IDRL309

docx

School

Athabasca University, Athabasca *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

309

Subject

Philosophy

Date

Jan 9, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by SuperHumanIron12457

Are human rights universal, inherent, inalienable, and indivisible? The evaluation of human rights can be looked at as a theoretical question or as an assessment of human rights in society. This assignment is written with the purpose of answering the question, “Are human rights universal, inherent, inalienable, and indivisible?” from a mainly practical perspective. This question requires us to establish the definitions of the words, “universal, inherent, indivisible and inalienable”. These words are taken from the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) by the United Nations (UN) and has acted as the master document for recognizing people’s civil, social and political rights. i It lays out a framework from which nations can follow to advance human rights. We are going to look first at the universality of human rights and then continue to explore whether human rights are truly inherent, indivisible and inalienable. The universality of human rights is the application of rights to all humans, equally and without common prejudices like race, nationality, gender and socioeconomic status. The UDHR was founded on this principle at a time when the world was just beginning to recover from a second world war. ii After the horrible atrocities that occurred, it appeared that it was time to move forward with universal human rights at the forefront of a global agenda. The newly formed United Nations was tasked with making sure the world never again experiences the kind of horror of the second world war. The UDHR declared rights are universal and applicable to all people. Since its adoption in 1945, the UDHR has acted as a central document to right declarations by different nations including the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (Charter), here in Canada. iii I believe human rights are universal in nature just like the UDHR states. The problem with this outlook is that no two people are equal as Gary Teeple points out in the book, “The Riddle of Human Rights”. iv As an example, a fifteen-year-old boy in Canada isn’t in a practical way, equally treated the same as a fifteen-year-old girl in Pakistan. Teeple points out there that there are two reasons for such a contradiction in the application of human rights. v First is that these rights are only abstractions for people that don’t have the means such as education or money and don’t live in a jurisdiction where human rights are easily attainable. Another reason is that the definition of human is abstract and is different in many places: leading to the abjuration of rights to many people. In fact, even here in Canada, there was a time when women, indigenous peoples and really all non-white males, didn’t have the right to vote. vi Universality of rights continues to be a work is progress and we must continue to do the required work. To understand whether rights can be deemed as inherent, one must look back in history. The idea that all humans have rights given to them by God or in their humanity alone isn’t a new idea. vii In theory, it can be argued that we are all equal through our own humanity alone. Philosophers throughout history have addressed the topic of inherency of rights. Many of the ideological leaders of the French and American revolutions of the eighteenth century supported the idea that our rights are inherent to our humanity. This includes Important revolutionary thinkers such as John Locke, a political philosopher that communicated about natural rights

belonging to all people. viii Natural rights are in theory universal and don’t require a single written document or a decree. I would agree that we all have rights that are granted to us through the fact we are persons, however, the evidence throughout history is that these rights are relative in nature and not applicable to all people. In his argument, Teeple, points to the struggle for social, civil and political rights as to why they simply cannot be inherent. Teeple interestingly points out that not only are rights not inherent in theory, but also in practice. He says, “all three forms of rights have been and remain in a constant process of challenge, contestation, denial, rejection and evolution; and this condition belies any suggestion of a natural or inherent status.” ix The three types of rights are further discussed by Teeple as he argues why civil, political and social rights aren’t inherent. Teeple says “The most cursory knowledge of the historical development of civil rights cannot be reconciled with the view that we are ‘born’ with these rights”. x This excerpt reminds us to look back in history and recognize that rights were fought for through various means, all over the world and that the struggle continues until today. In Canada and the United States, we know about the fight to end slavery, the civil rights movements of the mid 20 th century to give African Americans basic civil rights, the suffrage movement to give women the right to vote and many more fights that are being fought through this day. xi As for political rights, Teeple points out that they only came along with the emergence of private property becoming the primary form of holding land or goods. xii This meant the average person holding property had a voice in government. This was a privilege that was previously only afforded to the elite. Political rights continued to advance when it was no longer required to own land just to have a voice in government. As these rights took so long to obtain, Teeple concludes that the struggle alone shows political rights are not inherent. xiii Social rights are no different as they also took a long time to acquire. This was primarily achieved during periods when there was fatigue with the effects of capitalism. As capitalism grew, so did corporate rights and that caused unrest that led to redistributions of wealth through taxation and the delivery of services. xiv This is more evidence against the perception of the inherency of human rights. After looking at all the presented arguments, it’s clear that neither in theory nor in practice, can we declare human rights to be inherent. The idea of indivisibility means that one category of rights is equal to all the other Categories; that no single right is viewed as higher than another and no one right can be violated in interest of another. xv The mere existence of multiple generation of rights show that the notion of indivisibility is weak. You will see this when you look at how rights are valued differently by nations. Some nations have made progress in respecting civil rights and political rights but lack in the social rights that Article 25 of the UDHR refers to as “Right to Adequate Standard of Living”. While other nations may provide a strong social infrastructure through things like universal healthcare but lack in civil and political rights including the right to vote. xvi Indivisibility is the weakest of the notions stated in the question for this assignment because, as Teeple puts it, “the definition, promotion and enforcement of human rights everywhere have always divided those rights into separate spheres with differential treatment”. xvii Let’s not forget that the wealthy can better access rights than the rest of the population and that wealth disparity leads to a disparity in the realization of rights. The Charter, a document that serves a

protector of human rights in Canada, has two sections that question the idea of indivisibility. Section 1 of the Charter specifies “reasonable limits” on the charter rights for the purpose of social good or “demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society”. xviii This can be a good thing if a law limits violent hate speech, but on other matters, it can infringe on one right over another; challenging the indivisibility claims. The Supreme Court of Canada once said in a 2007 ruling, “most modern constitutions recognize that rights are not absolute and can be limited if this is necessary to achieve an important objective and if the limit is appropriately tailored, or proportionate”. xix This is a clear admission that support the argument that human rights are not indivisible. There’s also section 33 of the Charter, sometimes looked at at an “opt-out clause”. It has allowed governments to potentially violate Charter rights like Saskatchewan did in a 1986 back-to-work legislation. xx As to the question of whether rights are inalienable, we must first look at what inalienable means. Inalienability is something that cannot be surrendered, be given away and that cannot be taken. xxi Much like the notions of universality, inherency and indivisibility, inalienability is something often presented as a part of human rights. We must however look for evidence to support these claims. Teeple writes “human rights, however, are continuously alienated by mainstream institutions and structures that represent or embody prevailing corporate rights”. xxii He goes further to reassert previous claims that only some, especially those with higher economic standing to be able to realize their supposedly inalienable rights. Governments have a history of an abhorrent violations of human rights, even those countries with documents like that the Charter in Canada and other human rights documents around the world. The dream of member nations that voted to support the UDHR was to see human rights respected. xxiii However, those same nations have violated human rights in their countries. In Canada, indigenous peoples continue to fight for access to safe drinking water and for the safety of indigenous women from violence. The violent acts and risk, including murder that indigenous women face, was found by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights in 2015, to be caused by “racial discrimination and socio-economic marginalization”. xxiv The report also pointed to the lack of accountability by polices forces that has led to indigenous women being more vulnerable to violence. Police brutality has recently come to front of headlines as the abuse and killing of black men without reason surfaces on social media. xxv There’s has also been serious violations of the Charter with the introduction of bills C-51 and C-24, as counter terrorism measures; that included serious violations such as the ability for the government to strip dual citizens convicted of terrorism of their Canadian citizenship. Fortunately, that last measure was overturned by the current government, however, the election promises to reform the bill has been slow to progress. xxvi Corporate interests are also present in issues with the mining industry and labour violations committed by Canadian companies in other countries. Vancouver mining company Nevsun, is facing civil lawsuits after the British Columbia Court of Appeal ruled the actions of the company abroad, can be heard in a Canadian court and later led to a settlement. xxvii This is a win for civil liberties as companies like Nevsun have worked with state actors like the Eritrean government to violate civil rights through practices like forced labour. With all of this evidence, it’s not difficult to come to the conclusion that inalienable human rights simply don’t exist.

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

Though it’s tempting and euphoric to deem human rights are universal, inherent, indivisible and inalienable, evidence shows us that is not the case. If the question was, “should human rights be universal, inherent, indivisible and inalienable?”, the answer would be “yes”. While we cannot change whether these notions are true from a theoretical perspective, we can work on completing the vision of the UDHR delegates so that we can say “yes”, when asked, if in practice, these notions of universality, inherency, indivisibility and inalienability are true.

i Stromseth, J. (2020, September 23). Reclaiming the Universal Declaration of Human Rights from the Pompeo Commission – Part 2. Retrieved December 05, 2020, from https://www.justsecurity.org/72536/reclaiming-the-universal-declaration-of-human-rights-from-the- pompeo-commission-part-2/ ii United for Human Rights. (n.d.). United Nations, Universal Declaration of Human Rights, History. Retrieved December 08, 2020, from https://www.humanrights.com/what-are-human-rights/brief- history/the-united-nations.html iii Canadian Human Rights Commission. (n.d.). Human Rights in Canada. Retrieved December 10, 2020, from https://www.chrc-ccdp.gc.ca/eng/content/human-rights-in-canada iv Teeple, G. (2005). Chapter II: The Absolutes. In The Riddle of Human Rights (pp. 22-23). Amherst, NY: Humanity Books. v Teeple, G. (2005). Chapter II: The Absolutes. In The Riddle of Human Rights (pp. 22-31). Amherst, NY: Humanity Books. vi Elections Canada. (n.d.). A Brief History of Federal Voting Rights in Canada. Retrieved December 09, 2020, from https://electionsanddemocracy.ca/voting-rights-through-time-0/brief-history-federal-voting- rights-canada vii Arnold, F. (2019, August 28). Political Philosophy of Plato, Locke, and Aquinas, and Their Ethics of the State. Retrieved December 8, 2020, from https://sandbox.spcollege.edu/index.php/2016/03/political- philosophy-of-plato-locke-and-aquinas-and-their-ethics-of-the-state-2/ viii McLean, J. (n.d.). History of Western Civilization II. Retrieved December 11, 2020, from https://courses.lumenlearning.com/suny-hccc-worldhistory2/chapter/natural-rights/ ix Teeple, G. (2005). Chapter II: The Absolutes. In The Riddle of Human Rights (p. 24). Amherst, NY: Humanity Books. x Teeple, G. (2005). Chapter II: The Absolutes. In The Riddle of Human Rights (p. 23). Amherst, NY: Humanity Books. xi National Archives. (n.d.). The Suffrage and the Civil Rights Reform Movements. Retrieved December 10, 2020, from https://www.docsteach.org/activities/teacher/the-suffrage-and-the-civil-rights-reform- movements xii Teeple, G. (2005). Chapter II: The Absolutes. In The Riddle of Human Rights (p. 23). Amherst, NY: Humanity Books. xiii Teeple, G. (2005). Chapter II: The Absolutes. In The Riddle of Human Rights (p. 24). Amherst, NY: Humanity Books. xiv Teeple, G. (2005). Chapter II: The Absolutes. In The Riddle of Human Rights (p. 23). Amherst, NY: Humanity Books.

xv Nasr, L. (2020, May 01). Are Human Rights Really 'Universal, Inalienable, and Indivisible'? Retrieved December 05, 2020, from https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/humanrights/2016/09/14/are-human-rights-really- universal-inalienable-and-indivisible/ xvi Roderick, P. (2020, October 07). Why civil and political rights have been easier to secure than social and economic ones. Retrieved December 10, 2020, from https://theconversation.com/why-civil-and-political- rights-have-been-easier-to-secure-than-social-and-economic-ones-77027 xvii Teeple, G. (2005). Chapter II: The Absolutes. In The Riddle of Human Rights (p. 24). Amherst, NY: Humanity Books. xviii Government of Canada, D. (2019, June 17). Section 1 – Reasonable limits. Retrieved December 10, 2020, from https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/rfc-dlc/ccrf-ccdl/check/art1.html xix McLean, J. (n.d.). History of Western Civilization II. Retrieved December 11, 2020, from https://courses.lumenlearning.com/suny-hccc-worldhistory2/chapter/natural-rights/ xx The Canadian Press. (2017, May 02). A brief history of Canada's notwithstanding clause and how it came to be. Retrieved December 10, 2020, from https://regina.ctvnews.ca/a-brief-history-of-canada-s- notwithstanding-clause-and-how-it-came-to-be-1.3395076 xxi Nasr, L. (2020, May 01). Are Human Rights Really 'Universal, Inalienable, and Indivisible'? Retrieved December 05, 2020, from https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/humanrights/2016/09/14/are-human-rights-really-universal- inalienable-and-indivisible/ xxii Teeple, G. (2005). Chapter II: The Absolutes. In The Riddle of Human Rights (pp. 22-31). Amherst, NY: Humanity Books. xxiii Facing History and Ourselves. (n.d.). Introduction to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Retrieved December 09, 2020, from https://www.facinghistory.org/universal-declaration-human- rights/introduction-universal-declaration-human-rights xxiv INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS. (2017, September 05). Report on Poverty and Human Rights in the Americas (Rep.). Retrieved December 05, 2020, from http://www.oas.org/en/iachr/reports/pdfs/Poverty-HumanRights2017.pdf xxv Edwards, F., Lee, H., & Esposito, M. (2019, August 20). Risk of being killed by police use of force in the United States by age, race–ethnicity, and sex. Retrieved December 12, 2020, from https://www.pnas.org/content/116/34/16793 xxvi Pillay, S. (2017, January 31). Canada cannot shy away from its history of Islamophobia and prejudice. Retrieved December 12, 2020, from https://www.tvo.org/article/canada-cannot-shy-away-from-its- history-of-islamophobia-and-prejudice

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

xxvii Business & Human Rights Resource Centre. (n.d.). Nevsun lawsuit (re Bisha mine, Eritrea). Retrieved December 09, 2020, from https://www.business-humanrights.org/en/latest-news/nevsun-lawsuit-re- bisha-mine-eritrea/

IDRL309

Related Documents