The Right to Read

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lea Shaver

Reading – for education and for pleasure – may be framed as a personal indulgence, a moral virtue, or even a civic duty. What are the implications of framing reading as a human right? Although novel, the rights-based frame finds strong support in international human rights law. The right to read need not be defended as a “new” human right. Rather, it can be located at the intersection of more familiar guarantees. Well-established rights to education, science, culture, and freedom of expression, among others, provide the necessary normative support for recognizing a universal right to read as already implicit in international law. This Article is the first to call for recognition of a right to read. Once recognized in principle, it remains necessary to translate the right to read from a vague ideal into concrete content. As a starting point, the right to read requires that every person be entitled to education for literacy and the liberty to freely choose the reading material they prefer. The right to read also means that everyone must have access to an adequate supply of reading material. Law and policy must be designed to ensure that books, ebooks, and other reading materials are made widely available and affordable – even to the poor and to speakers of minority languages. Reframing reading as a human right ultimately points to a reorientation of copyright law, as well as obligations upon publishers and technology companies to facilitate access for readers of all income levels and in every language. The conceptual elaboration of the right to read also holds lessons for rights theorists and advocates, as an illustration of an “intersectional” approach to human rights scholarship and advocacy.

BESTUUR ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 44
Author(s):  
Saidah Fasihah Binti Che Yussoff ◽  
Rohaida Nordin

<p>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.  </p><p><strong>Keywords</strong><strong>:</strong> Expression; Freedom; Expression; Human Right.</p>


2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammed R.M. Elshobake

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore the most prominent human rights violations during the COVID-19 pandemic in accordance with international human rights law. Design/methodology/approach Through doctrinal and legal study and content analysis, this paper analyses the important relevant legal provisions under International human rights law and applies these provisions to the reality of managing the COVID-19 crisis to identify the most prominent human rights violations during the COVID-19 outbreak. This research paper considered as a review paper in that it provides a review of the most prominent measures taken during the COVID-19 crisis, which constitutes violations of international human rights law. Findings It is concluded that some measures that have been taken by countries to confront the COVID-19 pandemic have constituted violations of human rights and did not comply with the legal conditions to restrict human rights. Indeed, the COVID-19 pandemic has shown the ugly fractures in health-care systems, health inequities, racism and discrimination, Undermining the right to freedom of expression and the right to access information, gross negligence in protecting detainees from COVID-19 infection, all of these constitute clear violations of the principles of international human rights law. Research limitations/implications The spread of COVID-19 has not stopped, and its effects still continue, including human rights violations. Therefore, this paper cannot enumerate all human rights violations that occur during the spread of COVID-19. Practical implications Based on the results in this paper, governments need to be more prepared to face any health crisis at all levels including health care, which would reduce human rights violations. Social implications This research paper reflects positively on the social reality, as the adoption of its recommendations leads to the provision of adequate health care to all members of society in accordance with the principles of human rights, granting them the right to access information, protecting their right to freedom of expression, reducing the phenomenon of racism and discrimination and providing adequate health care to all detainees. Originality/value This paper studies an up-to-date topic that we are still living and seeing its effects. The benefit of this paper is to provide recommendations that protect human rights during the COVID-19 pandemic.


2020 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 625-656
Author(s):  
Anna-Maria Hubert

Abstract This article explores the potential contribution of international human rights law – specifically, the oft-neglected ‘right to science’ – to the interpretation, operation and progressive development of international environmental law. Science and its applications play a critical role in environmental protection. At the same time, society faces persistent controversies at this interface. Environmental regimes may lack sufficient norms and tools for regulating upstream science and innovation processes because they tend to focus narrowly on physical harms to the environment and may not address the wider ethical, legal, social and political concerns. The human right to science, which is codified in various international and regional human rights instruments, may serve to augment international environmental law and contribute to more effective, equitable and democratically legitimate and accountable processes and outcomes in relation to the application of science and technology in environmental regimes. The article begins by outlining the scope and contents of, as well as the limitations on, the right to science, focusing on Article 15(1)(b) of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) and its overlaps with the norms of international environmental law.1 It then analyses the ways in which the right to science may influence the development of international environmental law by elucidating mechanisms for the integration of a human rights perspective in science and technology and by outlining its potential substantive contributions to the development of international environmental law.


2016 ◽  
Vol 65 (4) ◽  
pp. 859-894 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Lappin

AbstractThe right to vote is the most important political right in international human rights law. Framed within the broader right of political participation, it is the only right in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights not guaranteed as a universal human right but rather as a citizen's right. While limitations on the right to vote are permissible in respect of citizenship and age, residency-based restrictions are not explicitly provided. However, recent judgments of the European Court of Human Rights endorse a view that voting rights may be conditioned on residency on the grounds of an individual's bond to their country-of-origin and the extent to which laws passed by that government would affect them. This article questions this proposition and explores whether disenfranchisement based solely on residency constitutes an unreasonable and discriminatory restriction to the essence of the right.


2016 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Munafrizal Manan

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.


2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 433-452
Author(s):  
Corina Heri

ABSTRACT In 1948, Article 17 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) pioneered a right to (individual and collective) ownership of property. Today, the right to property—specifically the social function of property, which was a mainstay of the discussions—can be linked to the idea of a human right to land, which has been particularly prevalent in the discourse concerning the creation of human rights protections specific to peasants. The peasant rights process highlights a number of normative and implementation gaps in international human rights law, including relating to land use and tenure. The present contribution will argue that the claims made in this context are neither new nor niche but relate to universal human rights entitlements and have existed at least since the drafting of the UDHR. They are not only an iteration of an age-old class struggle but are at the forefront of a contemporary critique of the existing international legal system as a whole. While existing human rights, including the right to property, can be part of a response to these critiques, however, neither peasant rights nor the activists who promote them can be expected to resolve them alone.


2020 ◽  
pp. 109-130
Author(s):  
Michelle Jurkovich

This chapter considers the puzzling role of international law around the right to food and examines why the existing law has been unable to generate norms within the advocacy community. It explores the reasons why international anti-hunger organizations rarely legitimate the right to food in legal terms and how this case can challenge the understanding of the relationships between norms, human rights, and law. It also provides a conceptual discussion of the distinction between formal law and norms, underscoring the importance of not conflating the two concepts. The chapter argues that many international anti-hunger organizations still do not conceptualize food as a human right, making international human rights law less relevant. It looks at the hunger case that suggests there is nothing automatic about law generating norms among activists or society at large.


2010 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 295-311 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sergey Golubok

AbstractThis article analyses nascent case law of the International Criminal Court on provisional detention at the investigation stage and in the course of trial (together referred to as “pre-conviction detention”) vis-à-vis the standards developed in the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights, being a reflection of “internationally recognized human rights” to which the ICC, according to its Statute, must adhere. At least several instances of presumed inconsistencies are detected. It is argued that international criminal tribunals should above all comply with standards set by international human rights law for domestic criminal proceedings, in particular when the most fundamental and basic human right ‐ the right to personal liberty ‐ is affected. Failure to comply entails a serious risk of hazardous fragmentation.


2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 195-226
Author(s):  
Aron Degol ◽  
Bebizuh Mulugeta

Freedom of expression is one of the human rights enshrined under International human right instruments. However, hate speech in the course of exercising this right has the potential to pose threats on the peace and security of nations and wellbeing of individuals. This has brought about arguments in favor of limitations to expression and against the limitations owing to unintended adverse impact of such limitations in the exercise of freedom of expression. In the Ethiopian case, ‘Hate Speech and Disinformation Prevention and Suppression Proclamation No. 1185/ 2020’ has been enacted.  The Proclamation indicates prohibited acts of hate speech and its exceptions. In particular, the generic terms contained in the definition given to ‘hate speech’ need to be carefully examined. However, the implications of provisions that set exceptions to ‘hate speech’ in the new law have not yet been subject to adequate academic discourse. This article examines these issues. By consulting different international human rights instruments, experience of other countries and scholarly literature, the article examines the appropriateness, constitutionality and implications of the Proclamation on the right to freedom of expression. Moreover, it indicates potential challenges that the exceptions will pose on the process of implementing the Proclamation in real court cases.


De Jure ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammed Sanka ◽  
◽  
◽  

Language plays an essential role in one’s ability to access the life opportunities offered by a society through employment, healthcare, jurisprudence, voting, education, media, etc. Linguistic rights have been designed under international human rights law to address the right to choose the language or languages for communication while accessing such opportunities. Even so, the individually held linguistic right, which evolves from general individual human rights, such as the right to freedom of expression, to privacy, to a fair trial, etc., comes with less consequences as compared to the collective linguistic rights of groups. This paper, while exploring how international law deals with linguistic rights generally, shall focus on the linguistic rights of indigenous peoples. By so doing, the author discusses various international legal instruments which envisage collective linguistic rights of indigenous peoples, highlights the challenges faced by indigenous peoples with regards to such rights, and concludes by suggesting ways by which these challenges can be surmounted.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document