Human rights Essay

The United Nations defines valet rights as rights inherent to every homophile cosmoss, whatever our nationality, place of residence, sex, national or ethnic origin, religion, language or any otherwise status (OHCHR 2009). They argon rights that are guaranteed to all adult male beings simply because they are gentle military personnel race. When commonwealth speak of having a right or it is their right to acquire this or that or to do that or the other, it is usually a reference to their military personnel rights. To have a right implies an entitlement to roundthing.Other people are obligated to bedevil it to you and if this right is endangered or denied then you can make special claims on political, moral and favorable grounds that will galvanize the concerned parties into performanceion and obligate the person guilty of denying the rights to discharge them hitherto if they are not willing. Rights can therefore be termed as rules of interaction between persons guideline s on how creation should relate to each other. A intrusion of these rules is not only improper it may subject mortal to special corrective claims as well as sanctions usually but not always at the discretion of the rights holder.Right holders are therefore not just passive beneficiaries of their rights but are actively in control of them. It is worth noting that gay rights are not simply abstract principles such as equality, security or liberty. Rather, they refer to the social practices that have been instituted precisely for the realization of those values and are recognised by constabulary (Donnelly 2003, p. 7-8 11). The international treaties on hu part rights have summarized humanity rights under two categories well-bred and political rights on 1 hand and socio-ethnical and economic rights on the other.Civil and political rights constitute the license of assembly, freedom from torture, freedom of speech, freedom from slavery and the right to a fair trial. On the othe r hand, socio- cultural and economic rights cover the right to social security, the right to equal wages for the same work regardless of gender, right to leisure time with control of working hours, right to good health, right to free radical education and the right to take part in the community cultural life (Asher and Banks 2007, p. 4).The violation of human rights is more commonly referred to as human rights abuse. It may include physical and sexual assault, mass killings, torture, vicious detention, disappearances of persons, forced displacement among others. Asher and Banks (2007, p. 4) point taboo that abuses of socio- cultural and economic rights are not as effortless to pinpoint as civil and political rights violations but include forced labor, with holding of humanitarian residuum supplies, destruction or seizing of property, and the various forms of discrimination.It is precisely because of these violations of human rights on a global exfoliation that the internationa l community sought to form treaties and declarations that would legally bind countries and compel them to observe human rights, thereby protecting all humanness regardless of their place in society and their country of origin. However, before analyzing human rights in international relations, it is important to first of all understand their justification. Justification of human rights As before mentioned, human rights are guaranteed to humans simply by virtue of their being humans.They are equal rights, that is, one is either a human being or not. thitherfore they apply equally to all humans across the board. They are also inalienable, that is, one cannot stop being a human even though he or she behaves in a totally inhuman way or conversely, is treated in an inhuman manner (Donnelly 2003, p. 10). Some people may argue that human rights should not apply to trustworthy categories of people especially those who behave in an inhuman way towards others. But since these people cannot stop being humans, their rights remain inalienable. Thus even prisoners have their rights.However, it is worth noting that infringement of other peoples rights may cause one to loose some of his or her rights as a form of sanction. Our entitlement to human rights comes with the tariff of ensuring that the rights of others are respected as well but even when some of these rights are taken extraneous as a sanction for violations, it is well nigh impossible to forfeit all rights and one frame entitled to at least some fundamental rights whose violation may cause an outcry from human rights advocates never mind that this person has babyd other peoples rights (Orend 2002, p. 7). This gives rise to the question what justifies the holding of human rights? One of the grounds on which the holding of human rights is justified is the fact that it is intrinsic to human nature. We all share a core belief that it is profoundly and distinctly wrong to cause a fellow human being to suffer. The occasioning of such harm and suffering is viewed as unjust and below what is judge of human behavior and can therefore not be tolerated at any cost. The only exception to this is if the harm inflicted is in self defense or defense of others.Thus human rights do not exist because of force or over-romanticizing of issues but simply because of an intrinsic compulsion to treat fellow human beings in a minimally civilized manner (Orend 2002, p. 69 73). This argument draws heavily from social morality. compassionate rights exist in the beliefs that are shared by humans across the globe. They are a progeny of ethical customs and practices and their codification into law only facilitate their application though they existed before the law (Orend 2002, p. 76).The grounding of human rights on morality and ethics has however come under criticism. Some people feel that moral norms are an illusion that has subconsciously been entrenched into our thoughts and our language. This gives rise to the problem of justification. It is important for human rights to be grounded on an objective viewpoint rather than the subjectivity of others who wish to impose their beliefs on the appease of the populace (Gorecki 1996, p. 19). However, morality appears to be the best grounds for justification of human rights.This is because morality and ethics are universally upheld and all societies have a code of conduct that implies respect for fellow human beings with some sanctions when these are violated. In deed as Gorecki (1996, p. 17-18) asserts, the inalienable rights of liberty, life as well as the stake of happiness as proclaimed in the American Declaration of Independence were not proclaimed because of the immanent thoughts of Thomas Jefferson or the imposition of the Continental Congress.They were given independent of any subjective views since every man has these inherent rights by virtue of their humanity. Thus in this sense, human rights are objectively justified. Other validat ions for human rights are based on religious principles. Such arguments usually posit that human rights are positive by God and should therefore be observed since not doing so would be in violation of Gods teachings. The grounding of human rights in religious teachings places them beyond interference by man or government.Such arguments have been referred to as metaphysical justifications and they place human rights justification beyond human design linking them to the supernatural (Edel 1978, p. 126 128). However, Orend (2002, p. 73) argues that the premises on which religious justifications are based are controversial as well as exclusionary and go against the principle of equality and universalism with respect to the protection of human rights. A trey human rights justification is based on the premise of legal positivism.Legal positivism implies that it is only those rights which have been ratified into law that are applicable and legitimate. Thus people are compelled to observe human rights lest they be punished by the law. The penalties for not obeying human rights are epitomed and include imprisonment, the payment of fines and simply the impression of a criminal record. There are numerous declarations, charters and treaties which provide these legal guidelines for the countries and they apply across the globe. However, Orend (2002, p. 4) points out a weakness in this justification, stating that in the event that some important human rights have not been ratified, then this may pose a problem since people do not feel stimulate to observe them. Human rights and international relations Human rights are universal and are therefore guaranteed by international law. International human rights laws have been expressed through the formation of treaties, application of general human rights principles and customary international law among others.International laws on human rights obligate governments across the globe to act in certain ways or to desist from eng aging in particular acts that may violate the rights of the citizens. This is done with a view to protecting the fundamental rights and freedoms of all humans across the globe (OHCHR 2009). There are numerous international treaties, charters and declarations that have been internationally agreed upon through numerous human rights conventions and which outline how international human rights will be handled.For instance, the 1945 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights hold 7 states that no one should be subjected to any inhuman, cruel or degrading treatment. Ignatieff terms this article as the juridical revolution of human rights. Other internationally recognized human rights documents are the 1948 geneva conventions, the 1949 Geneva conventions revision, the International convention on asylum of 1951 and the common Declaration of human rights (Ignatieff et al 2003, p. vii). The planetary Declaration of Human Rights was proclaimed by the United Nations General Assemb ly in 1948.It is one of the almost recognized human rights documents and outline basic rights and freedoms of the individual which are to be recognized globally (UN 2009). The Universal declaration of human rights- this great and inspiring instrument was born of an increased sense of responsibility by the international community for the promotion and protection of mans basic rights and freedoms. The world has come to a clear realization of the fact that freedom, justice and world peace can only be secure through the international promotion and protection of these rights and freedoms.U Thant, Third United Nations Secretary- General, 1961-1971 (UN Cyberschoolbus, 2009) The above quote by chance best exemplifies the commitment of the international community towards the promotion of human rights. The internationalization of human rights meant that they were no eternal the preserve of the state but that the states were answerable to the international community for the treatment that they accorded their citizens. However, there is no determining(prenominal) action with which to deal with states that violate international rights violations (Forsythe 2006, p. 5).