According to Griffin, “practicalities” also shape human rights. He describes practicalities as “a second reason” for human rights. They prescribe clarifying the boundaries of rights by avoiding “too many complicated turns,” expanding rights a bit to give them safety margins, and consulting facts about human nature and the nature of society. Accordingly, the generic justifying function that Griffin attributes to human rights is the protection of normative capacity to act, taking into account practical aspects. Social rights have often been defended by binding arguments that show the support they offer to the successful realization of civil and political rights. This approach was first developed philosophically by Henry Shue (Shue 1996; see also Nickel 2007 and 2016). Linking arguments defend the contested rights by showing the indispensable or very useful support they provide to the undisputed rights. For example, if a government succeeds in eradicating hunger and providing education for all, it promotes people`s ability to know, use and enjoy their freedoms, the right to due process and the right to political participation. Lack of education is often an obstacle to the realization of civil and political rights, as uneducated people often do not know what rights they have and what they can do to use and defend them. Lack of education is also a common barrier to democratic participation. Education and a minimum income make it easier for economically disadvantaged people to follow politics, participate in political campaigns, and spend the time and money needed to vote and vote.
In the next section, we examine the different types of rights protected by international law. If we know which areas of human existence are relevant to human rights law, and if we are aware of governments` obligations under that body of law, then we can begin to lobby in a variety of ways. This section shows that almost every area of injustice is relevant to human rights: from small-scale poverty to environmental damage, health, working conditions, political oppression, suffrage, genetic engineering, minority issues, conflict, genocide. and beyond. And the number of subjects is still growing today. Some of the issues related to the application of human rights law are addressed directly in the “Questions and Answers” section. These provide brief answers to some of the most frequently asked questions on human rights. If you want to know how a particular issue – for example, the right to health, education or fair working conditions – can be better protected, you will find it useful to look at the relevant background information on this topic. Climate change is currently a major environmental threat to the lives and health of many people, and it is therefore not surprising that human rights-based approaches to climate change have been developed and advocated in recent decades (see Bodansky 2011, Gardiner 2013 and Human Rights and Climate Change of the United Nations).
An approach advocated by Steve Vanderheiden accepts the idea of a human right to an environment appropriate to human life and health, and follows from this general right a more specific right to a stable climate (Vanderheiden 2008). Another approach, advocated by Simon Caney, does not require the introduction of new environmental legislation. Instead, it suggests that serious action is needed to mitigate and mitigate climate change through already well-established human rights, as severe climate change will violate many people`s rights to life, food and health (Caney 2010). This approach could be extended by arguing that severe climate change should be reduced and mitigated, as it will lead to mass human migration and other crises that will undermine the human rights capacities of many governments (for an assessment of these arguments, see Bell 2013). Minorities are often the target of violence. Human rights law calls on governments to refrain from and protect themselves from such violence. This work is done in part through the right to life, which is a standard individual right. This is also done through the Anti-Genocide Act, which protects certain groups from attempts to destroy or decimate. The Genocide Convention was one of the first human rights treaties after the Second World War. The right not to commit genocide is clearly a collective right.
It is owned by both individuals and groups and offers protection to groups as groups. It is largely negative in that it requires Governments and other authorities to refrain from destroying groups; But it also requires the creation of legal and other safeguards against genocide at the national level. Charles Beitz`s account of human rights in The Idea of Human Rights (Beitz 2009) has many similarities to Rawls`, but it is much more developed. Like Rawls, Beitz deals only with human rights as they have developed in contemporary international human rights practice. Beitz suggests that we can develop an understanding of human rights by “addressing the practical conclusions drawn by the participants competent in practice of what they consider to be valid human rights claims.” Observations on what relevant participants say and do inform the report on what human rights are. The emphasis is not on what human rights are at a deep philosophical level; Rather, it is how they function in guiding actions within a recent and still evolving discursive practice. Standards of practice guide the interpretation and application of human rights, the relevance of human rights criticism, jurisprudence before human rights tribunals and, perhaps most importantly, the response to serious human rights violations. Beitz says human rights are “issues of international concern” and are “potential triggers for transnational protection and remedial action.” Civil and political rights are enshrined in articles 3 to 21 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the ICCPR. Economic, social and cultural rights are enshrined in articles 22 to 28 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. The UDHR included economic, social and cultural rights, as well as civil and political rights, because it was based on the principle that different rights could only exist successfully in combination: a right is a claim that we can legitimately make. I am entitled to the goods in my shopping cart if I have paid for them.
Citizens have the right to elect a president if their country`s constitution guarantees it, and a child has the right to be taken to the zoo if his parents have promised that they will take him with him. These are all things that people can legitimately expect given promises or guarantees made by another party. Human rights, however, are super-demands with a difference. You are not dependent on the promises or warranties of another party. A person`s right to life does not depend on someone else`s promise not to kill them: their life can be, but their right to life is not. Their right to life depends on only one thing: that they are human. Non-discrimination permeates all international human rights law. This principle is enshrined in all major human rights treaties. It is also the central theme of 2 fundamental instruments: the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women. Creating a “culture of human rights” around the world In more than 110 countries, national human rights institutions (NHRIs) have been established to protect, promote or monitor relevant human rights in a given country.
[87] Although not all NHRIs comply with the Paris Principles,[88] the number and influence of these institutions is increasing. [89] The Paris Principles were established at the First International Workshop on National Institutions for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights, held in Paris on October 7-9, 1991, and adopted by UN Commission on Human Rights Resolution 1992/54 of 1992 and General Assembly Resolution 48/134 of 1993. The Paris Principles list a number of responsibilities for national institutions. [90] Many other values can be derived from these two core values and can help define more precisely how individuals and societies should coexist in practice. For example: freedom: because the human will is an important part of human dignity. Being forced to do something against our will degrades the human spirit. Respect for others: because a lack of respect for someone does not appreciate their individuality and essential dignity. Non-discrimination: because equality in human dignity means that we should not judge people`s rights and opportunities on the basis of their characteristics. tolerance: because intolerance indicates a lack of respect for differences; And equality does not mean uniformity. Justice: because human beings are equal in humanity, fair treatment deserves responsibility: because respect for the rights of others implies responsibility for one`s own actions and the exercise of efforts to realize the rights of individuals and of all.