Category: Human Rights

Introduction

The collapse of the Soviet Union marked the end of the Cold War and the polarization of the world. Even though the event seems to be beneficial for humanity in the long run, the effects of the matter are numerous and complex. On the one hand, the collapse of the Soviet Union led to the rapid acceleration of regional security cooperation in the region, which is crucial for human security.¹ Indeed, since the boundaries have dissolved, it seems natural that countries should be more open to cooperation. On the other hand, Simão claims that broader analysis leads to the understanding that post-Soviet societies suffer from instability and increasingly complex forms of insecurity.² For instance, Leinsalu et al. report the increased number of conflicts based on ethnic differences and nationalistic moods.³ Such observations lead to the understanding that short- and long-term implications of the collapse of the Soviet Union concerning human security are controversial.

One of the pivotal matters is human rights and the protection of citizens of post-soviet countries. Soviet people were deprived of some of the central human rights, and the collapse of the regime should have positively influenced the matter. In the Soviet Union, people did have freedom of religion, and Stalin’s policies were explicitly nationalistic.⁴ After the collapse of the USSR, Post-Soviet countries made human rights one of the primary concerns.⁵ However, in Russia, human rights are applied in a week manner even 28 years after the regime has dissolved.⁶ The present paper aims at answering the question of what are the short-term and long-term implications of the collapse of the USSR for human rights in Russia. This paper argues that despite the apparent positive impact of the event, the human rights of Russian citizens are still often violated.

Historical Background

The collapse of the Soviet Union came as a complete surprise since neither western nor Soviet authorities believed that the country could disappear so rapidly. However, on December 25, 1991, the Soviet flag flew over Moscow Kremlin for the last time.⁷ On this day, the representatives of 12 Soviet republics declared the USSR no longer existed, and the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) was established.⁸ There are different reasons cited for the matter, including a wide variety of external and internal causes.

The history of the Soviet Union began after the Russian revolution in 1917 when Bolsheviks came to power.⁹ Later, in 1922, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics was established under the leadership of Vladimir Lenin, a Marxist leader.¹⁰ While initially the state was meant to be a society of true democracy, Stalin’s brutal regime and strengthening of the authoritative power of the Communist Party turned the country into a repressive state.¹¹ However, in 1985, Gorbachev tried to turn the country back to democracy through political openness, or glasnost, and economic restructuring, also known as perestroika.¹² Gorbachev’s policies are often cited as the reason for the collapse of the Soviet Union.

There were no significant economic or political pressures that could be stated as the reason for the desolation of the USSR. On the contrary, the country has recovered from a substantial drop in oil prices, and all the political goals of the previous decade were achieved.¹³ However, after the 1980 Olympics in Moscow, a remarkable break in consciousness was instilled in the minds of Soviet People.¹⁴ Political openness and all the press published by political opposition made people of the USSR realize that the rules of the country humiliated its people.¹⁵ In other words, the lack of political freedom and human rights was the primary driving force of the changes in the society of the country.

One of the reasons for the oppression of Soviet society was the extensive power of KGB and its leaders. KGB was the symbol of despotic Soviet rule since it was the tool used to maintain strict obedience of non-Russian republics to Moscow and suppress aspirations to any form of independence.¹⁶ In other words, even though the country was formally a union of 15 independent states, any autonomy was viewed as a threat to the regime. Any separatist moods were controlled, and people suspected of spreading such attitudes were thrown behind bars without a trial.¹⁷ However, the policy of glasnost led to the release of many oppositionists, which spread the word about the unjust nature of KGB.¹⁸ Eventually, KGB was unable to control all the new ideas in the press and the streets, and the suppression was ended by the dissolution of the USSR.

While most historians agree that the new way of thinking was the primary reason for the cardinal change, others suppose that the greed of the elite was the reason for the event. The soviet elite wanted to enrich themselves using the most valuable state property, which was possible only if USSR dissolved.¹⁹ Instead of creating a democratic state, the elite wanted to protect their property. This led to the idea that a corrupt regime was needed to ensure the power of money.²⁰ In other words, while the abolishment of the Soviet Union had promising rhetoric behind it, the primary driving force may have been the desire for more power and money among the Soviet elite.

Analysis

Short-Term Implications

Before discussing the short-term consequences of the collapse of the Soviet Union, it is necessary to provide two definitions. The present paper treats all the effects of the dissolution within ten years after the event as short-term implications. Long-term implications are the effects, which can be witnessed after Vladimir Putin came to power. In other words, the present paper discusses two periods, the rule of Boris Yeltsin and the presidency of Vladimir Putin and Dmitry Medvedev.

The collapse of the oppressive regime promised a paradigm shift in human rights in Russia. However, according to Nowakowski, “transitions toward more democratic forms of governance and market economies have faced many obstacles, and have not necessarily facilitated the protection of such rights.”²¹ For the first decade, Russia was disturbed by the uncertainty in all spheres, including civic society, medicine, education, gender equality, ethnic conflicts, and rights of disabled and sexual minorities.

Even though civic society was granted by the Constitution of the Russian Federation accepted after the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russians were still unable to join an organization freely. The Constitution gives the right to enter any society without prosecution;²² however, the extensive bureaucracy was used to limit the possibilities of NGOs.²³ The media and the pressed was controlled by the government and failed to investigate the abuse and killings of activists and reporters.²⁴ However, citizens were granted a chance to practice any religion, which was prohibited before the fall of the USSR.²⁵ While there reports that “non-traditional” religions were still open to suppression and threats²⁶, the change in this field was positive.

Initially, the fall of the Soviet Union significantly decreased access to healthcare and education. Danton reports that around 700,000 Russian citizens died every year due to the health crises.²⁷ These problems had a particular effect on disabled people since healthcare and schooling facilities were not adjusted to meet the requirements for the special-needs population.²⁸ At the same time, during the first decade after the collapse of the USSR, there were numerous reports about the oppression of ethnic minorities,²⁹ violations of human rights in the Russian military due to an unsuccessful reform,³⁰ and an increased number of human trafficking.³¹ Additionally, discrimination against women was a common feature since women are viewed as caretakers of the household and children, while men did not participate in these activities.³² However, despite the overall poor attention to human rights in Russia in the 1990s, there were some positive changes that need to be mentioned.

First, while the sexual minorities were still discriminated against, the emergence of the Russian Federation provided a legal background for further development. In the Soviet Union, homosexuality was illegal, and people could be put to prison for being gay or lesbian.³³ While Russian people and authorities still consider homosexuality immoral, at least it was excluded from criminal codebooks. Such a drastic change may lay a beginning to the policy of tolerance towards LGBTQ. The same was done for disabled people since the Constitution declared the equality of opportunity as the primary principle.

Second, even though the opposing press was still controlled, it became legal to criticize any social or political issues. Article 59 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation declares that “defense of the Fatherland shall be a duty and obligation of citizens of the Russian Federation.”³⁴ Law enforcers often stated that criticism of the government might be viewed as a failure to adhere to this article.³⁵ However, the legal basis for the future elimination of the press was set during the period, which is a positive consequence of the dissolution of the USSR.

Third, citizens of Russia no longer needed to state their nationality in their passports, which is vital for ended discrimination based on ethnicity. The change made it no longer legal to ask for ethnical identity during job interviews, and the employer no longer had a chance to determine an applicant’s nationality. Before the change, it was legal to make being Russian one of the criteria for employment.³⁶ In other words, it was no longer legal to discriminate against ethnical minorities.

In summary, the short-term consequences of the collapse of the Soviet Union are self-explanatory. According to Stokes, by the end of the twentieth century, Russia could not be called a full-fledged democratic state.³⁷ While the change of the regime to democracy granted all the freedoms and human rights, the enforcement of these rights was laggard. The reasons for such lags include a wide variety of social, economic, and political issues. First, the generation did change during the first decade, and people continued to think as communists. According to Cohen, 76% of USSR citizens voted for preserving the USSR, which means that people valued their way of life.³⁸ The minds of people do not change overnight; therefore, more time was needed for people to start thinking as a civic society. Second, Russia suffered from a considerable financial crisis, which meant that there was not enough money to reinforce human rights.³⁹ Third, there were no leaders interested in enforcing the Constitution since the elite was interested in becoming wealthier using privatization.⁴⁰ In brief, short-term consequences were disastrous for human rights in Russia; however, the legal bases for future development were laid.

Long-Term Implication

Long-term implications of the collapse of the Soviet

Almost thirty years after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the situation concerning human rights in Russia has changed considerably. According to Romanova, Russia has made significant progress in the field of human rights, and it continues Europeanization, even though the country’s leaders do not admit it.⁴¹ An evident breakthrough can be seen in education, which has become more democratized.⁴² Francesconi, Marco et al. argues that education reform and introduction of the unified state exam allowed more talented students to enter prestigious universities.⁴³ The changes decreased corruption and made the requirements for entering higher education institutions more transparent.⁴⁴ In healthcare, Russia was able to address the majority of problems posed by the collapse of the Soviet Union; however, the effectiveness of the measures was limited. According to Nazarov and Avxentyev, the Russian healthcare system underperforms in terms of mortality, life expectancy, and access to care.⁴⁵ Healthcare workers are underpaid, there is no universal outpatient drug provision program, and there is a structural disproportion in health spending sources.⁴⁶ However, in general, the situation with healthcare and education improved considerably.

While Russian citizens are granted freedom of religion, the government continues to control religious organizations limiting their activity. Russian society is believed to be conservative, and it accepts only traditional religions, including Eastern Orthodox Church and Islam.⁴⁷ However, the government continuously tries to attack smaller religious groups, such as the International Society of Krishna Consciousness and Jehovah’s Witnesses.⁴⁸ For instance, Jehovah’s Witnesses are considered an unlawful organization in Russia for unclear reasons.⁴⁹ People are taken to jail and interrogated for practicing their religion, which demonstrates a low level of human rights in terms of faith.

At the same time, religion and conservatism negatively influence the rights of sexual minorities.⁵⁰ Putin’s organization made a considerable step back from the fundamental freedoms granted after the collapse of the Soviet Union.⁵¹ In 2013, the State Duma of the Russian Federation passed the law prohibiting the propaganda of homosexuality among children and adolescents.⁵² The law is extensively used to suppress human rights movements fighting for the rights of LGBTQ.⁵³ In short, the situation in the sphere has deteriorated in comparison with the first decade after the fall of the USSR.

Numerous studies report that human rights in Russia are consistently violated. Mantzaris reports high rates of corruption in Russia, which is used to promote legislation limiting the rights of unprotected populations, including children, elderly, and disabled people.⁵⁴ Moreover, racism and ethnic conflicts are also a growing concern in the country.⁵⁵ Freedom in the World 2019, an independent website about human right, reports that “with loyalist security forces, a subservient judiciary, a controlled media environment, and a legislature consisting of a ruling party and pliable opposition factions, the Kremlin is able to manipulate elections and suppress genuine dissent.”⁵⁶ In summary, long-term implications for the collapse of the Soviet Union are not as optimistic as it was initially projected.

In summary, Putin’s administration is associated with a return to Soviet methods and authoritative power. The majority of human rights are still suppressed to maintain the authoritative control of the President. Even though there are positive changes in healthcare and education, freedom of speech, religion, and sexual identity are granted only on paper. Cohen argues that the fall of the USSR brought an end to the democratization of Russia, which was started by Gorbachev in the late 1980s.⁵⁷ Russian citizens lost the feeling of security and confidence, and the trust of the government is slowly decreasing.⁵⁸ Freedom in the World 2019 website declares that Russian is not free with an overall score of 20 out of 100.⁵⁹ While economic stability is achieved, Putin’s administration continues to control the press and opposition through official and unofficial channels. In brief, the long-term results of the Soviet Union’s collapse in terms of human rights in Russia are poor.

Conclusion

The dissolution of the USSR came as a surprise to the majority of experts since there were no apparent political or economic prerequisites. The lack of provision of basic human rights was one of the major concerns that led to the historical event. The collapse of the regime was associated with legal provisions of all democratic freedoms. Even though there were significant limitations to the implementation of these freedoms, the long-term results of the event were expected to be positive. However, the analysis shows that Russia seems to turn back to Soviet methods of controlling the thought of citizens by oppression and limiting human rights. While on paper, Russian citizens are granted all the rights and freedoms, they are often violated for political reasons.

Works Cited

Antonov, Mikhail. “Religion, Sexual Minorities, and the Rule of Law in Russia.” Journal of Law, Religion and State, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 152–183.

Arnold, Richard. “Systematic Racist Violence in Russia between ‘Hate Crime’ and ‘Ethnic Conflict’.” Theoretical Criminology, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 239-256.

Aron, Leon. “Everything You Think You Know about the Collapse of the Soviet Union Is Wrong.” Foreign Policy, vol. 20, 2011, pp. 1-7.

Benites, Kirsten. “Repatriation of Ethnic Groups.” Human Rights in Russia and the Former Soviet Republics, Human Rights and Human Welfare, 2007, pp. 89-97. Web.

Bonneville, Ken. “Civil Society and Human Rights.” Human Rights in Russia and the Former Soviet Republics, Human Rights and Human Welfare, 2007, pp. 4-9. Web.

Cohen, Steven. “The Breakup of the Soviet Union Ended Russia’s March to Democracy.”The Guardian. 2006, Web.

Danton, Christine. “The Health Crisis in Russia.” Human Rights in Russia and the Former Soviet Republics, Human Rights and Human Welfare, 2007, pp. 42-50. Web.

Francesconi, Marco et al. “Democratizing Access to Higher Education in Russia: The Consequences of the Unified State Exam Reform.” European Economic Review, vol. 117, pp. 56-82

Freedom in the World. “Russia.” Freedom in the World 2019, Web.

Freese, Susan. “Human Trafficking.” Human Rights in Russia and the Former Soviet Republics, Human Rights and Human Welfare, 2007, pp. 61-71. Web.

Goble, Paul. “Federalism and Human Rights in the Soviet Union.” Cornell International Law Journal, vol. 23, no. 2, 1990, pp. 399-404.

Johnson, Annika. “Disability Rights.” Human Rights in Russia and the Former Soviet Republics, Human Rights and Human Welfare, 2007, pp. 10-21. Web.

Kenez, Peter. A History of the Soviet Union from the Beginning to the End. Cambridge University Press, 2006.

Kortunov, V. et al. “Homosexuality in Russia: Are There Reasons to Be Homophobic Today?” Social Sciences and Arts, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 517-528.

Mantzaris, E.A. “Corruption as a Violation of Basic Human Rights in South Africa and Russia.” African Journal of Public Affairs, vol. 9, no. 8, pp. 15-30.

Knight, Amy. “The KGB, perestroika, and the collapse of the Soviet Union.” Journal of Cold War Studies, vol. 5, no. 1, 2003, pp. 67-93.

L, Vladimir. “Human Rights and How They are Applied in Post-Soviet Societies.” Journal of Political Sciences & Public Affairs vol. 5, no. 4, 2017, pp. 1-4.

Leinsalu, Mall et al. “Increasing Ethnic Differences in Mortality in Estonia after the Collapse of the Soviet Union.” Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health, vol. 58, no. 7, 2004, pp. 583-589.

Libby, Kristina. “Ethnic Conflict.” Human Rights in Russia and the Former Soviet Republics, Human Rights and Human Welfare, 2007, pp. 22-29. Web.

Marples, David. The Collapse of the Soviet Union, 1985-1991. Routledge, 2016.

Nazarov, Vladimir and Nikolay Avxentyev. “Healthcare in Russia: Problems and Perspectives.” Financial Journal, no. 4, pp 9-23.

Nowakowski, Arianna. “Introduction.”Human Rights in Russia and the Former Soviet Republics, Human Rights and Human Welfare, 2007, pp. 1-3. Web.

Romanova, Tatiana. “Europeanisation and Russia.” The European Union and Its Eastern Neighbourhood edited by Paul Flenley and Michael Mannin, Manchester University Press, 2018.

Petrovsky, Vladimir. “Human Development and Human Security in Eurasia.” International Journal on World Peace vol. 22, no. 4, 2005, 17-75.

Samarin, Melissa. “Persecution Against Jehovah’s Witnesses in Russia Escalates.”Human Rights Watch. 2019, Web.

Simão, Licínia. “(In)Security in Post-Soviet Eurasia: Contributions from Critical Security Studies.” E-Cadernos CES vol. 19, 2013, pp. 132-152.

Smith, Cathy. “Violations of Human Rights in the Russian Military.” Human Rights in Russia and the Former Soviet Republics, Human Rights and Human Welfare, 2007, pp. 51-60. Web.

Stokes, Nick. “Prospects for Democracy.” Human Rights in Russia and the Former Soviet Republics, Human Rights and Human Welfare, 2007, pp. 72-81. Web.

Swift, Amy. “Political Repressions of Islam.” Human Rights in Russia and the Former Soviet Republics, Human Rights and Human Welfare, 2007, pp. 82-88. Web.

“The Constitution of the Russian Federation.”Constitution.ru, Web.

Weilminster, Lisa. “Gender and Human Rights.” Human Rights in Russia and the Former Soviet Republics, Human Rights and Human Welfare, 2007, pp. 30-41. Web.

Footnotes

1 Petrovsky, Vladimir. “Human Development and Human Security in Eurasia,” International Journal on World Peace 22, no. 4 (2005): 18.

2 Simão, Licínia. “(In)Security in Post-Soviet Eurasia: Contributions from Critical Security Studies,” E-Cadernos CES 19, (2013): 133.

3 Leinsalu, Mall et al. “Increasing Ethnic Differences in Mortality in Estonia after the Collapse of the Soviet Union,” Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health 58, no. 7 (2004): 583-589

4 Goble, Paul, “Federalism and Human Rights in the Soviet Union,” Cornell International Law Journal 23, no. 2 (1990): 401.

5 L, Vladimir, “Human Rights and How They are Applied in Post-Soviet Societies,” Journal of Political Sciences & Public Affairs 5, no. 4 (2017): 1.

6 L 2.

7 Marples, David, The Collapse of the Soviet Union, 1985-1991 (Routledge) 32.

8 Marples 32.

9 Kenez, Peter. A History of the Soviet Union from the Beginning to the End (Cambridge University Press) 15.

10 Kenez 24.

11 Kenez 4.

12 Marples 37.

13 Aron, Leon. “Everything You Think You Know About the Collapse of the Soviet Union Is Wrong,” Foreign Policy, vol. 20, 2011, p. 2.

14 Aron 3.

15 Aron 4.

16 Knight, Amy. “The KGB, perestroika, and the collapse of the Soviet Union.” Journal of Cold War Studies, vol. 5, no. 1, 2003, p. 79.

17 Knight 80.

18 Knight 72.

19 Cohen, Steven. “The Breakup of the Soviet Union Ended Russia’s March to Democracy.” The Guardian, 13 Dec. 2006.

20 Cohen.

21 Nowakowski, Arianna. “Introduction.” Human Rights in Russia and the Former Soviet Republics, Human Rights and Human Welfare, 2007, p. 1.

22 “The Constitution of the Russian Federation.” Constitution.ru.

23 Bonneville, Ken. “Civil Society and Human Rights.” Human Rights in Russia and the Former Soviet Republics, Human Rights and Human Welfare, 2007, p. 4.

24 Bonneville 4.

25 Swift, Amy. “Political Repressions of Islam.” Human Rights in Russia and the Former Soviet Republics, Human Rights and Human Welfare, 2007, p. 72.

26 Bonneville 4.

27 Danton, Christine. “The Health Crisis in Russia.” Human Rights in Russia and the Former Soviet Republics, Human Rights and Human Welfare, 2007, p. 42.

28 Johnson, Annika. “Disability Rights.” Human Rights in Russia and the Former Soviet Republics, Human Rights and Human Welfare, 2007, p. 10.

29 Libby, Kristina. “Ethnic Conflict.” Human Rights in Russia and the Former Soviet Republics, Human Rights and Human Welfare, 2007, p. 22.

30 Smith, Cathy. “Violations of Human Rights in the Russian Military.” Human Rights in Russia and the Former Soviet Republics, Human Rights and Human Welfare, 2007, p. 51

31 Freese, Susan. “Human Trafficking.” Human Rights in Russia and the Former Soviet Republics, Human Rights and Human Welfare, 2007, p. 61.

32 Weilminster, Lisa. “Gender and Human Rights.” Human Rights in Russia and the Former Soviet Republics, Human Rights and Human Welfare, 2007, p. 30

33 Weilminster 30

34 “The Constitution of the Russian Federation.”

35 Bonneville 4.

36 Goble 401.

37 Stokes, Nick. “Prospects for Democracy.” Human Rights in Russia and the Former Soviet Republics, Human Rights and Human Welfare, 2007, p. 72.

38 Cohen.

39 Nowakowski 1.

40 Cohen.

41 Romanova, Tatiana. “Europeanisation and Russia.” The European Union and Its Eastern Neighbourhood edited by Paul Flenley and Michael Mannin, Manchester University Press, 2018

42 Francesconi, Marco et al. “Democratizing Access to Higher Education in Russia: The Consequences of the Unified State Exam Reform.” European Economic Review, vol. 117, pp. 56.

43 Francesconi et al. 58.

44 Francesconi et al. 59.

45 Nazarov, Vladimir, and Nikolay Avxentyev. “Healthcare in Russia: Problems and Perspectives.” Financial Journal, no. 4, p 10.

46 Nazarov 9.

47 Antonov, Mikhail. “Religion, Sexual Minorities, and the Rule of Law in Russia.” Journal of Law, Religion and State, vol. 7, no. 2, p. 153.

48 Bonneville 4.

49 Samarin, Melissa. “Persecution against Jehovah’s Witnesses in Russia Escalates.” Human Rights Watch, 29 Oct. 2019.

50 Antonov 153.

51 Kortunov, V. et al. “Homosexuality in Russia: Are There Reasons to Be Homophobic Today?” Social Sciences and Arts, vol. 3, no. 1, p. 517.

52 Kortunov 517.

53 Kortunov 520.

54 Mantzaris, E.A. “Corruption as a Violation of Basic Human Rights in South Africa and Russia.” African Journal of Public Affairs, vol. 9, no. 8, p. 15.

55 Arnold, Richard. “Systematic Racist Violence in Russia between ‘Hate Crime’ and ‘Ethnic Conflict’.” Theoretical Criminology, vol. 19, no. 2, p. 240.

56 Freedom in the World. “Russia.” Freedom in the World 2019.

57 Cohen.

58 Cohen.

59 Freedom in the World.

Introduction

A fair number of countries around the world have been criticised for poor human rights implementation. It is essential to study them and determine why these nations have not embraced universal human principles because behind every observation is an underlying ideological or philosophical premise. At this point, one must recognise that there are two divergent ideas that exist in this matter; universalism and relativism (Freeman, 2002).

Critics often argue that universal human rights contravene multicultural societies and should therefore be abandoned. However, proponents of universalism argue that humans need to constantly understand each other and also need to seek for ways of improving themselves. To abandon the very notion of universal human rights would be to accept the status quo. These diverse notions have therefore complicated the human rights agenda and need to be critically analysed.

Women’s rights and circumcision

The issue of female rights as analysed through female genital mutilation (FGM) in various parts of the world provides a unique platform for understanding how challenging universalism of human rights can be. Many societies in Africa and the Middle East engage in this practice; which is a fact that has generated a lot of debate around the issue. Proponents of this practice base their standpoints on three major grounds.

They assert that it suppresses sexuality in women thus propagating monogamy. Conversely, it can be understood as a distinct representation of one’s cultural identity. Most individuals who hold this view are actually women who are expected to or who have gone through the practice themselves. Girls in these societies are socialised to respect marriage, so female genital mutilation becomes an important precursor to eligibility for marriage.

These women cannot be opposed to the act because if they choose to do, they may be alienated and condemned to a life of loneliness. Circumcision is a platform for identification with one’s community or kinsmen. Other supporters of the practice think of it as a symbol of beauty. The clitoris is perceived as a masculine trait so its removal would reinforce their femininity (Abusharaf, 2001).

On the other hand, this practice puts its participants at serious risk of infections, infertility or even tetanus. Those who do it for religious purposes may not find support for it in their holy books such as the Quran. Female genital mutilation can also lead to painful sexual relations, death and very difficult (if not fatal) childbirths.

All these effects makes it a seemingly vicious and even torturous act. It is no wonder that the United Nations considers FGM a violation of female rights (More, 2006). Such human rights groups have sought to repress or wipe out the practice altogether (Shute & Hurley, 1993) However, the problem is that making it illegal does not necessarily make it go away.

Affected communities still need other ways of enforcing respect, femininity, social status and the like and unless the latter matters are addressed then it is likely that the custom will carry on. This means that such social-cultural concerns deeply come in the way of enforcing universal human rights. Furthermore, issues revolving around cultural continuation may also be another big impediment and these definitely minimise the possibility of eradication of such a practise.

Northern versus Southern discourse

Sometimes what some have categorised as a universal framework of rights may actually be a perpetuation of western hegemonic beliefs. Usually, poor countries perceive ideas from the North as a mild form of colonisation because little consideration has been given to these country’s perceptions of human rights.

In fact, quite a lot of human rights assumptions are founded on an individualist notion of society. However, poorer countries often give precedence to collectivism. Their respect for group rights is normally marginalised over other individualistic concerns. (Pollis, 2006)

In situations where advocates from the North are working from the South, it is common for the former to automatically assume that the latter are victims and in need of rescuing. Human rights defendants from the United States and other similar countries frequently stereotype most human rights issues in poor or developing nations by classifying them as ‘barbaric’ and in need of serious eradication (Merry, 2002).

Taking on such superior stances actually comes in the way of instating true reforms. This is because prescriptive approaches never work as well as descriptive ones (Sikkink & Keck, 1998). Since most emphasis has gone to transference of ideas without necessary advocating for dialogue then universality of human rights may still be a farfetched reality.

Communality over universality-the case for Asia

Several Asian leaders such as Lee Yew of Singapore have asserted that Asians tend to give a lot of precedence to prosperity and social stability. In such conditions, these societies may demonstrate loyalty to their authorities over personal benefits. These leaders tend to look at interpretations of human rights in the West as distinct to their economic and social backgrounds. (Freeman, 2002b).

Furthermore, they believe that state interventions may sometimes be necessary in order to get these nations to where they need to be in terms of economic growth. However, one can see that authoritarian governments can take advantage of such premises to protect their oppressive rules (Glendon, 2004).

In fact, other Asian advocates have asserted that communality in Asia needs not be regarded as incompatible with universal human rights. In fact, they assert that to claim that their cultures are incompatible with rights and freedoms of others is actually taking on a racist premise (Malcontent & Thakur, 2004). The distressing fact is that certain citizens in these said nations may fall victim to extensions of these state’s laws.

Those governments may argue that as long as their citizens get access to basic human needs like food then the other issues (including human rights) can be covered by the state. (Jones, 1994). To this end, arguments for sovereignty, national security and the like will take primacy over proper treatment of these individuals. Advocates of the universality of human rights may therefore need to overcome such authoritarian governments in order to ensure every single human being is treated equitably.

Philosophical challenges

In order for societies to think of human rights universally, there must be an agreement on the philosophical basis for human rights yet this is still yet to occur. First of all, existence of universal human rights implies an endorsement of moral truths.

However, not all philosophers back this kind of premise. Most happen to fall within the moral relativist school of thought. These adherents affirm that all societies are characterised by a wide array of cultures and hence beliefs or principles. Consequently, any concerns about human rights need to be made context specific so as to fully address the diverse array of believes.

It is as though relativists are arguing that certain human rights can be foregone if the situation in one’s culture demanded. In this regard, moral relativism appears to be incompatible with universal human rights. As long as there exists such extreme opposition to universalism, then possibilities for the latter’s instatement are rather slim. These discourses need to be addressed in order for the latter movement to move ahead.

Secondly, some critics have opposed the assumption that human rights can be regarded as moral rights on the basis of the subjective nature of morals.

Since moral beliefs are created on the basis of some of the underlying subjective beliefs, then it would be unfair to try and impose one’s moral accord upon the lives of others. In this regard, the latter critics hold that universal human rights rest on the premise that there is an a priori rational moral principle where all other doctrines emerge. In deed the rationality of human rights itself can be contested.

The sentimentality inherent in it cannot be ignored because most of these beliefs are actually motivated by the need to sympathise with others (Braithwaite, 1999). It is indeed difficult to set these concerns aside as they attest to the appeals behind human rights hence universal human rights for that matter. These philosophical arguments indicate that there is yet to be a morally compelling explanation for universal human rights amongst various parties thus illustrating why there are still problems in implementation.

Cultural relativist concerns

In order for universal human rights to triumph, then objectives by cultural relativists need to be looked at and accommodated. Holders of the latter believe that enacting a universal set of human rights would be ignoring the empirical differences inherent in human society (Tilley, 2000).

There are practices and norms that fundamentally alter human rights issues. Relativists claim that political variables, cultural variables, desires and preferences are all essential influencers of human rights. In this regard, certain communities define their identities based on their families or their kinship ties.

Therefore, these communities may find it very hard to conceptualise individual autonomy. Family worth is more important than self worth in African societies. Other Native American tribes tend to think of non tribal members as less than human (based on myths and stories of origin) and this affects their perceptions of the latter. Cultural relativists therefore tend to look at universal human rights as parties working towards dominance and imposition of their values upon others.

By its very nature, cultural relativisms cannot co exist with universal concepts because it places a lot of emphasis on the need to acknowledge and hence respect diverse customs and beliefs. These differences are actually what make the world as we know it very interesting and unique.

Trying to instate universal human rights would therefore be seen as a method of homogenising the world. Once again, the hegemonic concept creeps in here. Most cultural relativists say that poor countries have been oppressed from time in immemorial. In the past, these societies utilised their resources to do so (as the case is in colonialism), however, modern forms of domination are founded on cultural precepts. Universal human rights may therefore be opposed based on these grounds. (Pollis, 2002)

Conclusion

At the very basic level, most challenges for universal human rights are actually derived from the relativist-universalist debate. The best way of overcoming these barriers would therefore be to first acknowledge cultural diversity and then work out solutions to incorporate them into perceptions and conceptions of human rights.

There is a need for tolerance in pursing these interests but most importantly, a revision of traditional understandings of human rights will need to be considered. These reconstructions could possibly put to rest arguments like western hegemonic domination and the northern –s southern discourses.

References

More, E. (2006). The universal declaration of human rights in today’s world. International communications journal, 11(2), 65

Abusharaf, R. (2001). Virtuous cuts, FGM in African ontology. Feminist cultural studies, 12(1), 112-140

Tilley, J. (2000). Cultural relativism. Human rights Quarterly, 22(2), 501

Merry, S. (2002). Religion, rights and community-domestic violence on the global context. Law and society review, 35(1), 39-44

Braithwaite, J. (1999). A future where punishment has been marginalised- utopian or realistic. UCLA law review, 46, 1827

Sikkink, K., & Keck, M. (1998). Activists beyond borders: advocacy networks in international politics. NY: Cornell Press

Freeman, M. (2002). Human rights – an interdisciplinary approach. NY: Wiley and Sons

Glendon, M. (2004). Rule of law in universal human rights declarations. International human rights. North-western university journal, 2(5), 34

Malcontent. P. & Thakur, R. (2004).Sovereign impunity to international accountability. NY: UN University Press

Shute, S. & Hurley, S. (1993). Human rights – oxford amnesty lectures. NY: Basic books

Jones, P. (1994). Rights. Basingstoke? Mcmillan publishers

Pollis, A. (1996). Cultural relativism revisited – through a state prism. Human rights quarterly, 18(2), 316-344

Donnelly, J. (1999). Human rights & Asian values: a defence of western universalism. Cambridge: CUP

Baehr, P. (1999). Human rights: universality in practise. Basingstoke: McMIllan

An Naim, A. (1999). The cultural mediation of human rights. Cambridge: Cambridge University press

Ignatieff, M. (1999). Human rights- the midlife crisis, New York Review, 20 May

United Nations (1993). Vienna declaration of human rights. UN document. A/ Conf 157/23, 12^th July

Pollis, A. & Schwab, P. (1982). Towards a human rights framework. NY: Praeger publishers

Freeman, M. (2002b). Universality, diversity and difference: culture and human rights. Cambridge: Blackwell

Pollis, A. (2002). A New Universalism, in Pollis and Schwab (eds.), Human Rights: New Perspectives, New Realities, Boulder, CO. : Rienner publishers

The protected rights as documented in the Ontario Human Rights Commission website articulate why discrimination at the place of work should is prohibited. There should be equal treatment of all employees working in any give organization. The rights’ code in section five expounds that all the employees at the workplace should be treated equally without any element of discrimination.

In other words, no employee should be sidelined on the basis of disability, family status, marital status, a record of offenses, age, sexual orientation, sex, creed, citizenship, ethnic origin, color, place of origin, ancestry and race (Ontario Human Rights Commission, 2008).

The code continues to assert that all employees should be free from any form of emotional or physical harassment at the place of work. This harassment may emanate from the employer’s agent or the employer himself. Besides, it is also possible for employees to harass each other based on disability, family status, gender or sexuality.

Although the term “employment” has not been defined by the code, it has been extensively interpreted by the commission. According to the latter, employment entails a contract job or part-time and full-time work that is executed by staff members who may be temporarily or permanently hired.

Working under probation or volunteering also constitutes employment. All the aspects of the working environment are adequately covered by the rights enshrined in the code.

When filling out employment application forms or during interviews in anticipation for employment, I have noted that discrimination still exists. For instance, the employment application forms contain mandatory fields that must be filled out in order to specify the gender and sexual orientation of job seekers. Worse still, the interview process is hardly transparent because the choice of the successful candidate is largely affected by gender and sexuality.

Compare and contrast the forms of prejudice and discrimination experienced by your case study choice

Any form of prejudgment is highly likely to culminate into prejudice. It is common for the interviewing panel to draw conclusions about an applicant who is being interviewed even without having the relevant facts to support the arguments. The contemporary world has indeed advanced in making prejudice statements. Unfavorable and preconceived decisions have made several job seekers to miss employment opportunities.

Nationality, language, race/ethnicity, sexuality, religion, and even gender are some of the elements used to prejudice and discriminate other people. Other forms of prejudice and discrimination that have potentially gone against the provisions of code five include disability, age and social class (Ontario Human Rights Commission, 2008).

Unfounded beliefs may also amount to prejudice. For instance, if a decision does not conform to rational thinking, it can still lead to prejudice. Application forms for job seekers and the process of interviewing applicants are usually subjected to all the mentioned elements of prejudice and discrimination.

Assess social problems and their dynamics within a cultural and personal context utilizing critical thinking skills

There are myriads of social problems aggravated by challenges posed by prejudice and discrimination. Individuals can be prejudiced or discriminated through a preconceived notion. The two vices can also be considered by the victim as any form of undesirable or unusual characteristics of the perpetrator.

Some of the social challenges experienced by the victims of prejudice and discrimination include linguistic discrimination, religious discrimination, racism, sexual discrimination, classism, nationalism, and sexism (Ontario Human Rights Commission, 2008).

These social problems also affect personal and cultural dynamics. For instance, common cultural characteristics are usually part and parcel of sentiments carried along with the spirit of nationalism.

Although a population is often bound by nationalism, the dynamics of the latter often culminate into separatism or national independence. Such an outcome may not be favorable when a nation is keen on seeking bilateral and multilateral co-operation with other states.

Reference

Ontario Human Rights Commission (2008). Human Rights at Work 2008 – Third Edition. Web.

Introduction

It has been said before that cheap labor carries hidden costs, Tech Human Rights Art 2008, 7. In some countries like the USA, it would appear normal to have access to basic technology like owning a car, television set, and basic communication gadgets like a modern mobile phone. However, as it appears normal in some of these countries, some people in the less fortunate countries lack even the basics of these technologies such as a mobile phone.

Since most of the world bodies continue to use the basic technology to communicate with the world e.g. about health and safety, access to these ‘modern’ basic technology should be regarded as a human right and every effort is taken to ensure that just like immunization, every human being has access to them. It would be of little effort to produce vaccines that people never get to know about just because they cannot afford a television set.

Vital human rights with modern basic technology

A complete scope of vital human rights guarantees the development of life in its broadest sense and sustainable human development. Health, life, education, and nutrition have been considered to be on top of the human rights list. For many years, United Nations (UN) has been concerned with the link of the right to development to human rights and technologies. Of late, a link between development and the proclaimed human rights has been developing. UN has linked sustainable development to the positive effects of poverty reductions and has thus given priority of the human rights to a fair share of education, welfare, employment and health, Glendon, M.A., (2001).

Science should place human beings at the center of the universe. Since technology is meant to serve the human beings, a set of rules needs to be established in order to have universal access to techniques essential for a good healthy life. Without discouraging research especially for products such as vaccine, there is need to have a Global Technological Facility that addresses vital human rights. People should have a right to simple yet adequate information through essential technologies. Education needs to be the center of concern in promoting technology towards human rights. It should be a permanent activity such that professionals with human sensitivity receive continued education, Ignatieff, M., (2001).

We live in an age of constant technological breakthroughs, designed not only to ease human suffering but also to enhance human powers. At first glance, such progress — particularly in the health care field—appears to be an unqualified gain. However, inequality of access to these advances has worried many thoughtful people. Should individuals’ access to technology depend on how much money they have? Or which country do they live in?

These concerns are becoming increasingly important as new technologies of medical care and bodily enhancement develop. As we try to understand the moral issues raised by these questions, we will examine how such concerns are translated into laws that set floors and ceilings for access to technology. The moral desirability of such limits on the minimum and maximum amount of technology available (to the poor and rich, respectively) will be the central focus of the course. We will begin with the idea of the social minimum—the basic level of technology that a just or decent society assures to even its poorest members.

We will then explore how the law enacts this idea of a social minimum, both in the United States and (more briefly) internationally. In the U.S., the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act of 1986 requires hospital emergency rooms that receive federal funding to screen and stabilize anyone who arrives with a serious condition. Medicaid and state programs assure some level of health care to the indigent. Internationally, some intellectual property laws governing pharmaceuticals also grant poor countries the right to “compulsorily license” lifesaving drugs in times of emergency. We will discuss how these and similar legal protections work, whether they are successful, and their unintended consequences.

Conclusion

A simple and pure market approach will not lead to an automatic solution for people with basic needs problems especially those with scarce resources. The poor also are so much in need of a healthy life that is in harmony with nature and their fellows. Reality has not turned to be pleasant for the poor after the centuries of modernity since transformations of the scientific and technological context have seen advances in liberty but delays in liberty.

A dual strategy is thus required to deal with extreme poverty and modern competitiveness, a dual challenge for the ‘modern world’. Thus it can be ruled out that enabling access of the poor and semi-illiterate to ‘modern’ technology is enhancing their human rights. With further redevelopment and common international agreements steered by UN commissions on human rights should have these legally recognized incorporated as human rights.

Reference

Ignatieff, Michael. Human Rights as Politics and Idolatry. Princeton & Oxford: Princeton University Press. ISBN 0691088934. (2001).

Abstract

According to the researches have been made by UNHCR, 1998 , found that 80% of the refugees immigrating to the United States and other countries of second asylum are women or children. Women are the most vulnerable population because of both physical realities and traditional cultural roles and perspectives. a lot have left their family and support systems behind. Some have lost their husbands and children to war, Disease and famine. a lot of women refugees have stay their time in refugee camps where conditions are crowded and frequently Unhealthy.

Most of them have been the victims of violence. All have left everything familiar behind. As if the tragedy and fear that forced these women to leave their homes, including what was a burden enough, many refugees find themselves in a foreign country, with unknown customs, language, values and conventions. They are immediately faced with the major role changes, which further increases their vulnerability.

Refugees women are affected differently than men by events of their past, and have special concerns arising from these events and responses. Regardless of the details that led the women to flee their homes, typically they come to the countries of refuge to second asylum refuge with all-encompassing human needs ,including the spiritual, social, and psychological

Health Care

Refugees should be provided by full natural examination within the first year of their stay. this may be the only form of health care provided to many during this period of time.

Language barriers, limited transportation, deficient knowledge of the refugee agency regarding health needs, and limited knowledge of health care sources all inhibit the refugee woman’s access to primary and specialty health care. refugee women might not know about financial aid during the presentation of the various agencies. Personal and cultural issues may also cause a woman to hesitate seeking health care. Many refugee women come from very private backgrounds and may fear allowing someone outside their culture to examine or treat them. Others have always relied on traditional methods of treating illness, and may distrust western medicine techniques.

Safe home

This important reason may greatly increase or decreased the refugee woman’s. In many countries of first asylum, refugee women live in the crowded refugee camps where she may be Exposed to violation or disease.

Some refugees women may stay in survive ,brothels or sweatshops. Although there may be different options for the refugee woman in countries of second asylum, shelter that is safe, comfortable, and affordable may still be difficult to find.

Childbirth

Refugee women tend to have the best parity, delayed prenatal care, and lower hematocrits than their host country counterparts. Refugee women are also more likely to have complications during labor and delivery and to deliver low birth weight babies. Financial implications of having children may also increase the physical and emotional strains on refugee women.

Each culture has its own views of childbirth, and these need to be assessed in terms of the culture and on an individual level. In general, exploration should be made of a woman’s desire to prevent or space births – regardless of the woman’s faith background. The challenges and difficulties of refugee life may override religious proscriptions.

Sexual Abuse

This factor is one of the most important factors that expose women for Migration. Refugee women are extremely vulnerable to sexual abuse and rape. Women of many cultures tend to be dependent upon men for the important life needs , food, safe home, etc. in a lot of cultures, women are viewed as property and are expected to submit to men. This, coupled with the fact that men are generally physically stronger than women, opens the door to sexual and physical abuse outside and inside marriage. In most third world countries, abuse is not even reported due to the social status of women. Refugee women bring this background to their countries of asylum.

Because of their vulnerability, rape and sexual assault are extremely common among female refugees and immigrants. Though few are forthcoming with such history, horrifying reports of cruelty and rape have been reported by the few who will speak out. Note also that dealing with psychological and physical trauma may take many years or may never occur

FGC

Until just a few years ago, few in the West were aware of the practice of female genital cutting (FGC) or female genital mutilation (FGM). FGC has also been called female circumcision (FC), but that promoted for a comparison to male circumcision, which in many cases is misleading as male circumcision does not cause discomfort other than the procedure, nor is it related to control over the circumcised person. Today, it is known that more than 114 million women in the world have undergone some form of FGC

Early Marriage

In some cultures, it is not uncommon for girls to get married at early ages. When these women Migrate from their countries to any country, they may be only 14-17 years old. The difference of age in married women, may cause the woman to feel further isolated in the larger society and she may have a more difficult time making friends, since she may feel she does not “belong” with the girls her own age or with the older married women. Due to their young age, these women generally have fewer personal resources to deal with the strain of being a wife in this culture, as well as to stress created by relocation in general. These women need much support and a sense that they are accepted.

Refugee women in Canada

Refugee women who arrive in Canada are subject to a refugee determination system that is separated from the economic factors that influence the policy of refugees. A claimant’s request for refugee status is determined in accordance with the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees definition which states that a refuge is any individual who owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of the nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail of the protection of that country.

As such, claimants are subject only to eligibility criteria. decision-makers determine if these refugees meets the requirements of the Convention definition thus entitling him or her to refugee status.The central concern behind the formulation of the Guidelines is how gender-specific forms of persecution can be accommodated by the Convention refugee definition.

Canadian International Development Assistant

designed for refugee women operate independently role that the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) plays in providing assistance to refugees around the world. CIDA manages the Canadian government’s development assistance programs and projects. Assistance provided by CIDA on behalf of refugees overseas is administered through its International Humanitarian Assistance program. CIDA’S policy regarding refugee assistance is described as complementary While some funding is targeted specifically for refugee women, CID’s overall approach to refugee assistance is aimed at refugees in general, on the understanding that by virtue of constituting the majority of the refugee population, women and their dependents are assumed to benefit most from any CIDA-sponsored in iterative.

It is not uncommon for the power structure of a refugee camp to be male-dominated and for women refugees, in spite of their majority status within most camps, to be excluded from the management and distribution of even the most basic items such as food, clothing, or blankets. As a result, women, and by extension those who depend upon them, are vulnerable to abuses in the system, in particular the distribution of supplies. Their food rations may fall short of the recommended allotment as male distributors favor themselves, family members, and friends. Worse, women may be forced to perform sexual favors in exchange for basic necessities.

CIDA dispenses, but does not oversee, the funding it allocates to refugee programs. Instead, CIDA relies upon agency funding, such as the United Nations High Commissar for Refugees, e Red Cross, and NGOSt,o design and implement gender-sensitive distribution structures inside the camps. To its credit, CIDA has repeatedly urged these agencies to implement programs that solicit and incorporate input from refugee women. Although CIDA funding is not contingent upon such an arrangement.

Aid organizations continue to respect structures and traditions which deny women their human rights instead of working directly with the female community organizers activists to support a gender-responsive agenda.

About United States refugee women

There is a proud tradition in the United States of protecting refugees, and has set an example for other countries in protecting women from gender-related violence. But the ability of refugee women to gain asylum in the U.S. was significantly undermined by a 1996 immigration law called the “Illegal Immigration Reform

and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996.” That law created new barriers for asylum seekers including:

• “expedited removal” process, which gives INS inspectors at airports and borders – rather than trained immigration judges – the power to order the immediate deportation of a person who arrives in the U.S. without proper travel documents
• mandatory detention” of asylum seekers who are subject to the expedited process
• a filing deadline that bars asylum claims that are not filed within one year of a refugee’s arrival

In 1996, USA Board of Immigration Appeals issued a ground-breaking decision recognizing that asylum could be granted based on fear of female genital mutilation as result of the outcry which happened because the sexual assault on Fauziya Kassindja

In 2001, Attorney General Janet Reno took another critical step towards protecting women refugees when she vacated a 1999 Board of Immigration Appeals decision in Matter of R-A- that would have prohibited a victim of severe domestic violence from receiving asylum. The Department of Justice had just previously proposed regulatory changes to further confirm that women with gender-based asylum claims may be eligible for asylum. But those regulations have yet to be issued. The U.S. government’s leadership in recognizing gender-based asylum claims is crucial in setting an example for many other nations and should be applauded.

But this leadership in developing refugee laws to account for gender-based persecution is undercut when women are prevented on procedural grounds from presenting their claims for asylum. When a woman with a gender-based asylum claim is barred from applying for asylum because of “expedited removal” or an unrealistic filing deadline, or when a woman fleeing domestic violence is detained and, in despair, abandons her asylum claim so that her child will not have to endure the lengthy separation caused by that detention, something is significantly wrong with U.S. laws and procedures

Conclusion

We should provide Canadian Refugee women by complete health care and take note of things that make the woman more or less uncomfortable , social care , initial care should be provided by another woman as many cultures view this as most appropriate , and all of care development must provided to these refugee to upgrade them into normal level or the best level in their life. also they should be treated with special sensitivity and respect their rights.

Each refugee have difference needs and interested. They carry the heavy weight of a violent, frightening, and often tragic past, as well as the pressure of facing an unknown future. Like the old pioneers helped one another build their lives with barn raisings and other support, we too should reach out and help these refugee women rebuild their lives.

References

• United Nations High Commissioner of Refugees (1998). Progress Report on Refugee Women.
• Hathaway, Jarnes The Law of Refugee Status. Toronto: Butterworth 1991.
• What is FGM? Web.
• Downs, Bernstein, and Marchese, “refugee women” 1997.
• Texas Department of Human Services Refugee Resettlement Program (1999).

Introduction

Over the past few decades, the process of national reconciliation has played a pivotal role in the recovery, and healing of those affected by civil wars and human rights violations within many countries. As such, countries ran by military/authoritarian governments have developed truth, justice, and reconciliation commissions to investigate and prosecute those responsible for the atrocities and sufferings endured by the masses. Between 1973 and 1990, Chileans suffered greatly under their military government. This paper shall highlight the human rights violations experienced during that period, as well as the actions taken by Chile in response to those violations. Similarly, the major tensions underlying Chile’s reconciliation efforts, and whether those efforts have been successful in balancing the need for justice and peace shall also be discussed.

The Human Right Violations Experienced in Chile between 1973 and 1990

According to Loveman and Lira, the 1973 military coup was the worst political unrest experienced in Chile in the twentieth century (60). After the death of the president, the military took office and a state of civil unrest engulfed the country (Loveman & Lira 61). To maintain control, the military occupied national territories and declared a state of siege referred to as “The State of War”, which subjected civilians to military Tribunals. Similarly, during this period of military rule, thousands of people were detained, subjected to torture and an unknown number of people disappeared (Loveman & Lira 66). As such, torture, detention, unfair prosecutions, and disappearances were the most heinous human rights violations experienced by Chileans between 1973 and 1990.

Actions Taken by Chile in Response to the Human Right Violations

After years of suffering under a dictatorial rule, Chile got a civil government in 1990. Since then, the government has been actively involved in the politics of reconciliation. This political process seeks to establish the truth, develop reparation policies, offer justice, and resistance to impunity (Loveman & Lira 63). Regarding the establishment of the truth, the Rettig Commission (1990-91) was formed to shed some light on the violations, status of the victims, compensation procedures, and to propose preventive measures against future human rights violations (Loveman & Lira 61).

On the same note, the Valech Commissions (2003-2005, and Valech Commission II, 2010-2011) were also created to investigate and offer viable solutions to the violations (Loveman & Lira 66). Similarly, constitutional accusations, investigative journalism reports, and activities from human rights organizations carried out over the years indicate Chile’s resistance to impunity (Loveman & Lira 68). These are among the actions taken to address the human rights violations incurred by Chileans.

Major Tensions Underlying Chile’s Reconciliation Efforts

Currently, there is a lot of anger and frustration among Chileans due to the number of unresolved issues in terms of prosecutions, reparation, and resistance to impunity. The fact that the issues leading to the coup have not been resolved is a source of concern because reconciliation cannot happen without conciliation. If the root issues are not resolved, there is fear that Chile may never heal, or fall into another political rapture.

While the efforts towards reconciliation remain visible, their success in balancing the need for peace and justice greatly depends on an aggressive stance against the perpetrators of heinous crimes. Some people have not been prosecuted for their crimes. This is indicative of a flawed justice system. As such justice and peace cannot prevail unless they answer for their crimes.

Conclusion

Human rights violations experienced in Chile have been highlighted and the actions are taken to address them discussed. Without an effective justice system, the country may never fully experience the reconciliation it seeks.

Works Cited

Loveman, Brian, and Elizabeth Lira. “Truth, Justice, Reconciliation, and Impunity as Historical Themes: Chile, 1814 – 2006.” Radical History Review 97 (2007): 43 – 76. Print.

Introduction

The United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) is an inter-governmental organization and an organ of the United Nations; all members of the United Nations members are members of UNHRC, the council seat, however, has a membership of 47 countries and it is charged with the responsibility of promoting and protecting human rights across the world, it fundamentally addresses matters concerning human rights violations.

United Nation Human Rights Council was established on 15 march, 2006 by the UN General Assembly primarily to replace the United Nation High Commission on Human Rights which had been ineffective in solving the human rights issues and also due to the fact that several of its membership were perceived to be human rights abusers.

The United Nations Commission for Human Rights was criticized for its effectiveness since it dwelt too much on the Israel situation at the expense of the other human rights issues. UNHCR was also criticized for its politicization and double standards in handling the Israel situation.

The membership of the council was 47 states and was geographically distributed according to regions and continents. The distribution was 13 countries from African continent, 13 countries were from Asia, and 6 came from Eastern Europe, 8 from the Latin America and the Caribbean and 7 countries were from Western Europe.

The threshold for calling sessions was placed at one third of the membership and could sit not less than three sessions per year. The status of the council was to be reviewed by the Security Council at the intervals of five years (Matas 10)

The members of the United Nation General Assembly meet to vote for those who can occupy the forty seven main seats in the council. The term of each member state in the council serves for a two-three year term.

The members who are elected to the council should uphold the highest standards in the protection of human rights. All the united Nation members are eligible for election into the council provided they receive an absolute majority of the votes and they should be nominated by their blocs or regions.

The members that presently seat in the council are Africa; Angola, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Djibouti, Gabon, Ghana, Libya, Mauritania, Mauritius, Nigeria, Uganda, Senegal and Zambia.

Asian countries in the council are; Bahrain, Bangladesh, China, Japan, Jordan, Malaysia, Maldives, Kyrgyzstan, Thailand, republic of Korea, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Pakistan. Eastern Europe: Hungary, Poland, republic of Moldova, Russian federation, Slovakia and Ukraine; the countries from Western Europe are Belgium, France, Norway, Spain, Switzerland, United Kingdom and united states.

Those from Latin America and the Caribbean are Argentina Brazil, Chile, Cuba, Ecuador, Guatemala, Mexico and Uruguay (Blanchfield 5).

The UNHRC has been relentless in condemning the state of Israel, majority of the resolutions have been targeting Israel which is a perceived violator of human rights and had became a permanent feature in each of the council’s session. Other countries that have been condemned by the UNHRC are Sudan, Iran.

The development of bloc voting has made the council a political instrument and it has attracted criticism from other states. This idea of voting along blocs has enhanced a unity of convenience between the nations of Africa and those of Middle East; they are often supported by the China, Russia and Cuba, this complicates the objectivity of the council.

Under the statutes of UNHRC, a council member can have its rights and privileges suspended by the council when it is found to have continuously violated human rights especially when it is serving its term in the membership. The process of suspension of a council member requires the endorsement of two thirds majority of the general assembly vote. The recent example is the suspension of Libya which was unanimous.

The mission of the UNHRC is to act as the main UN Avenue that states get to cooperate and dialogue on issues of human rights; it enables member states to deliver on their human rights obligations through dialogue, capacity building and technical assistance. The UNHRC also make suggestion to the general assembly when there is need for an international law in the field of human rights.

Consequently through the universal periodic review, the UNHRC assess the review and the progress of human rights in the 192 UN member states, it can also act as an advisory committee capable of providing advice on particular topical human rights issues. The UNHRC also acts as a complaints committee through which non-governmental organizations, individuals and member states channel their complaints (Arroba 66-85).

The mandate and the structure of UNHRC

Under the resolution A/RES/60/251 that gave birth to the UNHRC, the following was deemed to be its mandate;

• The UNHRC is aimed at promoting human rights education, advisory services, technical assistance and capacity building.
• The UNHRC is also expected to serve as a forum for debate and dialogue on topical human rights issues and to facilitate the generation of international human rights law to be forwarded to the UN General Assembly.
• The UNHRC is also tasked with the responsibility of promoting full implementation of the human rights obligation of the member states and also to ensure that states adhere to human rights commitments seriously that may arise from human rights summits and conferences.

Structure of UNHRC

On the structure of the UNHRC, the council holds an organizational meeting at the inception of each year; these elections are presided over by the president and the four vice-presidents each representing a regional bloc in the council.

The president and the vice-president form what is referred as the council bureau which is charged with the responsibility of procedural and organizational issues that relate to the council. The council bureau members elect the president from among them selves.

The seat of the council is in Geneva Switzerland where the members meet three times in one year for duration of 10 weeks. The council can also hold special session when a member state makes a request, the special session should be sanctioned by a third of the members (Blanchfield 7).

On its reporting, the council submits its annual reports to the UN General Assembly, consequently the council, after every five years should review and report its work and functions to the general assembly.

Under the UNHRC the following are issues considered to fall in its premise of human rights: Adequate housing, business and human rights, children; the rights of children include violence against children.

Children trafficking and the basic rights of the child, civil and political rights, climate change, communication, cultural rights, democracy, detention, good governance and debt, disability and human rights, disappearance, discrimination, education, food, freedom of expression and opinion , freedom of religion and belief, HIV/AIDS, mercenary, indigenous groups, internal displacement, poverty and health among others. (UNHRC 1)

The UNHRC enjoys a high profile as compared to its predecessor, the UNCHR because it is an organ of the United Nations General Assembly (Terlingen 12).

The funding of UNHRC

The major contributor to the monetary account of UNHRC is the USA, the congress for example have demanded that 2% of the UN regular budget should be dedicated to UNHRC. The USA congress has however sought to limit the US funding to the council because they still doubt its effectiveness (Blanchfield 12).

UNHRC in the international relations

UNHRC has been instrumental in the structuring of international system, the United States immediately after joining, made it a signature of its piece of diplomacy. Several resolutions of the council have been favorable as well as unfavorable depending on the item of deliberation.

The USA for example celebrated the outcome of the vote on banning any form of discrimination based on sexual orientation and the sanctioning of Iran. The US have used the UNHRC firmly to push for its objectives, this however does not erase the fact that the USA especially the Obama administration have been firmly supportive of the course of the council. The USA has effectively used the council to press for hard sanctions against Libya and Iran.

Following the adoption of the universal declaration of human rights in 1948, several states have attached primacy to it. They have included it in their national constitutions, consequently the universal declaration of human rights led to the emergence of human rights institutions in the world to monitor and safeguard the upholding of the similar rights.

In the international arenas, states have reneged on their promise of upholding, promoting and protecting human rights and now they have turned to be principal breakers or violators. The greatest field of concern in the dimension of human rights is the compliance factor.

The establishment of the international criminal court was considered the best alternative fro those who violate the international human rights norms. The commitment by states to the compliance to human rights is demonstrated by its ability to; first is that it should ratify all human rights treaty, second is the fulfillment of reporting and acceding to the request by the supervisory bodies and third is the implementation of norms in their domestic law.

Matters of Human rights have had primacy in the 21^st century. The influence of the United National Human Rights Council has been taken seriously by States; states have incorporated matters of human rights in their foreign policy documents and agendas.

The donor countries have consistently opted to using human rights record as a requisite when they want to allocate foreign aid whether military or economic, the issue of democracy and good governance has been made mandatory for any state to receive donor funding. This has been one of the effective ways of ensuring that human rights are protected.

Consequently the UNHRC has been instrumental in whipping states against violation of human rights. The suspension of Libya was unanimous and required no vote. It sent a note that states that violate the universal human rights have no place in the international arena.

It was the first time that a state had been suspended from the UNHRC since its inception. The suspension of a country, however, does not necessarily remove it from the UNHRC but will only hinder it from participating in its activities until that time that the General Assembly determines the fate of its reinstatement (Blanchfield 14).

The project of UNHRC

The introduction of the Universal Periodic Review by the UNHRC is considered one of the important projects. The Universal periodical Review analyses the status of countries’ human rights record.

The UPR is universal and reliable. This has been considered the best way of defeating double standard in the identification of countries to be examined. The UPR calls on all the membership states to cooperate since failures comply may warrant an expulsion from the council which some states term as an embarrassing act (Arroba 73).

Successes of the Council

After its creation in 2006, the council has attempted to overcome obstacles that plagued the previous UNHCR which had been widely criticized, this is despite the fact that it is too early to criticize or to praise it. The main activity of the body at the present is to structure the council.

The council being an organ of the UN General Assembly has managed to overcome the notion of protecting national sovereignty that has been a creation of states and a scapegoat against interference by any international body on the internal affairs of the state. The states have been using the privileges of national sovereignty to trample upon the rights of its citizens.

The UNHRC therefore has managed to balance national sovereignty and the protection of human rights. This dilemma had complicated the work of the previous commission in the western Darfur region of Sudan where the Sudanese government felt that external intervention amounts to the violation of its national sovereignty.

Being an organ of the General Assembly therefore has made the council more effective in its role to placing betterment of the world and the protection of human rights at the forefront over national interest (Arroba 80).

The failures of UNHRC on its mission

The UNHRC has been criticized for paying too much focus on the Israel in most of its sittings; this has been done at the expense of other human rights violation around the globe like in Darfur, Iraq and Zimbabwe.

The failures of the UNHRC have been catastrophic and open to see, first to begin with, the Universal Periodic Review has not been universal in form; the continuous singling out of Israel in its objectives has led to its diminishing influence.

Consequently, the universal periodic review which is global and covers all the global corners and not only the members of the council as it may be thought, it does not however include observers and this technically excludes the Palestinian Authority, this is considered an element of bias against Israel.

Also the scrutiny of the human rights record of the member states annually as been considered a failure in the effectiveness of UNHRC. The pace amounts to sixteen countries per session and with three sessions per year; the scrutiny cycle takes four years to cover the 192 countries.

Furthermore, the parameters of the review have been criticized; UNHRC bases its review on the information contained in treaty bodies. This implies that the blatant violators of human rights which sign few or no treaties at all will have little scope for review whereas the states which have demonstrate greatest respect for Human rights by ratifying many treaties will have a big scope for review, this creates bias against those who demonstrate high degree for the promotion and protection of human rights (Terlingen 43).

Obstacles facing UNHRC

The perception of member states that national interest takes precedence human rights issues has emerged the major challenge facing the council. Members states vote on the items of the UNHRC only based on their self interest. Consequently, the UNHRC is ineffective in discharging its duties.

Since it is the organ of the UN, it falls under the command of the Security Council which is the supreme organ of the UN; as such its role is only to advice and not to act or command. Unless the Security Council agrees to any intervention the UNHRC may not act to prevent human rights violations (Arroba 1).

There have been criticisms of the council based on the notion that the council is politicized. This is due to the fact that it has allowed the membership of undemocratic and human rights abusers like Libya, China, and Cuba to join it. This casts aspersion on its role in protecting human rights (Carlsnaes and Simmons 155).

My suggestions

The report on the human rights situation in the Palestine territories should also include all human rights violations that were committed by the both parties and not to only concentrate on the human rights violations committed by Israel. This is an arbitrary and discriminatory.

I also suggest that Israel becomes part of the regional bloc; being a member of the UN since 1948 and its denial to join one of the regional groupings is doing a disfavor to the state of Israel. In the UNHRC, it is the regional blocs who nominate and also vote for any member to any of the committees in the United Nations.

Its rejection by states from the regional blocs meant that Israel can not qualify to be elected in one of the committees of UN since no regional bloc can forward or nominate Israel for election. This has been largely associated with the continuous condemnation of Israel by UN institutions.

The Israel could have belonged to the Asian bloc but the Arabic countries have vehemently rejected it, no other bloc could allow Israel into its grouping because groupings operate via consensus. This has the effect of excluding Israel from UNHRC deliberation even if it is the main item on the agenda and hence makes it a target of manifest prejudice.

I strongly suggest that bloc voting be abandoned completely; this will help in achieving the intended objectives of the council. Vote bloc is the best way of curtailing the dominance and the hegemony of the Organization of the Islamic countries (OIC). This however seems a mirage since almost all the regional blocs have perfected the art of voting as a bloc as show of solidarity, besides the OIC, European Union have perfected voting as a bloc to strengthen their union (Matas 10).

Leadership from democratic countries; there has been lack of leadership in the council especially a leader from that countries that have an excellent human rights record. The voting regime has been detrimental to the objective of getting a able, and democratic leader, this is because unlike in other UN agencies who have devised a voting pattern that is based, the UNHRC votes based on blocs and whichever bloc that has a lot of members will be the winner and in this has been to the advantage of the OIC.

Works Cited

Arroba, Angel. The New United Nations Human Rights Council: What Has Changed? What Can Change? WEBASA, 2006. Web.

Blanchfield, Luisa. United Nations Human Rights Council: Issues for Congress. New York: DIANE Publishing, 2002. Print.

Carlsnaes, Walter and Simmons, Beth. Handbook of International Relations. New York: SAGE, 2010. Print.

Matas, David. Reforming the “Reformed” United Nations Human Rights Council. Institute of International Affairs of B’nai Brith Canada, 2009.Web.

Terlingen, Yvonne. The Human Rights Council: A New Era in UN Human Rights Work. UNACHINA, 2007. Web.

UNHRC. United Nations Human Rights Council. UNHRC, 2011. Web.

Abstract

Kosovo has been experiencing problems as a result of discrimination which was based on religion. The Serbs could not accept Islamic because of their strong Christian faith. This made them to be persecuted by the Turkish, and this increased the number of Albanians who occupied Kosovo in return. The paper has discussed the massive violation of Human Rights in Kosovo, The International Community’s reaction and actions to the Kosovo crisis, and i have given my suggestions to the community on regard to Kosovo crisis.

Introduction

According to reports with regard to Kosovo, the Human Rights are extensively violated in the region. Before the 19^th century the Albanians were under Ottoman Empire, and they fought war to get freedom. Later in the century, the region was given over to Serbia, the subsequently vacated their land, and joined Turkey, leaving Serbia to occupy their land.

Human right violation

The Kosovo human rights were violated in very many aspects. The violation did not spare the children’s rights, instead the Kosovo Albanian children are denied the publicized rights. The right holds a lot for the people, and in this case we will consider the violations systematically. Despite the fact that regular investigations were carried out in Kosovo regarding human rights violation by the international communities and and other individuals the Miloservic-the ruling power , he was only given a fake warning. Although the International Community, visited Kosovo they did not visit the Albanians and so they they got little information regarding the violations.

Although Kosovo has most fertile land in Balkans, and with variety of mineral resources, the people in the region had the poorest living standards. The farm products and minerals such as nickel, coal, goal, lead, and gold among others were barely used as raw material for the Serbia industries. When the Ethnic Albanians tried to raise their grievances, they were arrested and the prison term that was usually given was not considerable, because the minimum years one could take was six years and in some cases one can be put in prison for even twenty years. The individual were also subjected to massive convictions and trials which shows the discrimination that existed in the region.

The Serbia parliament dissolved the Kosovo government, assembly and canceled the regions autonomy. This was achieved through army forces and police involvement, and the cancellation had subsequent effects to the Albanians. (Dagmar 2003, pp. 107).Their access to current information was limited by banning the daily newspaper that existed, and stopping the radio and TV broadcasting in the region. This was followed by restricting the Albanians from accessing national and the universities libraries, and abolishment of all scientific institutions. All learning institutions as well as other social facilities were overtaken by Serbs. This was achieved by sacking all Albanians who were working in the institutions and dismissing of all individuals who were suspected to have nationalist sympathy from their workplace, and replacing them with the Serbs. The Albanians living was threatened, and many of them were thrown out of their living places, to the streets. According to the rights, the Albanians had the right to live in state apartments, but due to the violations, they were forced out of the apartments, and their houses in the apartments were occupied by the Serbs.

Between 1990 and 1995, many Kosovos lost their jobs and were forced to migrate from Kosovo to other countries and mostly in western Europe. In cases where the foreign countries tries to send them back or hesitates to offer asylum, the Serb authorities never accepts them back. Once the Albanians have moved out of the Kosovo, the Serbs take total advantage and control over the left property and space to an extent they holding these people at the airport for very long time without caring, and after the duration in airport the Serbs just chase them back to the countries that had sent them back to their original country. In most cases they are not merely held in the airport, rather, they are under arrest, and this means that any other Kosovo prison can be used leave alone the airport. In few cases when these people are allowed back in Kosovo, the people are continually subjected to worse discrimination and intimidation. The acceptance is usually minimal such that even dead bodies of the former Kosovo people are not allowed to be buried in Kosovo. Despite all the above mistreatment of the Kosovo, and their efforts to inform the International community during their frequent visits they were not given a chance, leaving the community ignorant.

International community reaction on Kosovo Human Rights Violation

The international community’s attitude is not clearly defined, thus hard to differentiate human rights and national rights. The interest of the international community in Kosovo are based on institutional ambitions, great power Internet and media attention. The community basis its consideration on government competition thus producing exaggerated and biased arguments. The international community views the massive violation of human rights as a matter that requires the international concern (HRFDC 1992).The international concern expressed by the international community has raised a number of rules networks and institution in the various organizational levels, but the international community attention was not adequate and this led to further violation of the rights. The humanitarian and refugees law’s principles were further breached. The Kosovo massive human rights violation took long to be addressed reducing the acquisition of the cause and effect of the Kosovo crisis.

The international community took the Serbs side. The community which is led by the United States opposes the Kosovo independence, and also opposed to disarm the violent secessionist in Kosovo by opposing Belgrade force (Johnstone 2000). Although the community has no independent stand in the issue and this has not helped Kosovo because secessionist continue to use arms, fearing Serbs on the blame. This has been evidenced in the case where the Kosovo population united and participated against Germans to achieve liberation, in accordance to the promises which had been made to them concerning self determination especially after the second world war, the promise was broken, and the Kosovo people were subjected to twenty one years of neglect, despite the fact that they had won, and their rights were consequently violated. There was a period of weapon collection which was carried out to the ethnic Albanians between 1954 and 1957, an activity which coerced about one hundred and ninety five thousand of the Kosovo Albanian population to emigrate to Turkey. The ethnic Albanian went into riot which made the region to be declared autonomous. Although the ethnic Albanian have been demanding international intervention and the international community argue to be on their side. This has brought contradictions because the Serbs also argue that the community is on their side.

My suggestions

The humanitarian and political causes of the human rights violation in Kosovo need to be determined, and the Yugoslavian federal republic should be reconstructed not on the basis of other issues but basically on the human rights. This should be achieved by a governance that is effective and efficient not only on its rules and mandates but all aspects that are likely to involve legal protection of human rights and enhance freedom in the region. The rights should not discriminate any individual regardless of religion, race or ethnic identity. This means that the Albanians and Serbs should have equal consideration. Unlike in the past where the international communities monitored the human rights on Serbs perspectives, the communities should access the entire Kosovo as well as other Yugoslavia regions.

Long term peace can only be achieved by understanding considering and protecting all people, especially the displaced and refugees. This understanding should not be limited to the rights adherence, but should also enable the asylum seekers and other displaced individuals to freely return to their original country without.

The international community should enhance compensation of the victims to enable them recover their property. The community need to come up with better mechanisms that readily. The refugees should be provided with security that guarantees them safety and dignity.

The international community need to take one side and mainly target at helping in adherence of human right law for the sake of the Kosovo people, because as long as their position is ambiguous, the violation continues and the Kosovo people continue to suffer.

The International community need to base their international relations free from use of force and threat in political independence of state or its territorial integrity, and should developed international law to handle, the human rights violations that are as massive as the Kosovos. These international law should be set in a way that will enable states to respond to the crisis using a wide range of peaceful responses whether individually collectively or by engaging in international organizations. The law should take non threatening counter measures which are free from aimed forces.

References

Dagmar, Skrpec. ”American and European’s reaction to Kosovo.” SAIS Review 23 (2003): 93-111.

Human Rights and Freedom defense council. ”Knocking on Europe’s Conscience”. NewYork.

Johnstone, Diana. ” Kosovo Problem and the International Community”. 2000. Serbian Orthodox Dioceses. 2008. Web.

Coercive interrogation can be determined as the application of physical or mental force to extract information that can have critical importance for saving others or protecting the interests of the state or nation. In such a way, it becomes a contradictory issue as there is a direct violation of the human rights guaranteed by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Every person should be protected from the use of force as it humiliates his/her dignity and results in the emergence of multiple ethical issues.

Official reinstitution of the given policy will mean that the state accepts the fact that tortures can be used while trying to acquire particular information. At the same time, there is the question what legal rules should be created to make this practice permissible and applicable in the modern environment.

Speaking about coercive interrogation, it should also be said that the given practice is traditionally associated with the emergence of particular needs to protect the country or its citizens, which means that there is a perspective that in some special cases it can be permutable to acquire the needed result. However, utilization of the given approach will result in the emergence of double standards which is unacceptable in terms of the state’s existence, its functioning, and observation of its laws.

Moreover, regarding the Alien Tort Claims Act, the coercive interrogation becomes inadmissible as it can result in the emergence of dangerous precedents when the force is applied to individuals regardless of their citizenship or current status. In such a way, coercive interrogation can hardly be reinstituted in the existing legal environment as it undermines the modern legal environment and results in multiple ethical issues.

As for the extraordinary rendition, it is determined as the illegal transfer of a person from one country to another avoiding the existing laws and regulations that set the background for the legalization of this process. In the majority of cases, it is applied to detainees who should be provided with some extra punishment. Governments of countries engaged in this process prefer to disregard the existing ethical and legal issues to achieve success and get a needed person.

The problem is, there is a high probability of using force while speaking about individuals who underwent extraordinary rendition. The can be subjected to coercive interrogation, tortures, and other forms of punishments prohibited by the existing regulations and Human rights statues. In such a way, reinstitution of the given practice can result in the emergence of multiple ethical issues and will contradict to the official course of the USA.

At the same time, the universal declaration of human rights states that people who may be subjected to torture when they send back cannot be deported. It becomes obvious that extraordinary rendition violates the given principle as all individuals exchanged or sent back due to the given procedure experience violent behaviors and inappropriate treatment. There is a perspective that the initiation of the given process can be justified by the need to protect citizens and the state.

However, it cannot be utilized in the modern world as there is a focus on the cultivation of humanistic values and the creation of the environment beneficial for people’s development. For this reason, further attempts to reinstitute the given practice should be avoided as it violates human rights and deteriorates the image of the country and its government. Additionally, regarding the Alien Tort Act, the existing lawsuits should be taken as relevant ones and considered by the court as there are no reasons for their dismissal.

Trump’s decision to build a wall at the border between the USA and Mexico can trigger multiple debates and result in the emergence of many ethical issues. Regarding the nature of this action, there are several factors that should be mentioned. First, it will be upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court because of the nature of executive orders and the past history evidencing that only in 3 cases it was not supported.

In such a way, the decision to build the wall will be accepted as it will be considered the National emergency and a potent way to struggle against the wave of immigration. The given act will empower a number of laws providing the President with new authorities and opportunities to control migration. However, it means that there will be a place for vigorous debates about the ethical character of the given decision.

The fact is that the majority of immigrants or refugees move from their homes trying to find better living conditions or avoid hazards and threats awaiting them in their native country. The universal declaration of human rights states that every person has the right to asylum in other countries from persecution. All individuals belonging to this category cannot also be deported because of the high possibility of violent acts or tortures. In such a way, the creation of the given wall in accordance with Trump’s decision can violate this norm. Immigrants who tried to avoid damage will have to return back because of the wall, or, in other words, will be sent back. It can be considered a serious problem as the given precedent deteriorates the image of the USA and its government.

There are also so-called Siracusa Principles that should be mentioned while speaking about this very case. In accordance with the basic assumptions suggested by this framework, each one of the five specific criteria should be met to determine if there is the necessity of protections. These points state that any restriction should be carried out in accordance with the law; be in the interest of a legitimate objective; remains critical in a democratic society; based on the scientific evidence; there are no other restrictive means.

Formally, Trump’s decision to build a wall meets some of these requirements as it is aimed at the protection of the democratic society and remains lawful as it is supported by the executive order. At the same time, there is no clear scientific evidence stating that the given measure is critical and effective. Moreover, it contains discriminative issues that limit people’s freedom of movement and their right for the asylum.

In such a way, the executive order that aims at the creation of the wall on the border violates the existing regulations about the human rights and the basic principles suggested by the international organizations to protect people from discriminative actions. There is a high probability that the given law will be supported and upheld by the Supreme Court because of the peculiarities of the existing legislation and past history. However, it does not mean that there are real causes for accepting this solution as it will trigger the public outcry and multiple debates about the discriminative politics peculiar to the USA. The problem with refugees and immigrants should be solved in another way that presupposes consideration of their needs and individual approach.

Global Citizenship

• What interested you about the article and how is the content of the article related to aspects of global citizenship?

Upon reading the news article from Amnesty International’s website about Chinese officials’ land grabbing act and how they tortured and killed one farmer who protested, I conclude that even if the notion of human rights is prominent in the modern era, still people abuse it. China as a country has grown to be a global economic power but with the modernization of its policies and systems, it seems that the country still practices traditional if not barbaric ways in settling disagreements and commotions. Relating to global citizenship and human rights, it seems that China had failed to bring about social justice, human rights for all, to the villagers whose farmlands have been sold by local officials who depend on revenues from land sales to increase their budgets.

Universal Declaration of Human Rights

• How does the current event support or violate human rights?

According to article 17 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights:

“Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others and that no one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property” (The Universal Declaration of Human Rights).

Chinese officials violated Article 17’s code of conduct when they sold the properties of the farmers, including Xue Jinbo’s land, without consulting and asking permission from the owners.

• What are your views concerning the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the current state of the world?

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights drafts out the basic needs and understanding of human beings. The set of rules are easy to understand and I believe that about 80% of the peoples around the world respect the codes of conduct but still there are some who abuse the declaration for their own advantages. In the case of China, the citizens’ rights were sacrificed for profit.

• Do you think this document about human rights is a catalyst for protecting human rights? Why or why not?

I believe that the document is a catalyst for protecting human rights because it provides a clear synthesis of rules and regulations to be followed in respecting another human being but it is essential that an international body or police strictly enforce the Universal Doctrine of Human Rights so as the latter will be respected by all. Global efforts to support human rights had been successful in pressuring abusive parties to give in and follow the rules but it seems that injustice still occurs.

Amnesty International

• Give your views about the global effort to support human rights.

Amnesty International has been actively campaigning for human rights. Its efforts had been rewarded though it is not enough because there are still some cases unknown to the public. Xue Jinbo and his fellow villagers’ human rights have been violated by the Chinese government when their lands were taken and sold without their consent and when they protested they were evicted from their homes and tortured. Xue Jinbo died of cardiac failure but it seems he was tortured with bruises and cuts on his face and two broken fingers. Though China is modernizing as its economy grows, the human rights of citizens must be protected by their government instead of abusing them.

• Summary of the issue and why it interests me.

The farmer Xue Jinbo from the southern province of Guangdong was detained after being suspected of protesting against the local government when his farm together with the other villagers was sold by the government. Xue Jinbo died last December 11 on his third day in custody. Officials claimed that the farmer died of cardiac failure but family members and villagers cited that he appeared to have been tortured with bruises and cuts on his face and two broken thumbs (China Must End Land Grabs Amid Protests Over Death in Custody, Says Amnesty International).

The article interests me because China has been the focus of the international system these past few years. It has risen to be a global economic power but observing from their government’s actions they seem to sacrifice profit over people’s rights.

Works Cited

“China Must End Land Grabs Amid Protests Over Death in Custody, Says Amnesty International.” Amnesty International. 2011. Web.

“Human Rights Basics.” Amnesty International., 2011. Web.

“The Universal Declaration of Human Rights.” UN.org., n.d. Web.