOs
Role of NGOs in Balancing Internationalization and Politicization of Human Rights

Strengthening Internationalization -
● NGOs carry out independent investigations, monitor violations, and publish detailed
reports that highlight abuses otherwise hidden or downplayed by states. These reports
inform global actors, including intergovernmental bodies like the UN, and strengthen the
push for universal human rights standards.
● Through lobbying and advocacy at national and international levels, NGOs help shape
both domestic laws and international treaties. Their work ensures that global human rights
standards are not just created, but also improved and applied universally.
● NGOs give legal, psychological, and practical support to victims when state systems fail,
further embedding the principle that protection of rights is a shared global responsibility.
● They raise public awareness about human rights, empowering individuals and
communities to claim their rights and take action against violations, thereby supporting the
global diffusion of human rights norms.
● NGOs are often invited to major international human rights conferences and play a
significant role in negotiating treaties, drafting conventions, and pushing for the adoption
of new rights standards
Countering Politicization

NGOs also play a crucial balancing role against the politicization of human rights by:
● Credible NGOs seek to hold all violators accountable, regardless of political alliances. By maintaining impartiality,
they challenge the selective or strategic use of human rights for political gain.
● Through rigorous research and transparent methodology, NGOs can counter misinformation and propaganda
intended to weaponize human rights claims for geopolitical aims.
● When governments use human rights language selectively, NGOs mobilize transnational activism and media
attention to expose double standards and push for consistency in the application of human rights norms.
● NGOs hold both governments and international bodies accountable, advocating for victims even when official
mechanisms or political processes stall or fail due to political interests.
● By empowering local actors and amplifying marginalized voices, NGOs counteract state-centric politicization of
human rights debates, making these struggles less susceptible to manipulation by powerful states or political blocs
R2P stands as a pivotal concept reshaping the principles of state sovereignty and intervention in
the name of humanitarianism.

Genesis: R2P emerged in response to the international community's failure to prevent atrocities
in the 1990s, such as in Rwanda and the Balkans.
Core Idea: It posits that states have the primary responsibility to protect their populations from
genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity. Should the state be unable
or unwilling to protect its citizens, the international community must intervene.
Application and Criticism
Libya and Syria: The NATO-led intervention in Libya in 2011, ostensibly under the R2P banner,
and the contrasting inaction in Syria, exemplify the inconsistency in applying R2P.
Accusations of Misuse: Critics argue that R2P can be, and has been, used as a pretext for
military intervention serving the interests of intervening states rather than purely humanitarian
objectives.
ACHIEVEMENTS
● The internationalisation of human rights has led to the establishment of various international human rights
instruments, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights, and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. These instruments set out the basic
rights and freedoms that all individuals are entitled to, and they provide a framework for holding states accountable
for human rights abuses.

● Moreover, the internationalisation of human rights has also led to the creation of international bodies and
mechanisms to monitor and enforce compliance with human rights standards. These include the United Nations
Human Rights Council, the International Criminal Court, and various regional human rights courts and commissions.
These institutions play a crucial role in promoting and protecting human rights at the global level.
Economic Sanctions and Human Rights
Sanctions are deployed by states or international bodies to enforce behavioural changes in target states, often for human rights violations.
Their effectiveness and ethical implications, however, remain contentious.

Types and Impact

● Comprehensive vs. Targeted: Comprehensive sanctions affect entire countries, while targeted or "smart" sanctions aim at specific
individuals, groups, or sectors. Targeted sanctions are increasingly preferred to minimise suffering among the general population.
● Human Cost: Even targeted sanctions can lead to unintended socio-economic hardships, affecting the most vulnerable groups in
society.

Debating Effectiveness
● Long-Term Impact: The long-term effectiveness of sanctions in compelling change is debated. Cases like North Korea demonstrate
how regimes can resist external pressure over extended periods, often with severe humanitarian consequences.
● Symbolic Value vs. Practical Outcomes: Sanctions can be more symbolic, serving to denounce certain actions and actors
internationally rather than achieving immediate change.
It requires recognising both the potential of human rights as a tool for positive change and the realities of their
manipulation in the international arena. This knowledge is crucial in critically analysing current events and in shaping
a more just and equitable world.
Media plays a crucial role in the politicisation of human rights, as it shapes public perception and influences political
agendas. Media coverage can bring attention to overlooked human rights issues, creating pressure for action.
However, media can also contribute to the politicisation of human rights by selectively reporting issues based on
political bias or sensationalism. This selective portrayal can distort public understanding and lead to an uneven
response to human rights violations globally. For example, media in Western countries might extensively cover
human rights abuses in adversary nations while underreporting issues in allied nations or domestic contexts. Such
biased reporting not only impacts international relations but also shapes the policy decisions of governments,
highlighting the powerful influence media holds in the political landscape of human rights.
Read - Global initiatives like the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in the EU, the Right to
be Forgotten ruling, and the UNESCO guidelines on AI ethics

What has been done so far ?

● ..

What do we want ?
● ..
 CRITICISM OF THEORY
● generation concept has been evolved to overshadow the UNIVERSAL spirit of UDHR.
● The UDHR nowhere talk about the distinction of Human Rights into different generation.
● A question often arises, how Economic,social and Cultural rights are called as 2nd generation
rights while Civil and political rights as 1st generation ignoring the fact that these both
rights fall under UDHR and also got separate covenant, by the same people and also on
the same line.
● The simple analogy can be made like,what would be meaning of right to life if right to food,
shelter, water, security are not granted or secured, these rights have equal standards like the
right to vote or right to life.
● Theory argues that it gives more emphasis on the economic rights than the civil rights. If we
see the 15 goals under MDGs and later SDGs, are economic in nature.
● it can be argued that generation theory of Human rights have no place under the modern
jurisprudence of human rights and also under the domain of Human Rights doctrine
 Strengths of Generation Theory
Comprehensive Framework
• The generation theory provides a structured approach to understanding the diverse categories
of human rights. By recognizing civil, social, and collective rights, it allows for a more holistic
view of human rights that is particularly relevant in developing countries where
socio-economic conditions often impede the realization of basic rights.
• In developing countries, the implementation of civil and political rights, such as freedom of
speech and fair elections, can be strengthened by ensuring economic and social rights like
access to education and healthcare.
• Eg. South Africa's constitution, influenced by this comprehensive framework, includes a Bill of
Rights that guarantees a broad spectrum of rights, promoting a holistic approach to human
development.
Focus on Collective Rights
• The inclusion of third-generation rights, is significant for developing nations. These rights
acknowledge the interconnectedness of human rights and the importance of social and
economic conditions in ensuring individual rights. In many developing countries, where issues
like poverty, environmental degradation, and lack of access to resources directly affect the
enjoyment of civil and political rights
 Limitations
Potential for Misinterpretation
Critics argue that emphasizing collective rights could lead to justifications for repressive regimes to
limit individual rights in the name of collective interests. This could undermine the very essence of
human rights as individual entitlements and may allow governments to prioritize state or
community goals over personal freedoms, which is a significant concern in many developing
countries.
Interdependence of Rights
It does not reflect the inherent interdependence and indivisibility of all human rights. Civil and
political rights (first generation) are closely linked with economic, social, and cultural rights (second
generation). For example, the right to vote (a first-generation right) is often meaningless without the
right to education (a second-generation right), which enables individuals to make informed decisions.
Implementation Challenges
The prioritization of economic and social rights may also lead to conflicts with civil and political
rights, creating tensions that complicate the human rights landscape.
For eg., the need for economic development might be used to justify the suppression of dissent or
political opposition, thereby hindering the overall promotion of human rights. Many sub-Saharan
African countries struggle to provide comprehensive healthcare services due to limited financial
resources and infrastructure. This limitation hampers the realization of the right to health, a
second-generation right, despite legal guarantees.
 Another big criticism - Promotion of a
Hierarchical and Western-Centric Perspective
• It has undermined historical complexity, excluded other geographies from the evolution of
human rights and helped instil a hierarchy of rights, causing significant conceptual damage to
our understandings of human rights.
• Another significant problem emerges in the theory’s promotion of the hierarchy of human
experience—placing French and American historical experiences as the defining features of
what was always a transnational story.
• Further, the theory gives sole privilege to the normative ??dimensions of human rights, placing
them apart from wider histories of struggles and contestations and ignoring socio-political
developments elsewhere.
Liberal perspective Realist perspective

• Supports the Generation Theory of Human

Rights due to its focus on first-generation • realists place greater importance on
rights, which are closely aligned with core state sovereignty and national
liberal principles ( individual liberty, interests than on international norms
freedom of speech) - essential pillars of and ideals.
liberal democracy. • They contend that the promotion and
enforcement of human rights,
• By championing these civil and political
particularly second and
rights, the Generation Theory bolsters the third-generation rights, are frequently
liberal dedication to protecting personal shaped by power dynamics and
freedoms and ensuring a society that is geopolitical considerations.
equitable and just. • Realists maintain that states primarily
operate out of self-interest and security
concerns, suggesting that the idealistic
classification of human rights may not
correspond with the practical realities
of international relations and state
behavior.
Treaty
• A formal, legally binding agreement between two or more countries.
• The Paris Agreement (2015) is a global treaty to combat climate change by reducing carbon emissions.

Convention
• A general agreement among many countries that sets international rules or standards.
• The United Nations Convention Against Corruption (2003) establishes global anti-corruption measures.

Covenant

A binding agreement, often focused on human rights or moral commitments.

The ASEAN Human Rights Declaration (2012) acts as a regional covenant promoting human rights in
Southeast Asia.
 Signing vs. Ratification
• Signing = Political commitment, but not legally binding.
• When a country signs a covenant, it is expressing its intent to comply with its principles but is not yet
legally bound by it.
• Signing shows political commitment but does not create a legal obligation until further steps are taken.
• The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) was signed by the
U.S. in 1977 but has never been ratified, meaning the U.S. is not legally bound by it.

• Ratification/Accession = Becomes legally binding under international law.

• Canada signed and later ratified the Paris Agreement (2015), making its
commitments to climate action legally binding under international law.
• After signing, a country must ratify the covenant through its legal processes (e.g., approval by
parliament).
• Ratification makes the covenant legally binding for that country.
 covenants,declaration,instrument,
Signing VS Ratification
While the covenants are international law, they are more formally referred to as human rights
instruments. This is specific terminology to international relations and global politics. These are
different from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights for a few reasons;
A declaration is passed as a resolution by the UN General Assembly by a simple majority vote. They
are not law and states are not legally obligated to enforce them.
An instrument is also passed as a resolution by the UN General Assembly by a majority vote, but is
a law.
What distinguishes an instrument from a declaration is the process of signing and ratification.
Signing refers a state’s representatives agreeing to a treaty in person and signing the document.
This is usually a government minister like a minister of foreign affairs or foreign secretary.
Ratification refers to the process of formally accepting the treaty in a state’s own government.
Usually this requires formal consent by a governing body (e.g. parliament, congress, senate).
Once a treaty is ratified by the national government the state will notify the UN that it has formally
accepted the treaty and it then becomes legally binding.
 INTERNATIONAL TREATIES
• Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women
(CEDAW) (adopted 1979, entry into force: 1981)
• Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD)
(adopted 1966, entry into force: 1969)
• Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) (adopted 2006,
entry into force: 2008)
• Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) (adopted 1989, entry into force:
1989)
• United Nations Convention Against Torture (CAT) (adopted 1984, entry into
force: 1987)
• International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers
and Members of their Families (adopted 1990, entry into force: 2003)
• The Geneva Conventions came into being between 1864 and 1949 as a result of
efforts by Henry Dunant, the founder of the International Committee of the Red
Cross.
 STAGES -
● Lawmaking treaties such as the 1948 Genocide Convention and the 1966 International
Human Rights Covenants typically are drafted by an international organization or conference
and then presented to states for their consideration—or, as international lawyers put it, they
are “opened for signature and ratification.”
● Neither the drafting of a treaty nor its approval by the United Nations or another
international organization gives it legal effect.
● For a treaty to be binding, it must be accepted by sovereign states.
● And it is binding only on those states that have formally and voluntarily accepted it.

Signing a treaty is a declaration by a state that it intends to be bound by the treaty. That
obligation, however, only becomes effective after the treaty has been ratified or acceded to
according to the constitutional procedures of that country.
❖ Eg. In the United States, the president signs a treaty and then transmits it to the Senate for
ratification, for which a two-thirds vote is required.)
❖ States that have ratified or acceded to a treaty are said to be parties to the treaty. Typically a
specified number of states must become parties before the treaty becomes binding. When
sufficient ratifications have been filed, the treaty is said to enter into force.”
❖ For example, the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW)
entered into force after twenty states had ratified it.
Donelly, Jack. International Human Rights. Boulder, Westview Press, 2013,

[Link]
Covenant
Binding agreement between states; used synonymously with Convention and Treaty.
• ICCPR -
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
ICCPR is a multilateral treaty adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1966, and in force
from 1976.
• The ICCPR is part of the Internatiónal Bill of Human Rights, along with the ICESCR
(International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights) and the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights (UDHR with its two Optional Protocols. As of September 2019, the Covenant has 173
parties and six more signatories without ratification ?? (e.g. China), 25 states have neither signed nor
ratified the treaty.
Ratification is the official way to confirm something, usually by vote. It is the formal validation of a
proposed law. We almost never use the word ratification except to talk about process by which
proposed laws, treaties, and agreements are officially recognized.
 RECAP & REVISE
• What does it mean to say that human rights have and continue to develop progressively?

The first global framework of human rights agreed to by states is called the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
(UDHR). Adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on December 10, 1948, the UDHR was the first comprehensive
articulation of fundamental human rights that all people are entitled to, regardless of nationality, race, religion, or other
status. It was a milestone document in the history of human rights, setting out, for the first time, fundamental human rights
to be universally protected.

• The Magna Carta (a written document) listed rights for nobles in the 13th-century in England. Why is the document
considered important in Human Rights history?

A royal charter of rights agreed to by King John of England in 1215, promising the protection of church rights, protection
from illegal imprisonment, access to swift justice, and limitations on feudal payments to the Crown. It established the
principle of the rule of law over the arbitrary power of the monarch. Chapters 12 and 14 established the principle of no
taxation without representation, requiring the king to obtain the consent of the common council before levying taxes. This
was an important step towards democracy and the rights of citizens.

While the Magna Carta was an elitist document focused on the rights of nobles, its core principles of limiting government
power, guaranteeing certain rights, and establishing the rule of law were hugely influential in the development of human
rights over the following centuries

• How does recognizing the rights of one person limit the power or powers of another person?

Recognizing the rights of one person often limits the power of another by establishing legal and moral boundaries. For
instance, when individual rights such as freedom of speech or the right to privacy are upheld, they restrict the authority of
governments or individuals to infringe upon those rights, promoting accountability
 • Explain. Philosopher Jacques Rousseau in the 18th-century defined the relationship between the
_____________________ and the ______________________ of the state. What did Rousseau call the
relationship between the people and their government?
Rousseau in the 18th century defined the relationship between the individual and the sovereign authority of
the state.
Rousseau called this relationship the ------/-------- (HANGMAN),
a theory in which individuals consent to form a government that will protect their rights and well-being in
exchange for some of their freedoms. This mutual agreement establishes the basis of political legitimacy and
authority.
• What are the differences between a state, a nation and a nation-state?
A state is a political entity with defined territorial boundaries and a sovereign government, recognized by
other states.
A nation is a group of people who share a common identity, culture, language, or history, but may not have
political sovereignty.
A nation-state combines both concepts, representing a state primarily inhabited by a single nation, where
the political boundaries align with the cultural identity of the nation.
• What was the first global framework of human rights agreed to by states called?
The first global framework of human rights agreed to by states is known as the Universal Declaration
of Human Rights (UDHR). Adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1948, the UDHR
established fundamental human rights that are to be universally protected, laying the groundwork for
subsequent international human rights treaties, including the International Covenants on Civil and
Political Rights and Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.
 Individual V. Collective Rights
The argument of whether group rights (such as those of the Indigenous people) is more efficient, or
whether the rights of everyone can be better protected if implemented at an individual level.
Classical Liberal approach:
Places emphasis on the rights of individual people
Driven by the notion that the guarantee for the rights of individuals would lead to collective rights
Human rights flow from the individual to the group
Despite the increased support towards individual rights over the years, certain scenarios (such
as ethnic cleansings, mass genocides, refugee crises etc.) call for the protection of
collective rights.
Individual Rights in Western Collective Rights in Non-Western
Contexts Contexts
Examples:
● The First Amendment of the U.S. ● The African Charter on Human and
Peoples' Rights integrates individual and
Constitution safeguarding freedom
collective rights.
of speech. ● Many Asian constitutions incorporate
● The European Convention on duties towards the state and society,
Human Rights focusing primarily on reflecting collective ideologies.
civil and political rights of ● Policy Outcomes:Greater focus on
individuals. community rights, social harmony, and
● Policies often criticised for moral duties.
prioritising individual success over ● Balancing act between respecting
social equity and community individual freedoms and maintaining
collective societal ethics.
welfare.
 Economic rights
List - Individual economic rights Rights that highlight the importance of ensuring economic justice and equity
for all members of society, challenging the inequalities generated by strict individualistic economic rights
frameworks. Individual economic rights focus on aspects like-
right to property, the right to work, and the freedom to pursue economic interests, essentially highlighting
personal economic autonomy and security.
This perspective supports capitalism and free market ideologies, centring on individual achievement and the
protection of personal wealth.

List collective economic rights - rights to common resources, or the socioeconomic rights of marginalised
groups.
Here, the focus is on economic systems that ensure equitable distribution of resources, social security, and
community welfare, often aligned with socialist or communal economic models.
These rights highlight the importance of ensuring economic justice and equity for all members of society,
challenging the inequalities generated by strict individualistic economic rights frameworks.
 Diverse Perspectives on Understanding of Rights
political issues we should always consider the points of view of various stakeholders and actors to better
appreciate the diverse standards and understandings of these issues.
2 of the main opposing viewpoints are embedded in many global political debates on rights and justice.-
1. Universalism - Moral Absolutism: Belief in inalienable, indivisible rights that are inherent to all humans.
Human Rights propagates the idea of ‘Universalism’- a global political theory that calls for the implementation of
laws and principles across cultures regardless of the differences.
● There are many who believe that there are certain rights that all people have simply because they are
human. There are no exceptions and a person cannot 'give up' these rights or have them taken away for any
reason. For example, the United Nations (UN), the UDHR and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) such
as Amnesty International support the claim of universality.
● They argue that, if you adapt or change rights on the basis of culture, then you are basically allowing states
to continue to oppress marginalized groups, such as women or indigenous people, in the name of 'culture.
● They dispute the argument that the UDHR is 'Western' because the multicultural committee that created it
was designed to prevent this.
● Read -
[Link]
[Link]
 Cultural relativism - The idea that one’s beliefs, practices and values should be understood from the
perspective of their own culture or belief system, as opposed to implementing universal values.

● Contextual Morality: Views moral values, rights, and ethics as contingent upon cultural context.
● Cultural relativism argues for the interpretation of human rights within cultural contexts, challenging
the notion of universal rights.
● Cultural relativists disagree with universalists, arguing that cultures differ from one another, and so
do the moral frameworks that structure relations within different societies.
● Cultural relativists are saying that rights should be considered within the context of culture.
● Some observe that in many cultures the rights of the community are more important than the rights
of the individual.
● Cultural Relativism opposes the idea of ‘Ethnocentrism’- the judging of other cultures/ beliefs based
on the standards set by one’s own ethnicity
● Relativists also view Universalism (or any conventions, declarations, or documents associated with
the same) as ‘Western Constructs’ or the blatant use of western soft power to increase
transnational influence on laws.
They argue that 'universal rights are focused on Western-centric values and come from a long Western
philosophical tradition. By imposing universalism, the Western world is continuing to try to dominate and
control the global community.
 Politicization of rights
● Politicization means that actors are directed by political motives, rather than being
genuinely concerned with rights.
● Politicization, therefore, is seen when the actions and intentions of stakeholders are
centred on gaining or manipulating power.

1. Are universalists really just trying to impose Western values on the global comm as
claimed by cultural relativists?
2. Are cultural relativists simply opposing universalists so that they can pick and choose
which rights they support, and oppress some members of their communities?
3. It's not always easy to see the true intentions of and stakeholders, but it's also important to
remember that there can be a variety motivations and intentions even within a group.
The absence of politicization is widely considered to be the ideal situation with regard to
ensuring the credibility of international organizations (IGOs) concerned with rights and justice.
This is the reason why many NGOs focusing on rights and justice avoid any kind of government
funding and fiercely value their independence.
But for IGOs, avoiding politicization can be difficult
 Examples of Tension and Integration

● Conflicting Rights: Instances where individual rights (like freedom of speech) may clash with
collective rights (like maintaining public order or cultural values).
● Harmonising Approaches: Some nations are increasingly recognising the need to integrate both
perspectives. Examples include Canada's reconciliation efforts with Indigenous peoples,
balancing national interests and Indigenous collective rights. To explore specific cases where
these issues intersect with severe global issues, like Terrorism and Genocide.
Sharia Law - A legal system based on Islamic principles and teachings.

● Relativist Defence:
● Universalist Critique: Emphasises respect for religious freedom
Argues that certain aspects, such as gender and societal norms inherent in Islamic
inequality and punitive measures, violate countries, viewing these laws as integral to
universal human rights standards. religious identity and cultural cohesion.
Consumer Rights - Covers issues like product safety, accurate
information, freedom of choice, and the right to be heard.

Universalist Stance: Cultural Relativism:

Points out that economic, social, and
Advocates for consistent consumer cultural differences should inform consumer
protection standards, ensuring fairness and rights, acknowledging different levels of
safety worldwide. development and consumer practices.
Rights and 4 Theories
1. The theory of natural rights, This theory was advocated by philosophers like
John Locke.
2. The theory of social rights, which argues that rights are created by society and
law to benefit the greatest number of people. Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart
Mill were proponents of this view.
3. The theory of legal rights, which claims that rights are established by states and
individuals have no rights outside of what states grant them. This view was
supported by philosopher John Austin.
4. The theory of economic rights- proposed by Karl Marx
 Theory of natural rights: John Locke & Rousseau
● The most notable expression of this doctrine is found in the writings of John Locke. -
- all individuals were gifted by nature with the inherent rights to life, liberty and
property of their own and
- could not be removed or abolished by state.
● the individual is an autonomous being capable of exercising choice and
● the legitimacy of government depends not only upon the will of the people, but also
upon the government's willingness and ability to protect those individual natural
rights.
● Jean Jacques Rousseau attempts to settle the natural rights of the individual with
the need for social unity and cooperation through the idea of the social contract.
● Rousseau declared that natural law conferred inalienable sovereignty on the
citizens of the state as a whole.
● The most significant details of idea of natural rights came from the writings of
Thomas Jefferson, Samuel Adams and Thomas Paine made the natural rights
theory a powerful justification for revolution.
 Theory of Social rights
● The theory of Social rights states that rights are the conditions of society. It is the
creation of society, law, customs, traditions and yield to what is socially useful or
socially desirable. What is socially useful should have for its test the greatest
happiness of the greatest number.
● The real advocators of this theory was Bentham and Mill. They established the
principle of greatest happiness of the greatest number and emphasizes the role of
societal constructs in defining rights.
● Laski accepts Rights are not independent of society, but inherent in it. One's rights
are built upon one's contribution to the well-being of society. Rights are built upon
their utility to the individual and the community.
● The theory has its appeal in the sense of justice and reason.
 Theory of Legal rights
● According to this theory rights are created and maintained by the state. The state
is the only source of right and outside the state an individual has no rights at
all and never claim rights against state.
● The theory further maintains that rights are not natural to man. The political
pluralists object this theory, because the state does not create rights but it only
recognizes them.
● One of the main exponents of this theory was Austin.
● There are lot of criticism about this theory because it does not provide an adequate
basis of right. It might tell us the character of a particular state but it does not tell us
what rights need recognition.
● This theory will lead to despotic state and tyranny of laws. It does not provide a
basis to know what right ought to be ensured. Rights are in fact not what the state
grants what the man needs for his self-development and what the state should
grant.
 Marxist
● Marx's idea is simple and even convincing too to certain extent.
● According to him the State is powerful agency to uphold the particular type of social
organisation and law is a tool of the State that preserves and safeguards the interests of the
dominant group in the society.
● He explained that political, social, religious and other institutions are determined by economic
components, which is essentially the mode of production. To each stage of production in the
development of society corresponds as appropriate political form and an appropriate class
structure.
● Every system of production leads to the rise of two opposite classes -- the exploiters and the
exploited.
● It rejects the concept of natural another rights,stated from time to time as an explanation of the
nature of rights.
● Laski agrees with Marx's idea and maintains that the way the economic power is distributed at
any given time and place will shape the character of legal duties which are imposed on that
time and place.
Karl Marx finally believes that rights can exist and flourish only in a classless society where all
are equal and no one is to be an exploiter.
Evaluate the extent to which Western liberal theories of human rights focusing on
individual rights can be applied universally.
Discuss the importance of cultural context in shaping the
understanding of individual versus collective rights.
 GP GUIDE

Justice is often
● closely associated with the idea of fairness and
● with individuals getting what they deserve,
although what is meant by deserve is also
contested.
JUSTICE ● One avenue is to approach justice through the
idea of rights, and what individuals can
legitimately expect of one another or of their
government.
[Link] ● Some theorists also argue that equality not only
?v=H0CTHVCkm90&t=140s in the institutions and procedures of a society but
also in capabilities or well-being outcomes is
required for justice to be realized.
 What is Justice?

Michael Sandel, explains that justice requires us to engage in reasoned deliberation

about the values and principles that should guide our society, taking into account the
well-being of all members of the community. He writes, “To ask whether a society is just
is to ask how it distributes the things we prize – income and wealth, duties and rights,
powers and opportunities, offices and honours” (Sandel, 2009, p. 19).

Sandel argues that justice is not just about individual rights but also about the common
good and the virtues that society should promote.

Exploring justice in the context of human rights requires us to make judgments about
what qualifies as a human right and how those rights ought to be maintained.
 Task on Justice- What Is Justice?
The -concept of justice has some important implications for the study of human rights in global politics.

First, since justice is linked to the idea of fairness the pursuit of human rights is often seen as the pursuit of
a fair and just society. Many liberals believe that a just society is one that guarantees equal rights and a
suitable quality of life for all of its citizens.

Second, violations of human rights inevitably bring up the question of justice. If question is on violation -

● What should be done to protect human rights? Role of state and NSA?
● How do we know when human rights have been violated?
● How do we punish people and organizations that violate human rights?
● How do we obtain justice for the victims of human rights abuses? IGO , NGO?

Briefly describe each of the following types of justice described in the video-
[Link]

Distributive Justice
Need-Based Justice
Merit-Based Justice
Briefly describe each of the following types of justice described in the video

Merit-Based Justice
Distributive Justice

Need-Based Justice
 Chomsky-Foucault Debate on Power vs Justice (1971)

For hard core GP lovers only - 2 stalwarts -

in the following slide - we have a summary of their points -

[Link]
Noam Chomsky and Michel Foucault discussing justice, power, and the notion of human nature in their famous 1971 debate.

Script of this debate -

[Link]
 Chomsky's Key Points Foucault's Key Points
Justice as a Weapon: The idea of justice itself is an "instrument
Innate Human Nature: Chomsky argues there are
of a certain political and economic power" that has been
fundamental elements of human nature, such as the invented and used in different societies.
need for creative work and free inquiry, that should be
maximized in a just society Power as the Goal: In social struggles, the goal is to take
power, and the war is considered just because it will overthrow
Grounding Justice: He believes there is an absolute the ruling class, not based on abstract justice.
basis for justice grounded in human qualities, even if we
can't fully define it.
Reconstructing Society: The task of progressive social
Pursuing a Better Society: While we can't create an change is to reconstruct society and overturn existing
ideal society, we should imagine and work towards a oppression, without being constrained by abstract notions of
better society and system of justice, comparing it to the justice.
current flawed system.
War to Win, Not Because It's Just: One makes war to win
power, not because the war itself is just. Justice follows from the
Opposing Oppression: Reasonable people should attainment of power, not the other way around
oppose aspects of the legal system that represent
oppression.

Prioritizing Human Values: The only reason to want

the proletariat to take power is because one believes it
will achieve fundamental human values like freedom
and dignity, not just power for its own sake.
 ● Chomsky argued that multinational corporations and
financial institutions are today's "masters of mankind",
similar to Adam Smith's critique of the East India
Company.
● Chomsky criticized the power of large pharmaceutical
corporations, arguing they are granted monopoly
pricing rights that negatively impact access to
medicines.
● He contended that corporations deploy their resources
to control labor costs rather than raise living standards
and security for workers.
● Argued that corporations engage in "economic
engineering" without considering the broader social
implications, leading to dangerous results, such as the
dismantling of environmental.
● He critiqued the "neoliberal" policies that empower
multinational corporations at the expense of people's
wellbeing, as detailed in his book "Profit Over People".
He called for greater accountability and a rebalancing of
power away from corporate interests.
 Differing interpretations of justice
There are, of course, differences of opinion when deciding what people 'deserve. For example, some may argue
that all people deserve access to clean drinking water, and if you live in a society where this is not the case, then
your society is not a just one.

Others, including cultural relativists, may argue that the circumstances of that society determine what is
considered 'justice -
● In global politics we often associate justice with rights. Thinking back to how rights are defined in the
UDHR, we might expect that all individuals have the right to be treated equally by those with power (for
example, the government or police) and by other members of their society.
● When individuals or groups are deprived of their rights, we might expect negative consequences for those
responsible. This is also an aspect of justice.
 1. Egalitarian justice

Egalitarian justice is focused on social justice and has a long history in Western philosophical
thought. Influential philosophers have debated the meaning of 'justice over many centuries, and
ideas connected to egalitarian justice continue to impact our understanding of rights and justice
today, since its influence can be seen in the UDHR and the work of many human rights NGOs.

Some key principles of egalitarian justice include the following:

1. All individuals in a society must be treated with equal respect and dignity, no exceptions.
2. All people should have equal freedoms and opportunities.
3. We are moral beings and have an innate understanding of right and wrong.
4. We inhabit a world where people are often seen in terms of economics and politics, but our
moral identities cannot be overlooked.
 2. Cosmopolitan justice
Like egalitarian justice, cosmopolitan justice is concerned with morality and the obligations found in both social and political
justice. Cosmopolitan justice takes the ideas of egalitarian justice further and argues that all people must work at achieving
justice for all individuals on a global scale.
● For practical reasons, IGOs such as the UN and/or perhaps regional IGOs like the African Union (AU) have an obligation
to act when needed.
● Additionally, in extreme situations, humanitarian intervention can be seen as necessary.
● Sometimes sovereignty can be seen as an obstacle to justice, and cosmopolitan justice argues that intervening in the
affairs of another state is justifiable if:
• the state is structurally 'unjust; for example, a totalitarian regime is in place that is abusing its citizens, or that the state is a
failed state struggling to address the needs of its citizens
• all other methods to help have been attempted with no success, and intervention is your last resort.
Cosmopolitan justice in the real world
● A real-world example of cosmopolitan justice can be seen when we look at migration, in recent decades, more and more
people have been forced to leave their homes because of environmental, economic or political instability.
● The term 'migrant is a more all-inclusive term that refers to anyone moving from one place to another, but often these
people are later classified as refugees
● It is estimated that climate change will push this trend globally and in the coming decades more people may be on the
move than ever before in our history.
● Cosmopolitan justice argues that we are morally obligated to help migrants and refugees, as we are all members of an
interdependent global community.
● To do this, states must cooperate with civil society, including NGOs, regional IGOs and the UN, to rehome migrants and
refugees and support them as they build new lives.
3. Ecological justice
● Ordinarily, in discussions of rights and justice, human beings are the focus.
● You have probably seen, heard or even participated in some sort of environmental activism.
● Environmental concerns cross state boundaries and, globally, people are concerned about the state of the
environment and its impact on the health and well-being of all of humankind.
● Ecological justice advocates that we start considering all living beings, not only people, when taking action to
address environmental concerns.
● Due to the interconnected nature of our global environment, our future cohabitation on this planet depends on us
being more conscious and proactive when it comes to practising rights and justice for non-human living beings.
● Some people who agree with an ecological justice viewpoint argue that non-human living beings are holders of
'moral considerability, meaning we humans are morally obliged to pursue justice on their behalf, but not only
because we will benefit.
● They believe that human beings have created a world where there simply has not been any consideration for the
non-human inhabitants, and this has led to a severe crisis in terms of loss of habitat and mass extinction.
 Case Studies
[Link]
rg/human-rights

The Convention
against Torture
and Other Cruel,
Inhuman or
Degrading
Treatment or
Punishment
United Nations Convention on the Rights of Children

The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child is an

important agreement by countries who have promised to protect
children’s rights.

The Convention explains who children are, all their rights, and the
responsibilities of governments. All the rights are connected, they are
all equally important and they cannot be taken away from children.
Rights of Children
1. Definition of a child
A child is any person under the age of 18.

2. No discrimination
All children have all these rights, no matter who they are, where they live, what language they speak, what their

religion is, what they think, what they look like, if they are a boy or girl, if they have a disability, if they are rich or poor,

and no matter who their parents or families are or what their parents or families believe or do. No child should be

treated unfairly for any reason.

 Amnesty International, UK
Amnesty International (also referred to as Amnesty or AI) is an international
non-governmental organization focused on human rights, with its headquarters in the
United Kingdom. The organization says it has more than ten million members and
supporters around the world.[1] The stated mission of the organization is to campaign for "a
world in which every person enjoys all of the human rights enshrined in the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights and other international human rights instruments.
Amnesty International
Founded in 1961
Headquarters in London
A mass-membership organisation funded by members and supporters, that promotes direct
action such as protests, letter writing and campaigning.
REPORT TASK -
Human Rights Watch
Founded in 1978
Headquarters in New York
Largely funded by wealthy individuals, it puts pressure on governments
to take action and intervene.
Human Rights Watch, USA

Human Rights Watch (HRW) is an international

non-governmental organization, headquartered in New York City,
that conducts research and advocacy on human rights.[2] The
group pressures governments, policy makers, companies, and
individual human rights abusers to denounce abuse and respect
human rights, and the group often works on behalf of refugees,
children, migrants, and political prisoners.
Mahatma Gandhi

Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi is widely recognized as one of the

twentieth century’s greatest political and spiritual leaders. Honored in
India as the father of the nation, he pioneered and practiced the principle
of Satyagraha—resistance to tyranny through mass nonviolent civil
disobedience. While leading nationwide campaigns to ease poverty,
expand women’s rights, build religious and ethnic harmony and eliminate
the injustices of the caste system, Gandhi supremely applied the
principles of nonviolent civil disobedience to free India from foreign
domination.
Nelson Mandela

Nelson Mandela was an anti-apartheid revolutionary and the first

President of South Africa.
Apartheid was a system of racial segregation in South Africa. It
was enforced through legislation. Under apartheid, the rights and
freedoms of the majority black inhabitants and other ethnic
groups in South Africa were restricted, and white minority rule
was perpetuated.
Greta Thunberg
Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg and 15 other children filed a
complaint with the United Nations Monday alleging that five of the world’s
major economies have violated their human rights by not taking adequate
action to stop the unfolding climate crisis.
“You have stolen my dreams and my childhood with your empty words — and yet, I’m
one of the lucky ones,” Thunberg said Monday. “People are suffering, people are
dying.”

The petition names five countries – Germany, France, Brazil, Argentina and Turkey –
which they say have failed to uphold their obligations under the Convention on the
Rights of the Child, a 30-year-old human rights treaty which is the most widely ratified
in history.
Malala Yousafsai

Malala Yousafzai is a Pakistani human rights activist

and the youngest Nobel Peace Prize laureate. The
world learned about the girl after a gunman burst into
a school bus and shot the girl in the head, thereby
avenging her criticism of the Taliban and neglecting
the prohibition to attend school.
Fundamental Rights in India

The Fundamental Rights are defined as the basic

human rights of all citizens. These rights, defined in
Part III of the Constitution, apply irrespective of race,
place of birth, religion, caste, creed or sex.
Fundamental Rights may well be called the soul of
our Constitution.
Fundamental Duties
Fundamental duties basically imply the moral obligations of all citizens of a country and today,
there are 11 fundamental duties in India, which are written in Part IV-A of the Constitution, to
promote patriotism and strengthen the unity of India.

1. Abide by the Constitution and respect national flag & National Anthem
2. Follow ideals of the freedom struggle
3. Protect sovereignty & integrity of India
4. Defend the country and render national services when called upon
5. Sprit of common brotherhood
6. Preserve composite culture
7. Preserve natural environment
8. Develop scientific temper
9. Safeguard public property
10. Strive for excellence
11. Duty fo all parents/guardians to send their children in the age group of 6-14 years to
school.
Humanity Wins
Human Rights are important for everyone’s wellbeing. It is our rights and we
should be aware of it. At the same time some people are lucky to have human
rights and instead of being thankful they act reckless and in a mere moment of
faltering they don’t delve into the crux of the matter and unknowingly create an
unnecessary furore. However, there are people who do not have the basic rights,
who should be made aware of their “human” status and should be given a voice.
Instead of unnecessary action channelise the action in the right direction.
 Categorization
Economic, social and cultural rights Similarly civil and political rights
are argued to be: are categorized as:
• aspirations or goals • capitalist
• ideologically divisive/political • cost-free
• non-justiciable • immediate
• Positive • justiciable
• Progressive • negative
• resource-intensive • non-ideological/non-political
• Socialist • precise
• vague • real 'legal' rights
 THREE GENERATIONS
• Out of these generations, the third generation is the most debated and
lacks both legal and political recognition.
• 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."

Three generations

Civil and political Economic, social

rights and cultural rights Solidarity rights
 UNITED NATIONS
• The foundation of the United
Nations and the provisions of
the United Nations Charter
provided a basis for a
comprehensive system of
international law and practice
for the protection of human
rights.
• The Universal Declaration of
Human Rights (UDHR) was
adopted by the United Nations
General Assembly in 1948.
• Canadian law professor John
Humphrey and French lawyer
René Cassin were responsible
for much of the cross-national
research and the structure of
the document respectively, but
the document was structured
by Cassin.
Libyan case study
PSIR, Conflict and Peace and Human Rights

Libyan case study

[Link]
 UNITED NATIONS
• The purposes of the UN: The United Nations shall
promote:
1. to achieve international cooperation
in solving international problems of ✔ higher standards of living, full
an economic, social, cultural, or employment, and conditions of
humanitarian character economic and social progress and
development
2. promoting and encouraging respect
for human rights and for ✔ solutions of international economic,
fundamental freedoms for all social, health, and related problems
without distinction as to race, sex,
language, or religion ✔ international cultural and
educational cooperation
✔ universal respect for, and observance
of, human rights and fundamental
freedoms for all without distinction
as to race, sex, language, or religion.
 POLITICAL BODIES
✔ The United Nations Security Council has the primary responsibility
for maintaining international peace and security
✔ The United Nations General Assembly, under Article 13 of the UN
Charter, has the power to initiate studies and make recommendations on
human rights issues.
✔ 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.
SECURITY COUNCIL

POLITICAL BODIES GENERAL ASSEMBLY

HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL

 Substantive rights
✔ Right to life

✔ Freedom from torture

✔ Freedom from slavery

✔ Right to a fair trial

✔ Freedom of speech

✔ Freedom of thought, conscience and religion

✔ Freedom of movement

✔ Sexual and reproductive rights

✔ World Health Organisation

✔ Sexual orientation and gender identity