A Perspective On Human Rights

With less than a century having passed since a standard of international human rights has been recognised globally, it can be suggested that the implementation of civil and political rights has had to overcome limitations and have faced ongoing threats, and that this is still a problem in contemporary times.

This research is based on the “universalist” theory of human rights. The Universalist theory supposes that human rights are universal since they are said to belong to all humans in every society. Human rights are also supposed to be inalienable; because they flow from and protect human existence, they cannot be taken away without endangering the value of that existence. However, these universal and inalienable qualities of human rights are disputable in both their conception and operation (Heard A, 1997).

“Human rights are argued to be the most promising basis for an ethically principled opposition to both excesses of punishment and an unduly instrumental understanding of penal practice” (Canton, 2009). Human rights are one of the most important issues when it comes to ethics in connection to punishing criminals or even misdemeanor offenders. Canton also states in his article, “Nonsense Upon Stilts? Human Rights, the Ethics of Punishment and the Values of Probation”, in the British Journal of Community Justice, that our rights as humans “are distinctively important in discussions of punishment” (Canton, 2009) and that every attempt should be made to distinguish which rights should be forfeited as punishment for committing a crime and which rights should be retained regardless of any offense and what the offense is.

In the past, groups advocating for civil, human and migrant rights hardly made any meaningful progress courtesy of insufficient legislation and absence of political will. However, sweeping changes coupled by the need to recognize human rights have made it crucial to defend the oppressed in society irrespective of their location. Such civil and human rights groups have constantly set high standards when it comes to reinforcing the rule of law. Such groups ultimately combine forces to expose human rights violations and prosecute perpetrators. It’s undeniable that such groups have significantly ensured the enforcement of the rule

Throughout much of human history, certain issues have stayed unresolved for the longest time. Some are political, some are societal, and still, some are religious, but only modern day sees the conclusions to these affairs. Particularly, a human rights violation occurs when a government or other authority goes against any basic right that all humans are born with. Some of these rights include the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Furthermore, only in the modern-day is a violation such as injustice realized and dealt with appropriately.

Geber, Henry. "The Society for Human Rights—1925." The Society for Human Rights—1925. Web. 28 May 2016.

Human rights are very much in the forefront of national and international discourse and concern. Originating in the abstract thoughts of philosophers, human rights today affect the daily life of every individual human being. In regard to the relationship between rights and responsibilities, “The law places responsibilities on government and other public authorities to consider people's rights when developing laws, policies and delivering services” (Victorian

That human rights should be available and potentially useful to everyone is an aspiration, not a moral truth. It is the promise of human rights that makes them so appealing, especially to those who have no other recourse.31 One reason I dislike accounts of human rights that are not inclusive—such as the argument from autonomy—is that the mere admissibility of some justified exclusions opens the door to the possibility of others. The exemptions also become ripe for abuse, as with arguments about the limited "rationality" of all of those historically excluded from natural rights arguments. Such accounts undermine the promise, and thus the appeal and the legitimacy, of human

The concept of human rights has become ambiguous, with very little agreement regarding its meaning and application internationally. The concept of human rights could be deemed as what Gallie termed as “an essentially contested concept.” This argues that when it comes to certain concepts there is just simply no one clearly definable general use that is widely agreed on. There are a variety of elements and words that can be used to describe the concepts of human

In the article, “Critical Perspectives on Crime and Social Harm: Toward a Criminology of Human Rights,” by David Criger, he states the article has two central goals. The first is to highlight how the relationship between the study of human rights and social harms, and how those concepts are situated in criminology. Secondly, he wants to critically examine the criminological field so that further analysis can be done on the etiology of crime, human rights violations, and social harm (Criger, 2011).

The purpose of this project is to build on the existing literature regarding the International Human Rights regimes, with the goal of bridging a gap between the diffusion of international norms and changes in domestic respect for human rights. Due to a lack of formal enforcement mechanisms, it is difficult to punish states that violate its citizen’s human rights. One solution is to examine the role of international norms that are established and promoted via international treaties and organizations. If international norms are working, we should expect to see a process of diffusion taking place; states would improve their respect of human rights over time, but also in respect to their neighboring states. This would increase the global level

The doctrine of human rights were created to protect every single human regardless of race, gender, sex, nationality, sexual orientation and other differences. It is based on human dignity and the belief that no one has the right to take this away from another human being. The doctrine states that every ‘man’ has inalienable rights of equality, but is this true? Are human rights universal? Whether human rights are universal has been debated for decades. There have been individuals and even countries that oppose the idea that human rights are for everybody. This argument shall be investigated in this essay, by: exploring definitions and history on human rights, debating on whether it is universal while providing examples and background

Even though it has been argued that Human rights is of little assistance in dealing with

“All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.” These opening words of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights express a concept of man which underpins the framework of human rights embodied in the Universal Declaration and the two international covenants of Human Rights. Western political traditions is a concept that it derives from, is in harmony with moral and social teachings to be found in many other traditions and patterns of belief.

The origen and the content of human rights, as they are presented by the Declaration of 1948, belong to a concrete cultural and political tradition, that is, the Western,liberal, individualistic and democratic tradition. But such