Not All Human Rights Have Norms

2020 ◽  
pp. 57-82
Author(s):  
Michelle Jurkovich

This chapter builds on the insight of the international anti-hunger advocacy that does not fit the expectations of dominant models. It explains how it is possible that the behavior of international anti-hunger advocacy varies from the expectations of the human rights and advocacy literatures. It also evaluates the normative environment in which international anti-hunger advocates work. The chapter argues that there is no norm around hunger or the right to food among top international anti-hunger organizations and theorizes an advocacy in issue areas that lack a norm. It provides additional conceptual tools to make sense of the social and moral environments in which activists are working, articulating the distinction between norms, moral principles, and supererogatory standards.

2007 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 425-453 ◽  
Author(s):  
Noam Schimmel

AbstractThe right to an education that is consonant with and draws upon the culture and language of indigenous peoples is a human right which is too often overlooked by governments when they develop and implement programmes whose purported goals are to improve the social, economic and political status of these peoples. Educational programmes for indigenous peoples must fully respect and integrate human rights protections, particularly rights to cultural continuity and integrity. Racist attitudes dominate many government development programmes aimed at indigenous peoples. Educational programmes for indigenous peoples are often designed to forcibly assimilate them and destroy the uniqueness of their language, values, culture and relationship with their native lands. Until indigenous peoples are empowered to develop educational programmes for their own communities that reflect and promote their values and culture, their human rights are likely to remain threatened by governments that use education as a political mechanism for coercing indigenous peoples to adapt to a majority culture that does not recognize their rights, and that seeks to destroy their ability to sustain and pass on to future generations their language and culture.


Author(s):  
Hannah Lambie-Mumford

Chapter 3 sets out the key theories with which the book engages: food insecurity and the human right to food. Following on from a conceptualisation and definition of food insecurity, the right to food is introduced. Emphasis is placed on normative element of ‘adequacy and sustainability of food availability and access’ and on the state’s obligation to ‘respect, protect and fulfil the right to food’. Theories of ‘othering’ and ‘agency’ are employed to assess the social acceptability of emergency food systems as a means of acquiring food, and the power of providers to make sufficient food available through these systems and of potential recipients to access it. Theories of ‘care’ and ‘social protection’ are employed to explore the ways in which charitable providers are in practice taking responsibility for the duty to respect, protect and fulfil the right to food and how shifts in welfare policy are affecting need for this provision.


2020 ◽  
pp. 1-12
Author(s):  
Michelle Jurkovich

This chapter focuses on one case of an economic and social right, the right to food. It mentions the development of an alternative model of advocacy, called the buckshot model, which explains the trajectories of campaigns in terms of the right to food. It also discusses international anti-hunger activism, which cites the fore advocacy surrounding the human right to food. The chapter emphasizes how the fulfillment of other human rights is either impossible or substantively meaningless without the realization of the right to food. It points out that more people die from hunger and related causes globally than in all wars, civil and international, combined.


2020 ◽  
pp. 34-56
Author(s):  
Michelle Jurkovich

This chapter focuses on contemporary international anti-hunger advocacy, which describes the nature of contemporary campaigns across top international anti-hunger organizations. It introduces dominant human rights models, namely Margaret E. Keck and Kathryn Sikkink's “boomerang model” and Thomas Risse, Stephen C. Ropp, and Kathryn Sikkink's “spiral model.” It also provides an alternative model of advocacy, the “buckshot model,” which describes and explains advocacy around hunger and the right to food. The chapter identifies the hidden assumptions behind dominant human rights models and explores their limitations by using the hunger case to set up a contrast with more-often-studied civil and political rights campaigns. It reviews interviews with international anti-hunger activists that were completed by 2015, which reflected contemporary campaigns and efforts until 2014.


Author(s):  
Elver Hilal

This chapter focuses on food security. Although ‘food security’ is not a legal concept and does not impose rights or responsibilities, it is a necessary precondition to the full enjoyment of the right to food. The right to food is enshrined in article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as an integral part of the right to an adequate standard of living. As this right is indivisible, interrelated, and interdependent with all other fundamental rights and freedoms, it is ultimately essential for a secure, safe, and harmonious world. The chapter demonstrates that severe food insecurity continues to inflict massive casualties and create and prolong conflicts and emergencies despite well-established rules of international law, international humanitarian law, and international human rights law. It then looks at the international law principles protecting food security with the aim to diffuse emergency situations that create instability, inequality, and unrest, including those resulting from conflicts and natural disasters. The chapter provides suggestions for enforcing and enhancing existing laws and for the adoption of a new international convention which will set out clear duties and obligations for States and non-State actors with a view to eliminating food insecurity and preventing violations of the right to food for a safer, more secure world.


Author(s):  
Juan Manuel Goig Martínez

La alimentación adecuada constituye un derecho humano. Así lo han reconocido oficialmente la gran mayoría de los Tratados Internacionales sobre derechos humanos. Pero existe una gran diferencia entre que un Estado reconozca oficialmente la alimentación como un derecho fundamental en su constitución, o lo haga como un principio rector, puesto que ello dotará al derecho a la alimentación adecuada de una mayor protección, o lo convertirá en un principio de actuación de los poderes públicos. Se puede exigir a los gobiernos garantizar el ejercicio efectivo del derecho a la alimentación de conformidad con las disposiciones constitucionales para otros derechos humanos. Pero, la capacidad de la invocación indirecta de otros derechos humanos para lograr la protección efectiva del derecho a la alimentación en el plano nacional dependerá, en definitiva, de la interpretación jurídica que se haga de la Constitución.Adequate food is a human right. Thus the vast majority of treaties have officially recognized it human rights. But there is a big difference between that a State officially recognizes food as a fundamental right in the Constitution, or do it as a guiding principle, since this will provide the right to adequate food of greater protection, or the It will become a principle of action of the public authorities. You may require Governments to ensuring the effective exercise of the right to food in accordance with the constitutional provisions for other human rights. But the indirect invocation of other human rights capacity to achieve effective protection of the right to food at the national level will depend, ultimately, of the legal interpretation that is made of the Constitution.


1974 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 26-83 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gareth Evans

Governments have been increasingly preoccupied with the task of reconciling claims to preferential treatment with the principle of equality. The social and philosophical issues raised by this apparent paradox are considered, and the compatibility of benign discrimination with the concept of equality demonstrated by developing a complex normative notion of equality. An analysis is then undertaken of the various attempts made by lawyers, in nearly one hundred existing bills of rights, to give formal expression to these principles. Ultimately the problem of benign discrimination falls for resolution by the courts, and the jurisprudence developed in this respect by the Supreme Courts of Canada and the United States is critically discussed and compared. Having exhaustively developed an appreciation of world experience regarding the interaction of bills of rights equality clauses and benign discrimination, consideration is given to the formulation of the Australian Human Rights Bill—a bill of which Gareth Evans was one of the principal draftsmen.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document