Intro to Human Rights

• Human rights are inherent, belonging to individuals simply for being human.
• Human rights are universal, applying to all people regardless of status.
• Human rights are inalienable, meaning they cannot be taken away except in specific legal circumstances.
• Human rights are indivisible and interdependent; no right is superior, and all contribute to human dignity.
• Human rights aim to protect human agency and well-being, ensuring a just society by preventing exploitation, oppression, and deprivation.

Historical Development of Human Rights

• The concept of rights can be traced back to Stoicism, which emphasized living according to the laws of nature.
• Sophocles' Antigone illustrates the conflict between moral duty and state law, a fundamental human rights issue.
• Roman law recognized a form of natural law (jus gentium) that applied to all humans.

Medieval Era: Natural Law and Duties

• Natural law was seen more as a duty rather than a right.
• Aristotle and St. Thomas Aquinas justified hierarchical social structures, including slavery.
• The shift from feudalism led to a growing recognition of individual liberties.

Early Modern Era: Natural Rights Theory

• Thinkers like Hugo Grotius, John Locke, Montesquieu, and Rousseau developed natural rights theories.
• John Locke believed governments exist to protect the rights: life, liberty, and property.
• Montesquieu & Rousseau advocated that rights must be protected through laws and institutions via social contract theory.

Revolutions and the Institutionalization of Rights

• The American Revolution (1776) included the Declaration of Independence, emphasizing "unalienable Rights" (Life, Liberty, Pursuit of Happiness).
• The French Revolution (1789) included the Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen, with the values of Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité.
• These ideas fueled democracy, constitutionalism, and resistance to absolute monarchy.

19th Century Skepticism & Challenges

• Thinkers like Bentham and Burke criticized natural rights as abstract and impractical.
• Legal positivism arose; law is state-made, not natural.
• Marxists stated rights should focus on economic justice, not just political freedom.

20th Century: From Natural Rights to Human Rights

• World War II atrocities, such as the Holocaust, highlighted the failure of state-based rights protections.
• The UN was created in 1945.
• The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) was created in 1948.
• The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) was created in 1976.
• International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) was created in 1976.
• The UDHR, ICCPR, and ICESCR form the International Bill of Human Rights.

Understanding Human Rights Today

• Despite international recognition, human rights remain contested.
• Origins: Are they divine, moral, legal, or social constructs?
• Scope: Are they absolute or subject to limitations?
• Priorities: Should civil-political rights take precedence over economic-social rights?

The Three Generations of Human Rights (Karel Vasak's Framework)

• First Generation: Civil & Political Rights (“Liberté”): These protect individual freedoms from government abuse and emphasize negative rights (freedom from interference).
• Examples of First Generation Rights: Freedom of speech, religion, assembly, fair trial, and voting rights.
• Second Generation: Economic, Social & Cultural Rights (“Égalité”): These focus on state obligations to provide basic needs and emphasize positive rights (entitlements).
• Examples of Second Generation Rights: The Right to work, education, healthcare, and social security.
• Third Generation: Collective Rights (“Fraternité”): These are rights for groups, communities, and humanity as a whole.
• Examples of Third Generation Rights: Right to development, peace, a clean environment, and humanitarian assistance.

Key Debates in Human Rights

• Liberty-first argument: Civil and political rights must come first, which is a Western liberal view.
• Equality-first argument: Economic and social rights are fundamental, which is a socialist view.
• Reality: Both are interdependent.
• Universalists claim human rights apply to all cultures, which is the UN-based perspective.
• Relativists argue human rights should respect local traditions and customs (like the Asian values debate).
• There is tension between universalism and cultural relativism: Can human rights justify intervention in sovereign states?
• Tension exists between international norms and national sovereignty.
• Humanitarian interventions (e.g., in Bosnia, Libya, Kosovo) are examples of this tension.

International Human Rights Frameworks: Key Treaties & Organizations

• Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948): Non-binding but influential.
• ICCPR & ICESCR (1976): Legally binding covenants.
• UN Human Rights Council: Monitors violations.
• International Criminal Court (ICC): Tries crimes against humanity.

Regional Systems

• European Court of Human Rights (ECHR)
• Inter-American Court of Human Rights
• African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights

Challenges in Enforcement

• States selectively comply with human rights obligations.
• Lack of enforcement in authoritarian regimes.
• Geopolitics affects accountability (e.g., UN Security Council vetoes).

Emerging Trends in Human Rights

• Emerging "Fourth Generation" Rights include aspects like women's rights, children's rights, and future generations' rights (climate justice).
• Private Actors & Human Rights focuses on holding corporations accountable for labor abuses and environmental harm.
• Digital Rights & Privacy addresses concerns over surveillance, censorship, and data protection.

Summary & Key Takeaways

• Human rights are universal, but their implementation is contested.
• The concept evolved from natural law to international legal frameworks.
• Key historical influences include Stoicism, Locke's liberalism, revolutions, and post-WWII treaties.
• There are three generations of rights: political freedoms, socio-economic rights, and collective rights.
• Tensions exist between liberty vs. equality, universalism vs. relativism, and sovereignty vs. intervention.
• The global human rights system is strong in theory but faces challenges in enforcement.

How Are Human Rights Political?

• Human rights are rooted in political liberalism.
• They emerged from the liberal political tradition, particularly the Enlightenment.
• The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) reflects this tradition but lacks a single philosophical justification.
• Human rights are shaped by different political actors, including governments, international organizations, and activists.
• Debates over which rights to prioritize (e.g., civil and political vs. economic and social) reflect competing ideologies.
• Human rights laws depend on political interpretation and enforcement.
• Local contexts shape how rights are implemented (e.g., freedom of speech in democratic vs. authoritarian states).
• The pursuit of human rights often leads to conflict with unjust power structures.
• Anti-apartheid movement in South Africa, civil rights movement in the U.S. are examples of rights conflicting with unjust power structures.
• Human rights activism is revolutionary.

The Negative/Positive Rights Distinction

• One of the major distinctions in human rights theory is between negative and positive rights.
• Negative Rights (Liberty Rights) require government non-interference.
• Examples: Freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and protection from torture.
• Classic in Western liberalism (Locke, Mill).
• Often seen as more enforceable than positive rights.
• Positive Rights (Welfare Rights) require government action to fulfill them.
• Examples: Right to education, healthcare, and fair wages.
• More common in socialist and welfare-state traditions.
• Critics argue they are harder to implement than negative rights.

Langlois' Critique: The False Dichotomy

• Langlois states that all rights require both non-interference and active measures.
• Freedom of speech (negative right) needs institutions like courts and press protections (positive actions) to be meaningful.
• Healthcare (positive right) also requires non-interference (e.g., preventing discrimination in medical care).
• This supports the idea of rights as indivisible and interdependent.

Moral Justifications for Human Rights

• Human Dignity: All human beings deserve respect and fair treatment simply by virtue of being human.
• Autonomy: Protecting individual freedom and self-determination (Kant).
• Equality: Ensuring equal treatment and non-discrimination.
• Reason and Rationality: Humans, as rational beings, should have rights.
• Common Human Needs: Human rights ensure basic needs like security, shelter, and education.
• Consensus Theory: Rights are justified through global agreement, such as the UDHR.

Debate: Are These Justifications Universal?

• Cultural relativists argue that these justifications reflect Western values.
• Universality: Universal principles exist across cultures (e.g., Confucian ethics, Islamic justice, Indigenous rights).

Revolutionary Uses of Human Rights

• U.S. Declaration of Independence (1776) - Basis for civil and political rights because “All men are created equal”.
• French Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen (1789) – Emphasized freedom, equality, and fraternity.
• These documents helped legitimize revolutions against monarchy and oppression.

How Human Rights Support Revolutions

• Human rights can be used to challenge unjust governments, such as in the abolition of slavery, anti-colonial movements, and feminist movements.
• Critics state that human rights rhetoric can be manipulated for political gain.

Early Critics of Human Rights

• Conservative Critics (e.g., Edmund Burke) stated rights are not universal but rooted in historical traditions.
• Burke rejected the French Revolution's radical idea of human rights, arguing that society functions on traditions, not abstract rights.
• Utilitarian Critics (e.g., Jeremy Bentham) called rights "nonsense upon stilts" because they are abstract ideas with no real basis.
• Alternative view: Rights should be based on utility (i.e., maximizing happiness for the greatest number).
• This could justify sacrificing minority rights for the majority's benefit.
• Socialist and Marxist Critics believed human rights focus too much on individual freedoms and ignore economic justice.
• True freedom requires economic equality, leading to prioritizing positive rights over negative rights.

Modern Relevance

• These criticisms remain influential.
• Burke's view supports cultural relativism and tradition-based governance.
• Bentham's view echoes in debates over the effectiveness of human rights law.
• The Marxist view continues in discussions about economic and social justice.

Key Takeaways

• Human rights are deeply political, shaped by liberalism, power struggles, and political agendas.
• Moral justifications for human rights include autonomy, dignity, equality, and rationality, but their universality is debated.
• Human rights have been used in revolutionary movements to justify resistance to oppression.
• Critics of human rights (Burke, Bentham, Marxists) challenge their universality, practicality, and focus on individualism.

Why Is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) Political?

• The UDHR reflects Enlightenment Liberalism because it is rooted in Western political traditions, particularly the liberal philosophy of the Enlightenment.
• Thinkers like John Locke, Immanuel Kant, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau influenced the UDHR by emphasizing individual freedoms, political rights, and the rule of law.
• These ideas align closely with Western liberal democracies but have faced resistance in societies with different cultural and political traditions.
• Example of Political Influence: The focus on civil and political rights (e.g., freedom of speech, democracy) reflects a liberal framework, which some non-Western societies see as imposing Western values.
• The UDHR Emerged from Post-WWII Politics: After World War II, there was a strong political need to establish a global moral framework to prevent future atrocities (e.g., the Holocaust, fascism, war crimes).
• The UDHR was shaped by Cold War tensions: The United States and Western allies emphasized civil and political rights (negative rights) while The Soviet Union and socialist states prioritized economic, social, and cultural rights (positive rights).
• This ideological divide led to the later development of two separate treaties: International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) (1976) and International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) (1976).
• The UDHR Lacks a Single Philosophical Justification because to gain consensus among different countries, but this means it lacks a clear philosophical foundation.
• Instead of being based on a single ethical theory, it draws from multiple traditions: natural rights tradition (Locke, Kant and individual autonomy and liberty), Utilitarianism (Bentham, Mill and maximizing well-being) and Marxist/socialist influences (economic and social justice).
• The ambiguity of its moral basis makes it easier for different political systems to interpret it in ways that fit their own agendas.
• Human Rights Are Used as Political Tools and is frequently invoked in political conflicts.
• Democratic states use human rights to justify interventions (e.g., NATO's intervention in Kosovo).
• Authoritarian regimes often reject Western human rights norms, arguing that they are a tool of political control.
• Example of Political Influence: The U.S. criticized China's human rights violations (e.g., treatment of Uyghurs, lack of political freedoms), while China accused the U.S. of hypocrisy (e.g., racial inequality, police violence).
• The UN Security Council often fails to act on human rights violations due to veto power by major political actors (e.g., U.S., China, Russia).
• The UDHR's Implementation Depends on Political Will because unlike national constitutions, the UDHR is not legally binding.

Conclusion: The UDHR as a Political Instrument

• The UDHR is not just a legal document; it is a political tool shaped by historical events, ideological conflicts, and power struggles.
• Its ambiguous moral foundation allows for multiple interpretations, making it both influential and contested.
• The political use of human rights continues today in diplomacy, international law, and global conflicts.

How Treaties Work

• A treaty is a legally binding agreement between two or more states that establishes obligations under international law.
• Treaties can be bilateral (between two states) or multilateral (involving multiple states).
• Treaties in human rights law regulate state behavior rather than individual actions.
• Negotiation involves states discussing terms through international bodies like the UN.
• A signature expresses a state's intent to comply but is not legally bound.
• Ratification is when a state agrees legally bound after following national legal procedures.
• Accession is when a state joins a treaty it did not originally sign.
• A treaty only becomes binding after the required number of states ratify it.

Enforcement of Treaties

• Customary International Law: Even if states don't ratify treaties, widespread and consistent adherence to norms can make them legally binding.
• International Monitoring: UN bodies and regional courts monitor compliance.
• Sanctions & Diplomatic Pressure: States can face economic sanctions, trade restrictions, or political isolation for non-compliance.
• Universal Jurisdiction: Some violations, like genocide, can be prosecuted anywhere.

Loopholes & Ways to Avoid Responsibilities

• Even after signing a treaty, states use several legal mechanisms to limit or evade obligations.
• A reservation allows a state to exclude or modify specific treaty provisions.
• Example: The U.S. ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) but placed a reservation on Article 6, refusing to abolish the death penalty.
• A declaration is a formal statement by a state clarifying its interpretation of a treaty.
• Example: China made a declaration upon ratifying the ICESCR, stating that economic rights would be implemented progressively based on national conditions.
• Derogation permits a state to suspend certain human rights obligations in times of national emergency.
• Some rights are non-derogable, meaning they cannot be suspended, such as freedom from torture, right to life, freedom of thought, conscience, and religion under ICCPR Article 4.
• During COVID-19, several states suspended freedom of assembly to enforce lockdowns.

Humanitarian Law & Laws of War

• International humanitarian law (IHL) regulates conduct during armed conflicts to protect civilians and combatants.
• IHL is also called the laws of war or laws of armed conflict.
• The Geneva Conventions (1949) protect civilians, prisoners of war (POWs), and the wounded
• The Hague Conventions (1899, 1907) regulate means and methods of warfare (e.g., banning chemical weapons).
• IHL applies only in wartime, while human rights law applies at all times.
• Killing is lawful under IHL (if following rules), but human rights law prohibits arbitrary killings.

Human Rights & International Law

• Human rights law ensures state responsibility for protecting individuals with sources including treaties, customary international law, and general legal principles.

Customary International Law

• Legal norms are widely practiced and considered binding even without treaties.
• Prohibition of genocide.
• Ban on slavery.
• Torture is illegal under all circumstances.
• Soft Law includes non-binding guidelines and declarations.
• Examples: Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and Declaration on the Right to Development.

Monitoring & Enforcing Human Rights

International UN System

• The is composed of Primary Bodies (UN Charter-Based)

1. Human Rights Council (HRC)

• Reviews state compliance through the Universal Periodic Review (UPR).
• Appoints Special Rapporteurs to investigate violations.

2. Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR)

• Assists states in implementing human rights laws.

Secondary Bodies (Treaty-Baseds)

• Each treaty has a monitoring committee.
• Example: The Human Rights Committee (HRC) monitors ICCPR compliance.

International & Transitional Justice

• International Criminal Court (ICC) prosecutes genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity.
• International Court of Justice (ICJ) settles state disputes over treaties.
• Transitional Justice includes processes like truth commissions & special tribunals (e.g., Rwanda Tribunal).

Definitions

• Sovereignty is a state's authority over its affairs.
• Reparations are compensations for human rights violations.
• Ratification is the legal process through which a state formally commits to a treaty.

Theorization of Human Rights

• Negative Rights: Freedom from state interference (e.g., free speech).
• Positive Rights: Requires state action (e.g., right to healthcare).

Moral Justifications

• Autonomy: Rights protect individual freedom.
• Equality: Rights ensure non-discrimination.
• States Agree to Treaties through:
• Signature: Shows intent but is not binding.
• Ratification: Legally commits the state.
• Accession: Joining later.

Enforcement of Treaties

Compliance Mechanisms

• Self-reporting
• UN oversight
• Customary International Law: Unwritten rules a state must follow.
• Universal Jurisdiction: Some crimes (e.g., torture, genocide) can be prosecuted anywhere.
• Sanctions & diplomatic pressure.

Human Rights to Justify Revolution

• Thomas Hobbes advocated for monarchy, fearing chaos without strong rule.
• Hobbes believed that without a sovereign, life would be “nasty, brutish, and short."
• John Locke argued that people have the right to overthrow unjust governments.
• The French Revolution (1789) was justified using human rights principles supporting Human Rights as a Justification for Revolution and the Challenge to Unjust Governments.
• These rights have played a key role in justifying revolutions and challenging unjust governments, particularly when states fail to uphold fundamental freedoms.
• The philosophical basis is rooted in political theory, particularly in Enlightenment thought and social contract theory.
• John Locke argued governments exist to protect life, liberty, and property.
• When a government becomes tyrannical and violates natural rights, the people have the right to overthrow it.

The UN Declaration of Human Rights

• The UDHR (1948) provides a legal and moral foundation for challenging unjust governments that violate basic human rights.
• Critics state human rights rhetoric can be manipulated for political gain.
• The UDHR asserts in Article 1 that “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights."
• The UDHR dictates in Article 30 that "No state or group has the right to suppress these freedoms."
• Examples of modern movements like the Arab Spring (2011–2012) in Tunisia, Egypt, and Libya used human rights language to justify uprisings against oppressive regimes, identifying freedom of speech, political participation, and the right to a fair trial as key demands.

The Legal and Political Challenges of Using Human Rights to Justify Revolution

• If a state violates fundamental human rights, international law recognizes the right to self-determination.
• The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) supports the right to political participation and resistance against oppression.
• The Responsibility to Protect (adopted by the UN) suggests that when a state fails to protect its citizens' rights, external intervention may be justified.
• State sovereignty remains a legal barrier because international law prioritizes non-interference in domestic affairs.
• Powerful states can manipulate the human rights rhetoric to justify regime change for political interests (e.g., Iraq War 2003).
• Authoritarian regimes argue that stability is more important than rights, as China claims that economic rights (are more important political freedoms).
• Human rights provide both a moral and legal basis for revolution and political change.
• Locke, Rousseau, and the UDHR frame rights violations as justification for resisting unjust regimes.
• International law remains cautious about endorsing revolution, prioritizing state sovereignty.
• Modern movements, like the Arab Spring, continue to use human rights as a tool to demand change.

Explore the challenges in enforcing human rights, the UDHR, and regional systems. Test your knowledge of the chronological order of key documents and emerging trends, such as concerns over surveillance and data protection. Understand universalism and cultural relativism.