Human Rights

History[edit]
Pre 1948

To completely understand Eastern Asia’s early history, in relation to human rights, it is important to
establish context. Academic experts have argued that it could be said Asia has no early history of ‘human
rights’, as the term was created by western civilization.[1] When western civilization’s approach issues
surrounding human rights, these rights are applicable to all individuals within all groups of people in society,
and equal treatment is considered fundamental, regardless of socioeconomic status or relationship with the
state. It is fair to say that most western people consider themselves entitled to human rights, while in Eastern
Asian countries, there is no such expectation of these entitlements.[2] The significant difference appears to
stem from Eastern Asian countries focusing more on a person’s basic duties than basic rights. The basic
duties of an individual tend to rise from that persons socio-economic status.

1948–Present

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) was implemented on the 10th December 1948 by the
United Nations. Therefore, we have officially witnessed 68 years of the United Nations approaching human
rights issues on a global scale. The declaration was created after the end of World War II and was the first
worldwide acknowledgement of the rights each individual human being is entitled to. [3] When the UDHR
was first created the United Nations was only made up of 51 member states, but after the surge of
decolonisation’s, beginning in the late 1940s, the UN is now made up of 193 nations. Since 1948, many
Eastern Asian countries who were formally colonised have since achieved independence and have joined the
UN, therefore acknowledging the UDHR and other major human rights treaties.[4] There is currently no
human rights body governing the Eastern Asian region, however the Association of Southeast Asian Nations
(ASEAN) issued the ASEAN Human Rights Declaration in 2012.

ASEAN Human Rights Declaration

The first five articles of ASEAN Human Rights Declaration refer specifically to rights of individual people,
and especially support the idea of human rights being an expectation to “women, children, the elderly,
persons with disabilities, migrant workers, and vulnerable and marginalised groups[5]”. It is also noteworthy
that Article 10 the declaration directly affirms the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights. [6] However,
although this initially appeared to be a positive move by the ASEAN, the commission has recently come
under criticism from international human rights groups due to a lack of action from the ASEAN
governments when it comes to enacting the declaration. It has even been suggested the declaration was made
with no genuine intentions behind it for true endorsement.[7]

Asian Human Rights Commission

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) was founded in 1984 and continues to be an active,
outspoken group who intend to promote human rights throughout Asia. The group is particularly interesting
as it is completely independent from any state, and acts with the sole intention of promoting awareness on
topical human rights issues within Asia.[8] AHRC have stated "Many Asian states have guarantees of human
rights in their constitutions, and many of them have ratified international instruments on human rights.
However, there continues to be a wide gap between rights enshrined in these documents and the abject
reality that denies people their rights. Asian states must take urgent action to implement the human rights of
their citizens and residents.[9]"

What are the Basic Principles of the Human Rights Framework?

Universality: Human rights must be afforded to everyone, without exception. The entire premise of the
framework is that people are entitled to these rights simply by virtue of being human.

Indivisibility: Human rights are indivisible and interdependent, which means that in order to guarantee civil
and political rights, a government must also ensure economic, social and cultural rights (and visa versa). The
indivisibility principle recognizes that if a government violates rights such as health, it necessarily affects
people’s ability to exercise other rights such as the right to life.

Participation: People have a right to participate in how decisions are made regarding protection of their
rights. This includes but is not limited to having input on government decisions about rights. To ensure
human rights, governments must engage and support the participation of civil society on these issues.

Accountability: Governments must create mechanisms of accountability for the enforcement of rights. It is
not enough that rights are recognized in domestic law or in policy rhetoric, there must actually be effective
measures put in place so that the government can be held accountable if those rights standards are not met.

Transparency: Transparency means that governments must be open about all information and decision-
making processes related to rights. People must be able to know and understand how major decisions
affecting rights are made and how public institutions, such as hospitals and schools, which are needed to
protect rights, are managed and run.

Non-Discrimination: Human rights must be guaranteed without discrimination of any kind. This includes
not only purposeful discrimination, but also protection from policies and practices which may have a
discriminatory effect.

Human Rights in the Philippines pertains to the concept, practice, and issues of human rights within the
Philippine archipelago. The concept of "human rights," in the context of the Philippines, pertains mainly
(but is not limited) to the civil and political rights of a person[1] living in the Philippines by reason of the
1987 Philippines Constitution.[2]

Human rights are a justified set of claims that set moral standards to members of the human race, not
exclusive to a specific community or citizenship.[3] Membership in the human race is the sole qualification to
obtain these right.[3] Human rights, unlike area-specific conventions of international laws (e.g. European
Convention on Human Rights and International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and on Economic,
Social and Cultural Rights),[3] are universally justifiable as it pertains to the entire human race, regardless of
geographical location.[3]

The Philippines is a signatory to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) drafted by the United
Nations (UN) in the 1948.[4] The Universal Declaration of Human Rights was adopted, alongside the
Genocide Convention and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, by the
United Nations in response to the tragic and horrendous violations of human rights during the Second World
War.[5] The United Nations Charter, a treaty, was created in order to define what roles, powers, and duties the
United Nations is allowed to practice in dealing with international relations. Article I of the UN Charter
states that the UN aims:

"To achieve international co-operation in solving international problems of an economic, social, cultural,
or humanitarian character, and in promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and for
fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion;"[6]

According to the Charter, the jurisdiction of the United Nations is to provide cooperation among the nations,
and not act as an international government. The UN Charter paved the way for the drafting of the UDHR.
The UDHR aims to promote "universal respect for, and the observance of, human rights."[5] Thus, the UDHR
is merely a declaration for each signatory to adopt to its own political system. The significance of the UDHR
as stated in its Preamble is:

"Whereas a common understanding of these rights and freedoms is of the greatest importance for the full
realization of this pledge."[4]

As a signatory to the UDHR, the Philippines then declares an understanding and adherence of these
fundamental and inalienable rights to its population. The Philippines has adhered to the UDHR through the
Bill of Rights, and continued to create laws and policies that cater to a specific sector, like the Labor Code
and the Indigenous Peoples' Rights.

Magna Carta Libertatum (Latin for "the Great Charter of the Liberties"), commonly called Magna
Carta ("the Great Charter"), is a charter agreed to by King John of England at Runnymede, near Windsor,
on 15 June 1215.[a] First drafted by the Archbishop of Canterbury to make peace between the unpopular King
and a group of rebel barons, it promised the protection of church rights, protection for the barons from
illegal imprisonment, access to swift justice, and limitations on feudal payments to the Crown, to be
implemented through a council of 25 barons. Neither side stood behind their commitments, and the charter
was annulled by Pope Innocent III, leading to the First Barons' War. After John's death, the regency
government of his young son, Henry III, reissued the document in 1216, stripped of some of its more radical
content, in an unsuccessful bid to build political support for their cause. At the end of the war in 1217, it
formed part of the peace treaty agreed at Lambeth, where the document acquired the name Magna Carta, to
distinguish it from the smaller Charter of the Forest which was issued at the same time. Short of funds,
Henry reissued the charter again in 1225 in exchange for a grant of new taxes; his son, Edward I, repeated
the exercise in 1297, this time confirming it as part of England's statute law.

The charter became part of English political life and was typically renewed by each monarch in turn,
although as time went by and the fledgling English Parliament passed new laws, it lost some of its practical
significance. At the end of the 16th century there was an upsurge in interest in Magna Carta. Lawyers and
historians at the time believed that there was an ancient English constitution, going back to the days of the
Anglo-Saxons, that protected individual English freedoms. They argued that the Norman invasion of 1066
had overthrown these rights, and that Magna Carta had been a popular attempt to restore them, making the
charter an essential foundation for the contemporary powers of Parliament and legal principles such as
habeas corpus. Although this historical account was badly flawed, jurists such as Sir Edward Coke used
Magna Carta extensively in the early 17th century, arguing against the divine right of kings propounded by
the Stuart monarchs. Both James I and his son Charles I attempted to suppress the discussion of Magna
Carta, until the issue was curtailed by the English Civil War of the 1640s and the execution of Charles.

The political myth of Magna Carta and its protection of ancient personal liberties persisted after the Glorious
Revolution of 1688 until well into the 19th century. It influenced the early American colonists in the
Thirteen Colonies and the formation of the American Constitution in 1787, which became the supreme law
of the land in the new republic of the United States.[b] Research by Victorian historians showed that the
original 1215 charter had concerned the medieval relationship between the monarch and the barons, rather
than the rights of ordinary people, but the charter remained a powerful, iconic document, even after almost
all of its content was repealed from the statute books in the 19th and 20th centuries. Magna Carta still forms
an important symbol of liberty today, often cited by politicians and campaigners, and is held in great respect
by the British and American legal communities, Lord Denning describing it as "the greatest constitutional
document of all times – the foundation of the freedom of the individual against the arbitrary authority of the
despot".[1]

In the 21st century, four exemplifications of the original 1215 charter remain in existence, held by the
British Library and the cathedrals of Lincoln and Salisbury. There are also a handful of the subsequent
charters in public and private ownership, including copies of the 1297 charter in both the United States and
Australia. The original charters were written on parchment sheets using quill pens, in heavily abbreviated
medieval Latin, which was the convention for legal documents at that time. Each was sealed with the royal
great seal (made of beeswax and resin sealing wax): very few of the seals have survived. Although scholars
refer to the 63 numbered "clauses" of Magna Carta, this is a modern system of numbering, introduced by Sir
William Blackstone in 1759; the original charter formed a single, long unbroken text. The four original 1215
charters were displayed together at the British Library for one day, 3 February 2015, to mark the 800th
anniversary of Magna Carta.

A bill of rights, sometimes called a declaration of rights or a charter of rights, is a list of the most
important rights to the citizens of a country. The purpose is to protect those rights against infringement from
public officials and private citizens. The term "bill of rights" originates from England, where it refers to the
Bill of Rights 1689 enacted by Parliament following the Glorious Revolution, asserting the supremacy of
Parliament over the monarch, and listing a number of fundamental rights and liberties.

Bills of rights may be entrenched or unentrenched. An entrenched bill of rights cannot be modified or
repealed by a country's legislature through normal procedure, instead requiring a supermajority or
referendum; often it is part of a country's constitution and therefore subject to special procedures applicable
to constitutional amendments. A not entrenched bill of rights is a normal statute law and as such can be
modified or repealed by the legislature at will.

In practice, not every jurisdiction enforces the protection of the rights articulated in its bill of rights.

ARTICLE III
BILL OF RIGHTS
Section 1. No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due
process of
law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws.
Section 2. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and
effects against unreasonable searches and seizures of whatever nature and for any
purpose shall be inviolable, and no search warrant or warrant of arrest shall issue
except
upon probable cause to be determined personally by the judge after examination
under
oath or affirmation of the complainant and the witnesses he may produce, and
particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be
seized.
Section 3. (1) The privacy of communication and correspondence shall be inviolable
except upon lawful order of the court, or when public safety or order requires
otherwise,
as prescribed by law.
(2) Any evidence obtained in violation of this or the preceding section shall be
inadmissible for any purpose in any proceeding.
Section 4. No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech, of expression, or
of
the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition the
government
for redress of grievances.
Section 5. No law shall be made respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting
the free exercise thereof. The free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and
worship, without discrimination or preference, shall forever be allowed. No religious
test shall be required for the exercise of civil or political rights.
Section 6. The liberty of abode and of changing the same within the limits prescribed
by
law shall not be impaired except upon lawful order of the court. Neither shall the
right
to travel be impaired except in the interest of national security, public safety, or
public
health, as may be provided by law.
Section 7. The right of the people to information on matters of public concern shall
be
recognized. Access to official records, and to documents and papers pertaining to
official
acts, transactions, or decisions, as well as to government research data used as basis
for
policy development, shall be afforded the citizen, subject to such limitations as may
be
provided by law.
Section 8. The right of the people, including those employed in the public and private
sectors, to form unions, associations, or societies for purposes not contrary to law
shall
not be abridged.
Section 9. Private property shall not be taken for public use without just
compensation.
Section 10. No law impairing the obligation of contracts shall be passed.
Section 11. Free access to the courts and quasi-judicial bodies and adequate legal
assistance shall not be denied to any person by reason of poverty.
Section 12. (1) Any person under investigation for the commission of an offense shall
have the right to be informed of his right to remain silent and to have competent and
independent counsel preferably of his own choice. If the person cannot afford the
services of counsel, he must be provided with one. These rights cannot be waived
except
in writing and in the presence of counsel.
(2) No torture, force, violence, threat, intimidation, or any other means which vitiate
the
free will shall be used against him. Secret detention places, solitary, incommunicado,
or
other similar forms of detention are prohibited.
(3) Any confession or admission obtained in violation of this or Section 17 hereof
shall
be inadmissible in evidence against him.
(4) The law shall provide for penal and civil sanctions for violations of this section as
well as compensation to the rehabilitation of victims of torture or similar practices,
and
their families.
Section 13. All persons, except those charged with offenses punishable by reclusion
perpetua when evidence of guilt is strong, shall, before conviction, be bailable by
sufficient sureties, or be released on recognizance as may be provided by law. The
right
to bail shall not be impaired even when the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus is
suspended. Excessive bail shall not be required.
Section 14. (1) No person shall be held to answer for a criminal offense without due
process of law.
(2) In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall be presumed innocent until the
contrary is proved, and shall enjoy the right to be heard by himself and counsel, to be
informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him, to have a speedy,
impartial, and public trial, to meet the witnesses face to face, and to have
compulsory
process to secure the attendance of witnesses and the production of evidence in his
behalf. However, after arraignment, trial may proceed notwithstanding the absence
of
the accused: Provided, that he has been duly notified and his failure to appear is
unjustifiable.
Section 15. The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended except
in
cases of invasion or rebellion, when the public safety requires it.
Section 16. All persons shall have the right to a speedy disposition of their cases
before
all judicial, quasi-judicial, or administrative bodies.
Section 17. No person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.
Section 18. (1) No person shall be detained solely by reason of his political beliefs
and
aspirations.
(2) No involuntary servitude in any form shall exist except as a punishment for a
crime
whereof the party shall have been duly convicted.
Section 19. (1) Excessive fines shall not be imposed, nor cruel, degrading or inhuman
punishment inflicted. Neither shall death penalty be imposed, unless, for compelling
reasons involving heinous crimes, the Congress hereafter provides for it. Any death
penalty already imposed shall be reduced to reclusion perpetua.
(2) The employment of physical, psychological, or degrading punishment against any
prisoner or detainee or the use of substandard or inadequate penal facilities under
subhuman conditions shall be dealt with by law.
Section 20. No person shall be imprisoned for debt or non-payment of a poll tax.
Section 21. No person shall be twice put in jeopardy of punishment for the same
offense.
If an act is punished by a law and an ordinance, conviction or acquittal under either
shall constitute a bar to another prosecution for the same act.

Section 22. No ex post facto law or bill of attainder shall be enacted.