Top PDF From the rights of man to the human rights: Man - nation - humanity

The insistance on the fact that human rights and the rights of man (codified in The Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen, respectively) are not one and the same, which could be deduced from the notion of man common to both terms, is the key thesis of this text. By devel- oping this motive, I try to determine the following: that the notion of man, by defini- tion inclusive and abstractly non-discriminative term, is in fact established on tacit exclusions in the time of its inception (Enlightenment revolutinary era), and it was only upon these exclusions that the term man could have signified “the free and equal”. Although the parallel or simultaneous evolution and implementation of the rights of man and national rights might seem contradictory, I seek to demonstrate that this paradox is only ostensible, arguing that the notion of man is itself limited and exclusionary, and is therefore compatible with the exclusivity which is the conditio sine qua non of nation. The consequences of nationalism – World Wars, primarily – proved that the conception of liberty and equality, based on the conception of frater- nity of men (white European males), and of partial democracy pretending to be uni- versal, cannot be maintained any further. Codification of universal human rights represents a reaction to this internal discrepancy inasmuch as it is a reaction to the de- structiveness of all kinds of nationalisms. The notion of life, developed in this text, coresponds to the fundamental requirement for the right to life (as the first and the most basic of all human rights), which no longer belongs to “man”, but to everyone.

The advisory function of the Inter-American Court is classified as broad and unique in the IACHR, if a comparison is made with the universal and European systems (Salvioli, 2006: 5). Article 64 of the ACHR sets its scope with regard to legitimation, matters of interpretation and limitations (Nikken, 1999: 162). All American States members of the OAS, without having to be part of the ACHR, have the possibility of making consultations, as well as the specialized agencies of the OAS, which have competences in the area of human rights. With regard to the matters on which it can rule, it has determined that not only the norms emanating from the IACHR are within its competence, but also that it can have a say about any provision related to the protection of human rights of any treaty applicable to the American States, bilateral or multilateral in nature and that the OAS States may be party to them, including the reservations made and other instruments such as the DADH, and even on the compatibility of legislative projects of the States with the ACHR (Nikken, 1999: 166).

For Bobbio (2004) regardless of the attempt of distinctive analysis, the language of hu- man rights remains ambiguous There are not unique adjectives about such statement, because the wide opening semantics is positive when – in the current complex international legal order, already considering the overcome polar dichotomies – provides branched alternatives of institutionaliza- tion of concepts inherent in multicultural context, which, par excellence, is open and diversified. However the linguistic imprecision may serve to stratagems of coercion in a democratically un- balanced space, since there is no real equality between the participants of the communicative relationship, which not infrequently generates seduction of consciousness by the speech insight.

International human rights law applies to all human beings at all times in all places within a state’s jurisdiction. 10 It imposes both ‘negative’ and ‘positive’ obligations. A ‘negative’ obligation is a duty to ‘respect’, or not to directly violate, a particular right. A ‘positive’ obligation is a duty to ‘ensure’ its protection. It is also now generally accepted that states may be held accountable for acts carried out by private individuals if it supports or tolerates them, or fails in other ways to provide effective protection in law against them. 11 This can include ‘in certain well-defined circumstances a positive obligation on the authorities to take preventive operational measures to protect an individual’ from threats to their life and physical integrity. 12 A

Of course, the EU accession to the European Convention aims to reinforce the human rights protection system within the European Union, but, at the same time, it aims at a greater consistency in guaranteeing the rights in the order of the Union, within the scope of the European Convention and at the level of the internal law of the States. Difficulties, however, appear to be multiple and the rights protection system tends to get complicated. Both the relations between the three juridical orders (Community, international – of classic type – and internal) and the division of competences between the courts called to hear cases from within or at the limits of these systems will be confusing. For example, on this last point, if the treaty on the functioning of the European Union excludes from the competence of the Court of Justice the Union‟s activities connected to External and Common Security Policy, except the restrictive measures regarding the individuals (JaМqЮé, 2010) , the Strasbourg Court could, on the contrary, decide on the acts committed by the EU in external interventions, based on the provisions of the European Convention which also covers issues of jurisdiction of the Member States.

In the current context of the total market, human rights, based on liberty, are seen as distortions, because everything is reduced to the individual and his or her competency, which has led to an accentuated loss of meaning of public affairs, of the common good. Soci- al life is governed by the “law of the jungle,” by the values of “each man for himself,” and “take advantage of everything.” It is up to the individual to provide for his own life and needs. This is because the “rights” of large capital are placed above the rights of the personal being, which are now disqualified as privileges.

The ability of the clinical strains to tolerate growth at 37°C or above is unusual in the genus as, with the exception of certain P. luminescens strains, the majority of Photorhabdus cannot repli- cate above 34°C. This is clearly a prerequisite for bacteraemia and the establishment of a sus- tained human infection. Previous MLST and a recent whole genome phylogeny analysis of eight strains of P. asymbiotica and three strains of P. luminescens (using predicted proteomes) suggest a monophyletic origin of the clinical strains and their pPAU1-like plasmids (data not shown). Nevertheless it cannot be ascertained from this study whether 37°C tolerance was inherent in the last common ancestor of all the clinical strains, or whether it evolved indepen- dently on the different continents. The identification of clinical isolates from USA, Australia and Nepal (Pa Nep ) and a clinical isolate-like strain from Thailand (Pa Thai ), in addition to the two closely related temperature intolerant strains from northern Europe (Pa Hit and Pa Jun ), does suggest the P. asymbiotica phylogenomic group are globally widespread. The higher abun- dance of Pa ATCC423949 heat shock chaperone at 37°C is not surprising, although at this point it is unclear if these levels indicate a stress-response per se or an appropriate temperature specific induction. However the decreased tolerance to both salt stress and a wider pH range does sug- gest a lower integrity of the cell membrane and/or an impairment of osmotic homeostasis at the higher temperature. Importantly the observation that Pa ATCC423949 becomes avirulent to M. sexta at 37°C suggests that it is using temperature as a cue to orchestrate changes in tran- scription and translation appropriate for human infection but inappropriate for insect viru- lence. The alternative hypothesis that the higher temperature causes dysfunction of key proteins or pathways is unlikely given their ability to cause human infection.

Regarding Human rights has been emphasized by governments through universal declaration human rights and its violations faced the global reaction in any case. From this perspective; the necessity of observing human rights against terrorism has been emphasized by many resolutions of the General Assembly, the Security Council and many regional resolutions. But, today especially after the September 11 events and A merica unilateral attack s by resorting to human rights and of course by considering the lack of international agreement on the norms, strategies and principles of human rights, the campaign against terrorism has started on the basis of its obligations, reg ardless to existing norms. So it would be said that today; the war against terrorism more than any other terrorist attack s threatens the security and human rights. However, human rights framework has never prevented effective and legitimate actions to the terrorist attack s. In other words; in the human right framework , there is no conflict with the campaign against terrorism, it emphasizes on identifying and fighting and even it guarantees the effectiveness of such a fight. As a result, Human rights violations at the expense of security, certainly associated with the destruction of both.

Social relations are permeated by encounters and disagreements of people and social groups, as well as outlined by conflicts, power relations, pacts, resistances and, above all, by the dream of being happy fed in any and all living space. In this sense, the Democratic State of Law, which prizes for dignity, social justice, citizenship, among other values proclaimed as fundamental principles, also has the duty to create these minimum conditions. Although many countries have taken over the Democratic regime and the state model of social welfare, they still carry in their core the most forceful aspects of liberalism, which has produced a significant contingent of people excluded from the economy, the labor market, as well as access to human rights guaranteeing the existential minimum. In the face of the situation, more cooperative organizations and associations have emerged in Brazil, with more intensity in the last few periods, which bring together informal workers who seek through cooperation a form of resistance and survival to the exclusionary status quo.

By the nineties of the last century UN showed the rationality of mass immigration to Europe in order to maintain the level of economic growth and the kind of welfare society that was built. Irrational opposition to immigration to Europe developed the so- called Europe fortress, including imprisonment of immigrants for administrative blunders, criminalization of immigrants (four till ten times more probable imprisonment than nationals not explained by the respective crime rates), exploitation of immigrant work including by public institutions, maintaining legal immigrants as an under class in special low paid labour markets (where few nationals are willing to work), every day police pressure for “security” reasons on immigrant communities and neighbourhoods, international treaties with northern African countries that are known for disrespecting human rights in order to stop immigration waves before arriving at southern European shore (in order to hide from the public and make cheaper the “security” investments), imposing nationals the prohibition (as felony) to communicate with immigrants in Calais, where many of them join in order to find the way from the continent to the British Islands, and so on.

Scientific evidence seems to have provided a leading basis for abortion law reforms adopted across developed countries. It seems both rea- sonable and consistent with human rights theo- ry that if restriction of rights needs to be justified on the basis of the “person-person” dualism, the law should limit abortion only when some of the relevant features shared by all humans, notably perception and awareness of pain, are present in the fetus. This is apparent in the 12-week legal limit employed by most of Europe. Cyprus al- lows 28 weeks under certain circumstances, fol- lowed by Finland, the United Kingdom and the Netherlands with 24 weeks. Other countries al- low from 12 to 22 weeks. In the United States, abortion bans through the first two trimesters of pregnancy have been ruled unconstitutional.

Another response could be given by the International Criminal Court (ICC). However, scholars do not agree in its inclusion in the core of international crimes, since piracy does not offend at the same rate of gravity or seriousness, such as is the case of crimes against humanity in the countries and war crimes committed quite often by most of the countries of the world. Piracy remains to be seen as crime that threats economy and not necessarily human dignity. Besides, the limited resources of ICC are another obstacle to the prosecution of pirates, which has been growing in the last years culminating in what is labelled as an epidemic. Even though, another current of scholars has been defending its inclusion based on a broader interpretation of crimes against humanity. Middelburg does not support this last current; nonetheless she draws two conceivable inclusions through an amendment or protocol to the Rome Statute. An easiest and less problematic way to its inclusion would be through a protocol, which does not unite the States that ratified the Rome Statute, but affects only those who ratified the protocol not mattering if those States ratified the original treaty or not. 189 Finally, if a broader interpretation is not desirable to include in the scope of crime against humanity, a tactful approach must be taken once piracy has been threatening peace and degrading human dignity. Pirates have been inflicting more and more violence and disregard from the dignity of seafarers and their families in each attack they lead. Additionally, slavery has been identified as one of the recent practices, subduing a human life to another, even if for eleven months, cannot be acceptable and seen as something that does not breach human dignity. The dignity of a human being cannot be someth ing at the disposal of states’ interest, neither measurable in compliance with its diplomatic games. Thus, a closer look must be taken when one views the human

The right to life is one of the most signifi cant and most important human rights and, besides being closely related to human dignity as one of the most fundamental human rights, it is the background to the realizati on of the other human rights and through the UN Human Rights Committ ee, it is the highest right that cannot be neglected even in public emergency situati ons. Of course, some authors believe that the right to life supports people against the arbitrary abandonment of life by executi on, disappearance, torture and so on, and does not extend abandonment of life through the hunger or lack of basic nutriti onal needs such as food, primary health care and medical care. However, the Human Rights Committ ee does not agree with such a narrow interpretati on of the concept of the right to life, and in its fi rst interpretati on, states: “The Committ ee notes that the right to life has oft en been interpreted in a restricti ve way. The right concept of life’s inherent right cannot be construed in a restricti ve way, and the right to this right requires that states take positi ve measures”. According to this view, the sancti ons should not prevent people from achieving the minimum essenti al goods and services necessary for sustainable living. Therefore, the states should not undermine the right to life by imposing economic sancti ons, because these sancti ons will interrupt and shorten the supply of medicines and food and other basic needs and spread the disease and increase the mortality, especially in the most vulnerable countries, and this acti on would be in violati on of the right to life in the sense that the Human Rights Committ ee has said. It is therefore clear that the acti ons of the third state, along with unilateral sancti ons and even silence and not any reacti on against the loss of the right can alone lead to the internati onal responsibility of the third state.

At this point, overcoming the public/private divide is a crucial aspect, given that the division between which is considered a public or a private matter entails a num- ber of negative consequences for women. By situating the private sphere (and espe- cially the family) outside the reach of the state and exempting it from governmental scrutiny, gender neutral visions of human rights leave uncovered much of the areas where women and girls move, making easy for VAWG to happen and remain un- punished (Kelly, 2005). This not only gives stimulus to male power and dominance over women, in several implicit and explicit ways, but it specially encourages male supremacy in the canonical situations of domestic violence, marital rape, and incest, giving practical immunity to the perpetrators, as abuse against women and girls is concealed under the false holiness of privacy and home (Kabeer, 2014).

From a human rights perspective, it is important that countries not commit new sectors under GATS until their human rights effect has been evaluated. GATS itself provided that a comprehensive assessment of the impacts of services trade liberalization should have been undertaken before 2000, but this obligation remains unfulfilled, much to the dissatisfaction of developing countries. African trade ministers, for instance, noted in June 2003 that the “Services Council has not satisfactorily met the requirement of carrying out the assessment of trade in services as stipulated in the GATS”. Representatives of Latin American countries, and NGOs around the world have voiced similar concerns. Human rights advocates have constructively added their voices to calls for assessment of the potential and actual impact of services policies, on the grounds that these are fundamental to ensure the most appropriate policies and regulations for development, and for human rights. The High Commissioner for Human Rights has for instance recognized that States have the responsibility to ensure that commitments they make in other areas, including trade, does not reduce their capacity to set and implement national development policy. In a detailed study of services trade liberalization and human rights, the High Commissioner has concluded that human rights require a constant examination of trade law and policy as it affects the enjoyment of human rights, and that assessment is a major means of avoiding the implementation of any retrogressive measure that reduces the enjoyment of human rights. 19

Health care resource allocation, the prioritising of patents’ rights, is inherently a political question. How should the largesse available to government be distributed amongst its citizens? Arguments about social and economic rights involve issues of politics, economics, morality, ethics and so on. In this arena, we require different mechanisms to resolve disputes. They involve competing claims between individuals and have consequences for others very different from private rights. We have discussed the extent to which law should be involved in political disputes of this nature. We have seen the UK response in judicial review is to have developed a particular notion of “procedural” rights. Procedural rights are certainly rights and carry their own specific legal remedies. They impose duties on commissioners to consider relevant information openly, fairly and consistently. Procedural rights have the benefit of enabling the courts to detach themselves from the “politics” of deciding which group of patients, or which treatments, should take pri- ority over others in the competition for socio-economic rights. We have also noted, however, that the precise dividing line between procedural and substantive rights is often blurred. Judges are human and will sympathise with many of the

There are many definitions of globalization, or perhaps more accurately, there are many globalizations. Discussing the four faces of globalization – globalization from above, globalization from below, the globalization of human rights, and the globalization of the war against terrorism – and their impacts on education and learning, this article offers an analysis of neoliberal globalization and how "competition-based reforms" affected educational policy in K-12 and higher education. These reforms are characterized by efforts to create measurable performance standards through extensive standardized testing (the new standards and accountability movement), introduction of new teaching and learning methods leading to the expectation of better performance at low cost (e.g., universalization of textbooks), and improvements in the selection and training of teachers. Competition-based reforms in higher education tend to adopt a vocational orientation and to reflect the point of view that colleges and universities exist largely to serve the economic well-being of a society. Privatization is the final major reform effort linked to neoliberal globalization and perhaps the most dominant. As an alternative, the article provides insights into the possibilities of employing the concept of marginality as a central construct for a model of transformative social justice learning. Following the inspiration of Paulo Freire, I argue that transformative social justice learning is a social, political and pedagogical practice which will take place when people reach a deeper, richer, more textured and nuanced understanding of themselves and their world.

In doing so, it did not try to seek a protecive shield for bioethics – which it otherwise did not need – but rather emphasized in conveying to its recipients that bioethics provides for a concrete ap- plicaion of human rights in the ield that is its own (the life, health and welfare of human beings) and this not only with regard to the progress of the tech- nosciences, but also in a much more open ield: that of the social and economic determinants of life and human health. Both construcions speak the same language and note a common objecive in the inal analysis: the defense of human dignity before the pifalls of a world that advances precipitously, leav- ing out large masses of the populaion which remain trapped through their dramaic exclusion from the most diverse areas of life.

Wouldn’t we do better, then, by situating all human languages, in- cluding human rights discourse, in the traditions they emanate from? If we do so, one would have to acknowledge that even within what one could generally name Western discourses, human rights competes with other Western moral discourses based on notions of utility and social con- tract, just to mention two. Although MacIntyre may be right as for the need to acknowledge different traditions and sources of rationalities, such PRYH ZRXOG EH DQ LQFRPSOHWH DQG LQHI¿FLHQW VROXWLRQ WR RXU SUREOHP Swinging the pendulum and focusing entirely on the cultural embedded- ness of human rights discourse would leave us unable to deal with the uni- versal demand to protect human rights 23 . A universalizing framework is

Following the widespread and systematic attack against the civilian population by the Libyan regime, the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 1970 on 26 February 2011 (available at: http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/RES/1970 (2011)), making explicit the reference to the responsibility to protect. The Security Council has called for an end to violence, “recalling the Libyan authorities’ responsibility to protect its population”, imposing international sanctions. In Resolution 1973 (available at: http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/RES/1970 (2011)), adopted on 17 March 2011, one reads that attacks on the civilian community constitute crimes against humanity. In the UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon's report on Implementing the Responsibility to Protect (A/63/677, 2009), three pillars of this obligation are identified. They are: 1) The State has the primary responsibility to protect the populations from genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and ethical cleansing, as well as their incitement; (2) The International Community has the responsibility to encourage and assist states in fulfilling such responsibility; (3) The International Community has the responsibility to use appropriate diplomatic, humanitarian and other means to protect against such crimes. If a state is manifestly lacking in its obligation to protect, the international community must prepare to take collective action to protect the population, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations. (Available at: https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N09/206/10/PDF/N0920610.pdf?OpenElement.