Are Human Rights Universal?

International Consensus ◽

Natural Right ◽

International Human ◽

Moral Superiority

Broadly speaking, a human right is the same as a natural right, insofar as it is the property of anyone participating in human nature. However, ‘human rights’ usually refers to those bodies of rights that have attracted international recognition by states since 1945. Rights subscribed to by states possess a special authority that derives from national recognition, is confirmed by some international consensus, and is reinforced by international courts. This legal authority endows a natural, moral claim with the characteristic force of ‘a right’. From the early 1970s, international human rights have provoked the complaint from non-Western societies that they embody ‘neo-imperialist’ assumptions about the intellectual and moral superiority of Western culture. This chapter examines that complaint. It concludes that the human goods that rights seek to protect are universal, and it is therefore unlikely that any society has ever existed without establishing customary or legal rights that enjoy some security. Moreover, there is empirical evidence that some non-Western societies have in fact established rights, many of them familiar to Westerners. There are, however, different ways in which a good can be protected by a legal right, and the way chosen by a particular society will be shaped by its historical, cultural, and other circumstances. Therefore, while the good to be protected is universal, and while the means of protecting it by establishing a right is very probably universal, the specific form of the protective right will not be universal.

Part IV Normative Evolution, Ch.22 Core Rights and Obligations

The Oxford Handbook of International Human Rights Law ◽

10.1093/law/9780199640133.003.0023 ◽

2013 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Scheinin Martin

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

The State ◽

Legal Rights ◽

Human Rights Law ◽

Human Right ◽

The Core ◽

International Human ◽

Definition Of

This article examines the three main approaches in the identification of the core rights and obligations in international human rights law. These include the consideration of some human rights as being superior or more fundamental than others, the notion that each human right encompasses an essential core and the definition of core obligations of the state in relation to the enjoyment of human rights. This article suggests that the best way to achieve a thorough understanding of the normative quality and content of human rights as legal rights is to combine these three approaches.

Exploring Children’s Understanding of the Legal Rights of Suspects in England and Wales

Youth Justice ◽

10.1177/14732254211030597 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 147322542110305

Author(s):

Vicky Kemp ◽

Dawn Watkins

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Young People ◽

Legal Rights ◽

Children And Young People ◽

England And Wales ◽

Research Interviews ◽

International Human ◽

Points Of View ◽

Human Rights Standards

While studies have explored adult suspects’ understanding of their legal rights, seldom are the experiences of children and young people taken into account. In this article, we discuss findings arising out of research interviews conducted with 61 children and young people; many of whom have experience of being suspects. From listening to their points-of-view, we find that children and young people fundamentally lack understanding of the rights of suspects, and especially the inalienable nature of those rights. We argue this is not surprising when children are being dealt with in an adult-centred punitive system of justice, which is contrary to international human rights standards.

Breastfeeding in Refugee Camps: A Child and Maternal Right?

Human Rights Law Review ◽

10.1093/hrlr/ngaa064 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Aleisha Ebrahimi

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Best Interests ◽

Refugee Camps ◽

Human Rights Law ◽

Human Right ◽

Formula Milk ◽

International Human ◽

Milk Marketing

Abstract In recognition of the health benefits breastfeeding offers for both mother and child, breastfeeding has been acknowledged in various International Human Rights Law instruments. Furthermore, against the backdrop of aggressive formula milk marketing campaigns, significant soft law provisions contained within the International Code of Marketing of Breast-milk Substitutes 1981 regulate and control the promotion of breastmilk substitutes. Refugee camps, however, remain aligned with pre-code practice, as formula milk is often one of the first donations to arrive in camps. Mothers, who are still affected by historical formula marketing campaigns, receive formula milk and perceive its availability and distribution as an endorsement over breastfeeding. In this article, International Human Rights Law is analysed, within the framework of the principle of the best interests of the child, to determine if the choice to breastfeed should be protected as a human right and how the indiscriminate supply of formula milk interacts with this choice in refugee camps.

Ethical issues in tuberculosis screening and the use of new drugs for prisoners

The International Journal of Tuberculosis and Lung Disease ◽

10.5588/ijtld.17.0899 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 24 (5) ◽

pp. 57-60

Author(s):

B. S. Elger ◽

F. Mirzayev ◽

S. Afandiyev ◽

E. Gurbanova

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Ethical Issues ◽

Multidrug Resistant ◽

New Drugs ◽

Human Right ◽

Tuberculosis Screening ◽

Tb Treatment ◽

International Human

SETTING: Prisons are known to have extremely high tuberculosis (TB) and multidrug-resistant (MDR) and extensively drug-resistant (XDR) TB prevalence and poor treatment outcomes.OBJECTIVE: To examine the screening and M/XDR-TB treatment with new TB drugs in prisons from the perspective of international ethical and legal requirements.DESIGN: WHO recommendations on TB screening in prisons and M/XDR-TB treatment as well as the international human rights law on prisoners were analysed.RESULTS: Prisoners have a human right to access at least the same level of TB care as in their communities. Screening for TB in prisons, which may run contrary to a given individual's choice to be tested, may be justified by the positive obligation to prevent other prisoners from contracting a possibly deadly disease. Introduction of new TB drugs in prisons is necessary, ethically sound and should start in parallel with introduction in a civilian sector in strict compliance with the WHO recommendations.CONCLUSION: Access to screening for TB, as well as effective treatment according to WHO recommendations, must be ensured by countries on the basis of international human rights conventions.

Freedom of Expression in Malaysia: Compatibility with the International Human Rights Standard

BESTUUR ◽

10.20961/bestuur.v9i1.51637 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 9 (1) ◽

pp. 44

Author(s):

Saidah Fasihah Binti Che Yussoff ◽

Rohaida Nordin

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Freedom Of Expression ◽

Legal Framework ◽

International Standards ◽

Freedom Of Information ◽

Human Rights Law ◽

Human Right ◽

International Human

Malaysia is likely to introduce new laws on freedom of information. However, the important questions are whether the said laws are effective and will have enough bite with the public looking forward to opening government policy. Freedom of information has developed under international human rights law as the right to freedom of expression, including the freedom to seek, receive and impart knowledge and ideas through media, regardless of any frontier. This paper aims to examine freedom of expression under the international realm, scrutinize the said freedom in the Malaysian legal framework, and discuss the proposed enactment of freedom of information laws in Malaysia in conformity with international human rights law. This research uses the qualitative research method. This paper concludes that freedom of information in Malaysia is severely impeded by the enforcement of the Official Secret Act. This paper calls for the repeal or amendment to the Act in conformity with international standards. Keywords: Expression; Freedom; Expression; Human Right.

Part IV The Right to Reparation/Guarantees of Non-Recurrence, A The Right to Reparation, Principle 32 Reparation Procedures

10.1093/law/9780198743606.003.0036 ◽

2018 ◽

Author(s):

d’Argent Pierre ◽

de Ghellinck Isabelle

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Theoretical Framework ◽

Historical Background ◽

International Level ◽

Human Right ◽

Human Rights Treaties ◽

International Human ◽

The Right ◽

Procedural Aspect

Principle 32 deals with the procedural aspect of the right to reparation, that is, the right for victims of human right violations to access remedial procedures. It addresses three issues: the right to access remedial procedures, procedural requirements of national reparation programmes, and regional and international procedures. While the obligation of states to provide effective remedies is enshrined in most of, if not all, the key international human rights treaties, Principle 32 provides for a right to all victims to access remedies. ‘Reparation’ and ‘remedies’ are both envisioned as victims’ rights, but the distinction between them is vague. After providing a contextual and historical background on Principle 32, this chapter discusses its theoretical framework and how the reparation procedure, judicial or administrative, dealing with gross violations of human rights at national or international level has been implemented.

International Human Rights Law and Practice in Latin America

International Organization ◽

10.1162/002081800551235 ◽

2000 ◽

Vol 54 (3) ◽

pp. 633-659 ◽

Cited By ~ 134

Author(s):

Ellen L. Lutz ◽

Kathryn Sikkink

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Latin America ◽

Human Rights Law ◽

International Consensus ◽

State Compliance ◽

International Human ◽

Human Rights Norms ◽

The Right

Human rights practices have improved significantly throughout Latin America during the 1990s, but different degrees of legalization are not the main explanation for these changes. We examine state compliance with three primary norms of international human rights law: the prohibition against torture, the prohibition against disappearance, and the right to democratic governance. Although these norms vary in their degree of obligation, precision, and delegation, states have improved their practices in all three issue-areas. The least amount of change has occurred in the most highly legalized issue-area—the prohibition against torture. We argue that a broad regional norm shift—a “norms cascade”—has led to increased regional and international consensus with respect to an interconnected bundle of human rights norms, including the three discussed in this article. These norms are reinforced by diverse legal and political enforcement mechanisms that help to implement and ensure compliance with them.

The Right of Self-Determination: Its Emergence, Development, and Controversy

Jurnal Konstitusi ◽

10.31078/jk1211 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 12 (1) ◽

pp. 1

Author(s):

Munafrizal Manan

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

International Law ◽

Self Determination ◽

Human Rights Law ◽

Human Right ◽

International Human ◽

The Right ◽

Right Of Self Determination

This paper discusses the right of self-determinationfrom international law and international human rights law perspective. It traces the emergence and development of self-determination from political principle to human right. It also explores the controversy of the right of self-determination. There have been different and even contradictory interpretations of the right of self-determination. Besides, there is no consensus on the mechanism to apply the right of self-determination. Both international law and international human rights law are vague about this.

A Need for Transnational Non Bis in Idem Protection in International Human Rights Law

Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights ◽

10.1177/016934410502300302 ◽

2005 ◽

Vol 23 (3) ◽

pp. 329-347 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Alexander Poels

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Due Process ◽

The European Union ◽

Human Rights Law ◽

Human Right ◽

International Human ◽

The Individual ◽

Domestic Law

Although safeguards for the individual human right guarantees for protection against double jeopardy are strongly entrenched in international and domestic law as well as widely reflected in State practice, such protection is generally limited in scope and applicability to surrender or extradition procedures. Where criminal offenders face courts of a State after having been prosecuted and punished or acquitted by a court of another State, the absence of transnational non bis in idem protection constitutes a serious lacuna in international human rights law. Although legislative and judicial initiatives are being undertaken – notably under the aegis of the European Union – to remedy this lacuna, the international community must incontestably act upon this need for individuals' protection against abuses of power and breaches of due process through the amendment or complementing of the classical international human rights conventions.

The Incomplete Right to Freedom of Movement

AJIL Unbound ◽

10.1017/aju.2018.23 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 111 ◽

pp. 514-518

Author(s):

Moria Paz

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Human Rights Law ◽

Human Right ◽

Freedom Of Movement ◽

Territorial State ◽

Human Rights Regime ◽

The Face ◽

International Human

We live now in the midst of a massive global crisis of mobility. An ever-growing population finds itself refugees displaced from the legitimate jurisdiction of any territorial state. In the face of this pressing emergency, influential voices argue that international human rights law should be placed “at the center” of international efforts to meet this challenge. But today's calamity is set against the backdrop of a universal human rights regime that is not only thin but, more importantly, incomplete. When it comes to cross-border mobility, human rights law ensures that states allow individuals to leave their state, but alas does not require that any other state let them enter and remain. Such entry and residence rights are required only for a country's own nationals (however nationality is defined). And so, many refugees who have exercised their human right to exit come up against a functional block to mobility: they have no place to stop moving. Some of them may nonetheless find a state willing to take them in. In that case, they may enjoy meaningful protection, but this protection exists only by virtue of a state's domestic policies and has little to do with international human rights.