Speaking about the human rights issues which are connected to present day situations in the world, two situations could be outlined, one of them is China-Tibet situation, and the Darfur War or the Darfur conflict, and it should be mentioned that both of these situations involve China in a way or another.
Darfur Conflict
The situation in Sudan provokes the fears of the world community for several years. This is the most prolonged conflict in Africa, in course of which serious violations of the human rights took place and humanitarian catastrophes occurred.
In spite of the progress, achieved in the process of regulating the situation, and the ongoing process of peaceful settlement, the atmosphere of intensity is preserved in the country, and scale military attacks on innocent civilians still occur in the Darfur region. The government of Sudan does not always go to rapprochement, appealing to the principle of international law about the nonintervention into the internal affairs of state. There fore it can be seen that the human rights issue is still not solved, attacks on citizens continues, also there are problems, which are concerned to the access to humanitarian organizations, intimidations, pursuits and violations by the law-enforcement organs. The absence of safety beyond the camps boundaries prevented the internally displaced persons from returning to native places, and the realization of the villages’ restoration. It should be mentioned that china plays a major role in the Darfur conflict being the 40% share owner of international consortium extracting oil in Sudan. In addition, using this revenue, China compensates her money in buying the oil, by selling arms to Sudanese regime which was used in killing innocent people and had a huge factor in the Darfur conflict. The human rights organizations mention that for four long years, China was a major, if not the chief obstacle to international efforts to bring security to Darfur. Beijing blocked vetoed or diluted resolutions at the U.N. Security Council that would have authorized a protection operation or sanctions on Khartoum for continued intransigence.
China-Tibet
The violations of human rights in Tibet were considered a major issue for the last half a decade. The problem of the independence of Tibet has been one of the most delicate for the Communist government of China. Beijing insists that the Tibetan region is a historical part of China, and the numerous enemies of central authorities continue to attain its independence. In 1959 one of the largest uprisings against the Chinese military presence in the region flared up – the appearance of Tibetans were depressed, and the Dalai-lama together with 150 thousands of his compatriots left to India in order to head the government of Tibet in the expulsion. International discussions took place on these issues and the Chinese government took obligations on improving the situation in the country. Specifically, under these obligations the International Olympic Committee assigned the 2008 games to Beijing. Only in reality the management of China did not intend to radically change its relation to the oppositionists in Tibet.
In addition the known fact of Chinese private patronage to the Government in Sudan and being a factor in the genocide that happened in Darfur, played a major role in the way China reacted to the riots in Lhasa on the eve of the Olympic games. For the Tibetans it’s a vital question too, the Olympic Games taking place in Beijing is like an act of encouragement to the activities of the Chinese government. Although these riots probably would not lead to a boycott of the Olympics in the international world, it may lead to solving the situation which could not be solved for more than 50 years.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights: Drafting Process
18 members from various political, cultural, and religious backgrounds formed The Commission on Human Rights (Eleanor Roosevelt, widow of Franklin D. Roosevelt chaired the committee). The Commission met for the first time in 1947. The final draft of the Declaration was handed to the Commission being held in Geneva, therefore, the draft declaration that was sent to all UN member states for commentary is known as the Geneva draft. Over 50 Member States were participating in the final drafting; as a result of this process, the first draft of the Declaration was ready in September 1948.
Human Rights Day
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights was adopted on 10 December 1948. This date has been commemorated since 1950 when the General Assembly invited all states to celebrate Human Rights Day for the first time. Traditionally on 10 December high-level political conferences and meetings are held in United Nations headquarters in New York. Special events organized by governmental and non-governmental organizations accompany the celebration.
The Commission on Human Rights: The Chairwoman
Being neither scholar nor an expert on international law the former American First Lady managed to breathe into the work of the committee much enthusiasm and positive thinking. Her efforts were directed to making a common-sense approach and optimism fundamental in the process of the Commission’s work. Throughout her political activity, Eleanor Roosevelt was known as a professional who cared about the interests of the common man and woman.
Legacy of Smoking at the Workplace
Federal agencies like the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission demand employers to take reasonable measures to protect no-smokers from smoke. Safety in the workplace with regards to this problem is also protected by The Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Employees experiencing problems with their co-workers who smoke are encouraged to inform the proper authority. If the authority fails to take reasonable steps employees can resort to the organizations mentioned above to have their rights protected.
Telephone Tapping at Work
Interception of oral communications and telephone conversations, in particular, is prohibited by The Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968. According to the document, private and confidential conversations between employees should remain such, employers are forbidden to eavesdrop.
Monitoring E-Mail Messages
The law in different states differs but only a few states have legislation that grants workers’ protection from employers’ reading their e-mail. The principles of e-mail monitoring are established in the concrete company’s policy. More than one-third of the companies consider searching e-mail to be a business necessity. However, employers are forbidden to open e-mail marked as “personal and confidential”. In case privacy rights have been violated employers should feel free to address an employment attorney.
Questions about Employee’s Sex, Age, Race, Pregnancy, Nationality, Marital Status, Sexual Orientation, Disability
Employers are forbidden to ask questions of the kind and deny the employment on that basis as this violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, 1964. Qualified applicants should be guaranteed unbiased treatment. In case any prejudice is shown towards an applicant he/she should resort to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and seek damages.
Human rights are the automatic and natural rights and the freedom that an individual is entitled to irrespective of their diversity in terms of gender, race, origin or any other area of human diversity. These rights hence allow every human being to be treated equally and impartially.
James1 contends that human rights maintain the radar on the peoples’ freedom to develop and make independent choices as human beings. Freedom to grow and develop requires physical, emotional and social growth without fear, bigotry or aggravation.
Foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world is bestowed on the fact that there are equal rights to all members of the human race. Disregard to human rights have led to violations of human conscience resulting from restrictions to speaking out, fear and general oppression, restriction of movement and many other acts violating human rights.
Due to the effects of these barbaric acts, it is fit for the human rights to be protected by law through different bodies that have since been formed, a factor that leads to development of friendly relations among those within a country and abroad.
There is therefore a need for human right to be adhered to, respected and protected, failure to which there should be intervention by the affiliate bodies, non-government organizations and the international community. More specifically, the international community has power to really effect on those violating human rights and hence bringing soberness to the situation.
The dignity and worth to all human beings encourages social progress and improves the quality of all people irrespective of their gender, age, color, language or ethnic group2. Mindful declarations therefore strive to educate and promote the respect for rights and freedoms and implementation of progressive measures that secure the recognition of the importance and observance of the freedoms and rights3.
Human rights are traced during the insurgency time of Protestants. This was after the conservatism of religious conviction and after authoritarianism feudal had disappeared. The birth of mass communication and media in the form of radio, telecommunications and internet catapulted the knowledge of human rights by majority in the modern times.
Technological dominance of the modern age has also speeded up the formalization process of human rights3. Human rights entail acting and treating each other in the fortitude of brotherhood.
Some of the rights of human beings include; right to life, safety and independence, right to be recognized as a person, rights and freedom of movements and residence within the borders of a state, right to live and return to native country, right to nationality, right to ownership of property as an individual and jointly, freedom of peaceful assembly and associations, right to take part in government either directly or indirectly, right to equal access of public goods and services, right to leisure and periodic work with pay, right to form and join unions that protect personal and joint interests, right to equal pay for equal effort without favoritism, right to work in humanitarian conditions and with proper pay, freedom of participation in cultural activities of their communities and rights to protect moral interests.
Parents also have the right to choose the learning scheme they believe is best for their off springs4.
The human rights protect people from political, societal and officially authorized abuses. The rights of human beings exist in conscience, principles, the law and the integrity of all among the locals and internationally5. This implies that human rights are universal.
The roles of these rights include protection against murder, protection against abuses of the legal system, for example imprisonment without fair trial, protection of beliefs, movement and assembly, protection of the liberty to participate in politics (voting and serving in a public offices), protection against severe poverty and hunger and protection of willingness and ability to be to educated.
Human rights interventions come in place because of the denial of elemental ethical entitlements to humans. Violations of human rights means treatment to a particular individual or group in a manner suggesting that they are less than human and they do not deserve the dignity and treatment with respect6. As a result of these violations, several laws both locally and internationally have been enacted to preserve all aspects of humanity.
These laws are meant to inculcate peaceful coexistence and limit violence so as to bring back the rational of being human. Both external and internal peace is crucial in safeguarding human rights, prevention of conflicts and bringing about political sanity among citizens and the politicians7.
Humanitarian interventions are important in maintaining the civil society and in promotion of attitudes that encourage tolerance and mutual respect among members of the human race.
More importantly, according to Mertus, this form of intervention is not only aimed at law enforcement but Also on ensuring that there is creation of positive attitude and consciousness towards protection of human rights so that everyone has the capacity, awareness and willingness to protect them 8.
For humanitarian interventions to be successful in realizing its objectives, it should be legitimate and motivated by genuine humanitarian concerns. There should be a legal process to deal with those who violate human rights. It should highlight the existing abuse, should not be politically motivated and should have no specific interests. In solving the human rights problems, the underlying causes of the violations should be evaluated.
The evaluation process should identify the effects of the violations which range from underdevelopment, economic pressures, and several social problems9. Understanding the root causes help in strengthening the economic, political and civil society.
Most organizations focus mainly on the intervention process, which is just a half of the whole process of legality of human rights. There should be a process of isolating the modes of violations and then planning on how to avoid a repeat of the same.
An ideal initiative to curb human rights violation requires that the people should be educated on positive attitude management that encourages a variety of positive behavior patterns10. Culture plays a great role in modifying behavior and therefore focus should be placed on progressive development of rationality in the different cultures11.
Since human rights affect and concern all of us in one way or the other, everyone should stand up and protect them irrespectively. Also, since they are usually associated with our perceptions and principles, it is proper to inculcate the good behaviors in the future generations such that a global generation of people who say no once they have the feeling of choices that could lead to violations is created.
It is important to build a positive attitude for purposes of progressive behavior change. Behavior change is the element of humanity required to always refuse when feelings leading to choices of violations of human rights crosses the mind. This is crucial in promoting rationality and dignity among the human nature. Human rights should be respected at all times and in all places including the work place.
Political and societal welfare is important in enhancing the prevalence of peaceful coexistence. The stability in these important national and international institutions encourage respect for each other, which is vital in promoting dignity among all people including those occupying the lowest ranks in society12.
In addition, it is necessary for the bodies designated with the task of ensuring that human rights are respected across the globe and not violated to ensure they work hand-in-hand with, and not against, the natural groupings that are already present in the society such as the religious and cultural groups.
Through appreciating these groups and treating them and their beliefs with respect, it will be easier for bodies such as the UN to intervene or enact the acts of humanity amongst the people in the group, and consecutively in the society13.
Bibliography
Branch, Adam. Displacing Human Rights: War and Intervention in Northern Uganda. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011.
Donnelly, Jack. Universal Human Rights in Theory and Practice (2nd ed.). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2002.
Matl’ary, Janne. Intervention for human rights in Europe. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2002.
Mertus, Julie. The United Nations and human rights: a guide for a new era London: Routledge, 2009.
Murphy, Sean. “Humanitarian intervention: the United Nations in an evolving world order.” Procedural aspects of international law series, 118-125. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1996.
Nickel, James. Making sense of human rights. New Jersey: Wiley-Blackwell, 2007.
Orford, Anne. “Reading humanitarian intervention: human rights and the use of force in international law,” Cambridge studies in international and comparative law, London: Cambridge University Press, 2003.
Work Cited
1. James Nickel, Making sense of human rights (New Jersey: Wiley-Blackwell), 21-34.
2. Janne Matl’ary. Intervention for human rights in Europe, (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2002).
3. Sean Murphy, “Humanitarian intervention: the United Nations in an evolving world order”. Procedural aspects of international law series (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press), 118-125.
4. James Nickel, Making sense of human rights (New Jersey: Wiley-Blackwell) 91-108.
5. Adam Branch, Displacing Human Rights: War and Intervention in Northern Uganda (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011).
6. Anne Orford, “Reading humanitarian intervention: human rights and the use of force in international law”, Cambridge studies in international and comparative law (London: Cambridge University Press).
7. Janne Matl’ary, Intervention for human rights in Europe, (New York: Palgrave Macmillan).
8. Julie Mertus, The United Nations and human rights: a guide for a new era (London: Routledge), 3-5.
9. Anne Orford. “Reading humanitarian intervention: human rights and the use of force,” International law Volume 30 of Cambridge studies in international and comparative law, London: Cambridge University Press, 2003.
10. Nickel, James. Making sense of human rights (New Jersey: Wiley-Blackwell). 12. Jack Donnelly, Universal Human Rights in Theory and Practice (2nd ed) (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press), pp. 208-215.
13. Ibid, 122-131. Jack Donnelly, Universal human rights in theory and practice (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press), 89-90.
Scholars in support of human rights theory tend to agree with economic theorists on various issues even though a number of differences exist. For theorists attached to human rights, they often employ a number of philosophical and sociological conceptions, such as normative and deontological perspectives whereas economic theorists are inclined to aspects of science, such as positivism and behaviorism, which entail consequential theories.
However, a closer analysis suggests that the two disciplines share a number of principles meaning they complement each other. For instance, theories associated with human rights are utilized in providing normative frameworks that resolves the shortcomings of welfare theory. Based on this, economics will always employ the human rights frameworks in explaining power relations in societies (Seymour and Pincus 389).
Theories allied to the two disciplines play a critical role in explaining development because human rights theories give economists an opportunity to employ legal and political concepts in the process of drafting policies aimed at improving the standards of living. In this article, various differences between human rights theories and economic theories are discussed, including the assumptions of the two disciplines as regards development. Similarly, many authors view the two as being interrelated hence this paper looks at the point of interception between the two.
Areas of Overlap between Economics and Human Rights
According to Seymour Dan and Pincus Jonathan, the two disciplines, as well as their theories, have a frosty relationship. The first difference lies in the language used in explaining the terms because each one of them has specific vocabularies. In this regard, development as a concept is understood different in the two fields. Unfortunately, the United Nations is one of the international organizations that tend to approve the definition given by human rights theorists.
To these theories, as well as the UN agencies, development takes various forms, as it could be in terms of social, political, cultural, and civil rights. Based on this, a society is said to be developing if only it gives room to its people to achieve social, cultural, civil, and political targets. On the other hand, no economic theorists would approve this assumption because development has to be measureable based on the ability of people to acquire and dispose goods and services. Economists are never concerned with the issue of violation because their major aim is profit maximization and cheap production of goods and services.
Human rights violations, which come in form of production of substandard products, violation of labor laws, and unequal trade among agencies, are political debates that do not matter to them. For economists, the government should never try to impose taxes to the rich or businesspersons with an aim of providing basic services to the poor, as this system is unsustainable and highly unjust. If taxes are collected from the business community, the same funds should be ploughed back to the sector by ensuring an enabling environment is provided whereby goods and services would be moved easily.
This entails development of the rail and road networks, extension to the air transport system, setting up economic regimes to ease trade, and doing away with forms of regulations to facilitate business. Human rights scholars are quick to counter these claims by suggesting that economic activities are likely to cause inequalities and destabilize society hence the role of the government is provide some form and order through provision of the common services, such as education and health, which is achieved through taxation of the rich.
Shared Assumptions and Vocabulary
Although a number of differences exist between the two fields, they share a few things as well. First, they both arose out of enlightenment, as they support individual freedom and application of logic in addressing social problems. In other words, they both propose the application of a specific methodology in conducting social research because this would allow the deeper understanding of the problems. The two fields support the idea that the individual has the freedom of choice meaning he or she reigns supreme.
For economists, each person has the freedom to obtain anything in the market in what is popularly referred to as free market economy whereby the authorities are requested to keep off from economic issues. If the state intervenes in the market, the result would be negative because private investors would shy away from controlled markets. For some economists, the state simply intervenes to bring balance, especially when there is turmoil, such as economic crisis, which leads to inflation. However, a few other economists suggest that the presence of the government in financial matters should be permanent because of the various health and safety concerns.
For such theorists, consumers cannot be left in the hands of traders because exploitation is likely to take place. Additionally, economics have always appreciated the role of human rights theorists because property right, which is an issue to many of them, cannot exist without the understanding of universal rights. Human rights focus most on the development of the legal structure to protect the weak and the less fortunate in society.
Similarly, economists rely on the legal frameworks to protect properties and other business rights, such as copyrights and patents. Whenever human rights groups move to court to seek clarification on certain issues, economic institutions would always support them. Access to human rights call on an individual to establish an income meaning that economic power is one of the requirements, as well as an issue to human rights activists.
How the Two Fields can Help Each Other
It is noted that human rights and economics are not different, as one would imagine, because they share a number of concepts and principles. The two disciplines have different approaches to social issues, especially the issue of development because economics is concerned with the process while human rights as a field look at the outcome. On the issue of freedom, human rights insist on allowing an individual to do as he or she wishes while at the same time respecting the views of others. Economics advocate for the same thing, but the approach is different, as it gives an individual financial freedom.
Some analysts observe that economics should extend its scope to cope other forms of rights apart from property rights only. Economists try to understand power relations and the various forms of exploitations that go on in society, but they are not addressed adequately because less attention is often given to them. Issues that human rights tackle in society are created by economic activities and if they are to be resolved properly, the two fields should consider working together. For instance, unemployment and racial discrimination is a serious issue to human rights activists, but dealing with them has proved ineffective because they are multidisciplinary problems.
Works Cited
Seymour, Dan, and Pincus Jonathan. Human rights and economics: the conceptual basis for their complimentarity. Development Policy Review 26. 4 (2008): 387-405. Print.
There are many explanations of why a number of Arab people remain to be vulnerable to abuses and violations of human rights. One of the main reasons is the intention to restrict as many public activities as possible. Though there is no death penalty for such cases as kisses and touches in public or sharing private space with a person of an opposite sex (Leijen par.15), the citizens of the Gulf region may be sentenced to death for rape or treason.
In fact, there are many rules and regulations that have to be followed by an ordinary Arab in order to avoid the death penalty. For example, Arab children do not have a right to be educated from their early ages. They are dependent on their parents (Busaidy par. 1). They are under a threat of being lost, kidnapped, or abused and not knowing what they can do to protect themselves. Kidnapping is another reasons for the death penalty to be sentenced. Therefore, it is possible to define children lack of knowledge as another basis of social vulnerability to abuses.
In the Gulf region, there are also the cases of the vulnerability to abuses a number of domestic migrant workers and women can suffer from (Gibson & Black par. 17). Women cannot demonstrate their feelings and attitudes to the current state of affairs. They cannot control their working hours and choose the most appropriate working conditions. Finally, they cannot be sure that their salaries are always high and meet their expectations.
All these poor working conditions can explain the reasons for why many Arab people stay vulnerable to abuses and try to search for some other ways to earn money. Many Arabs do not know how to protect themselves. They make themselves vulnerable to all those threats and abuses that take place in the world. One of the easiest ways to earn money is to be involved in drug trafficking that may also lead to the death penalty or life sentence. Finally, the death penalty is also possible if a person declines the power of Islam. People, who prefer the religion different from the Islamic one may be sentenced to death as well.
Typical abuses and denial of the rights
The United Arab Emirates is rather a young country, the government of which tries to establish as many clear rules and restrictions as possible to control and unite people, solve their expectations and meet their needs. Still, the intentions of the government or other leadership representatives of the country are not always positives. There are the cases when the Arab people are abused, or their rights are denied. For example, many Gulf countries continue making attempts to promote their freedoms of speech and the possibilities to share their thoughts and suggestions using various media sources (Duffy 2).
There are many Arabs, who want to introduce their individual position in regards to different aspects of their lives and work. Still, the government, as well as other regulative bodies, tries to keep order and not to allow ordinary people share or even impose their independent thoughts because a free press and speech may promote the ideas of terrorism that are also lead to the death penalties among the citizens of the UAE.
Besides, many people are still challenged by the inability to participate in the political and cultural issues of their countries. In other words, ordinary people cannot share their opinions about the worth of the death penalty and protect their human rights. The healthcare sphere is also characterized by the situations when people with mental illnesses are vulnerable to abuses and violations of their rights because of the impossibility to vote and make independent decisions (Saxena et al. 878).
In general, there are many ways of how Arab people are abused, and why they cannot solve the issues of human rights and the death penalties. Some abuses are unintentional and take place accidentally. People overcome the challenges and continue living their ordinary lives. However, there are the situations when restrictions are regular, and people start fighting them. They create secret organizations or introduce some public institutions that aim at protecting human rights (Ahmed par. 1).
The way human rights are violated
It is possible to say that there are many human rights that have been violated as soon as the death penalty is sentenced. The citizens of the UAE have nothing to do but accept the possibility of the government to make serious decisions, control the solutions that can be made by people, and eliminate the challenges that can influence the current state of affairs. There are the cases when people, who make an attempt to criticize the government or the country’s authorities, disappear, undergo torturing on the legal basis, or are even sentenced to the death penalty as they are blamed for rape, treason, or drug trafficking.
Another famous human right restriction is the female dependence on males. According to the existing federal law, women have to obtain permission from their male guardians in order to get married. It is also legally approved to settle marriage unions and marry people without feelings or even personal meetings. However, if the activities by women are under control, the activities of men can hardly be controlled. As soon as they are accused of cheating or raping, they may be sentenced to death.
The Gulf region introduces one of the best examples of how the government can use the law to violate human rights. There are no contradictions towards the existing laws. People do not have definite rights to choose the legal system and do not have an opportunity to speak freely. It is the law, and people cannot resist it because they become out of the law.
References
Ahmed, Nasim. “Campaign against UAE Human Rights Violations Gathers Momentum.” Middle East Monitor 2014. Web.
Busaidy, Aida. “A Lack of Education Leaves Children Vulnerable to Abuse.” The National 2012. Web.
Duffy, Matt, J. “Arab Media Regulations: Identifying Restraints on Freedom of the Press in the Laws of Six Aravian Peninsular Countries.” Berkley Journal of Middle Eastern & Islamic Law 6.2 (2014): 1-31.
Saxena, Shekhar, Thornicroft, Graham, Knapp, Martin and Harvey Whiteford. “Resources for Mental Health: Scarcity, Inequity, and Inefficiency.” Global Mental Health 370 (2007): 878-889.
The issue is about Microsoft collaborating with the US National Security Agency to find solutions to users’ privacy. The scale of cooperation is found in Edward Snowden files that provide an idea of how top-secret prism program works. The files reveal that “Microsoft helped the NSA to find solutions and address issues that the agency would be unable to handle regarding the new outlook.com portal, and it had already started to access emails on outlook.com” (Greenwald et al. par. 5).
In addition, the company worked with FBI to allow the NSA to easily access the prism. The company also collaborated with FBI’s data intercept to understand the issues in relation to outlook features that enable users to create emails” (Greenwald et al. par. 4). It is revealed from the article that there has been tension between Silicon Valley and the Obama’s administration (Greenwald et al. par. 8). Later, disputes arose between Microsoft Corporation and the NSA on one side and the advocates of human rights on the other side, where the NSA claimed to have direct access to the prism program that had systems of major internet companies.
According “to the Surveillance Court, communications would be collected without warrant if the US citizens were not targeted” (Greenwald et al. par. 10). Despite the fact that Microsoft and other internet companies denied the allegations, there were many documents that indicated that the NSA was accessing encrypted information, and this made the complainants file lawsuits against the defendants. Microsoft, one of the defendants, defended itself and argued that it was complying with the law (Greenwald et al. par. 9)
Nature of the case in the article
The dispute was about the privacy of users of Microsoft and other internet applications. Microsoft had started to collaborate with the NSA to help it to offer services to its customers, but as they progressed, the NSA began to access all the programs of the Microsoft that made private companies lose confidence with regard to the use of the internet (Greenwald et al. par. 12). Many people and companies using Microsoft across the world were affected.
Results of the dispute
A lawsuit was filed against the NSA by the American Civil Liberties Union because of violating constitutional rights, i.e., speech, association, and privacy. The NSA also was sued for violating the First, Fourth, and the Fifth Amendments). The US citizens were worried about the broad and intrusive the NSA’s surveillance activities. Many private companies were believed to work closely with the US intelligence and accessed classified intelligence.
New developments, updates, and additional case
Government bodies and officials were sued for the mass call tracking programs, and President Obama, directors of National Intelligence, the NSA, and FBI were also sued by Eliott Schuchardt on the grounds of violating the Fourth Amendment. With regard to the new development, in February 26, 2014, the Obama’s administration requested the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to be allowed to track millions of phone calls longer than the then five years.
In fact, the president appointed John Podesta to review huge data and privacy regulations (Greenwald et al. par. 14). However, a FISA judge denied the request in March 7, 2014, citing that the aim of retaining records would not be for national security, but for litigation of persons. In March 17, 2014, the Washington Post reported that the NSA had developed a surveillance system that was capable of documenting 100% foreign country’s telephone calls (Greenwald et al. par. 14).
My reaction to the case
It would not be right to track citizens’ communications. In most cases, tracking is done to interfere with personal privacy. There are provisions of freedom of speech, privacy, and association in the US Constitution, making it wrong for any person or organization to access individual information without his or her consent. The information is used for litigation and not for curbing terrorist activities. Therefore, the government should utilize other ways of curbing terrorist activities.
Broader discussion
The main issue that is raised in the case is accessing data using the internet by the NSA for surveillance. The case is between internet providers, the National Security Agency on one side, and citizens on the other side. The NSA was tracking communication using internet applications, and was allowing private companies to obtain the information (Sinha 487). According to the US government administration, people’s private information should be obtained to promote national security and to track terrorists (Sinha 489).
Tracking phone calls and communications would assist the administration to protect its citizens from terrorists. However, promoters of human rights hold that it is a violation of human rights (Sinha 499). They have argued that the information that is obtained through tracking is used for litigation. For example, the FreedomWatch Movement USA filed a lawsuit against government bodies and twelve companies that were believed to have accessed information about their users’ communication and data to the NSA. This, to them, is a breach of the US Constitution (Murphy 484).
It is important to note that adopting the positions held by the government and service providers on one side, and the human rights activists on the other side could have undesirable outcomes (Murphy 485). If the position of the government and service providers would be held, the rights of citizens would be violated. On other hand, if the position of the complainants is maintained, terrorists may intrude the US, and carry out criminal activities.
How the constitution applies to the issue
The US administration and the service providers would be violating human rights in relation that freedom to speech, privacy, and association (Rosen 1555). The US Constitution categorizes invasion of privacy into four, i.e., intrusion of solitude, public disclosure, false light, and appropriation (Rosen 1557). If the administration and social network providers would be allowed to access information, they would be breaching the first two provisions.
First, there is physical or electronic interference with one’s privacy. Hacking into one’s electronic devices is a violation of privacy (U.S. Constitution. Art./Amend iv, Sec. 3). For example, in Mapp v. Ohio, “Florida Supreme Court ruled that an action would be taken for intrusion of privacy, but as the case proceeded, it was realized that there were no damages caused by the intrusion” (U.S. Constitution. Art./Amend iv, Sec. 3). Thus, the US administration was justified to access the information if there would be no damage caused (U.S. Constitution. Art./Amend iv, Sec. 3). The complainants should ensure that there would be no damage caused.
The second category is public disclosure, where a person reveals information that is not of public concern (U.S. Constitution. Art./Amend iv, Sec. 3). With regard to this case, the NSA disclosed private information to companies that were close to its managers. This was against the US Constitution, and it violated human rights. In such cases, courts should investigate the competing private and public interests. It only gives the mandate of search and seizure to the government, but not to private organizations. A search “should be based on individualized distrust of wrongdoing except in cases where there are special needs” (Epistein and Walker 87). Therefore, the US administration and service providers would be breaching the Constitution.
Nonetheless, according to the Fourth Amendment, tracking phone calls is against right to privacy. For example, in 1967, in relation to Katz v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled that the search in the dispute had taken place when the government trapped a telephone booth utilizing a microphone that had been connected. With regard to this case, by using the social networks to obtain private companies’ information, the government was against the Fourth Amendment. According to the Amendment, seizure should not occur because the government would be questioning an individual in a public place (U.S. Constitution. Art./Amend iv, Sec. 3).
However, “an individual should be seized within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment only when there is physical force, and his or her freedom of movement is restricted” (U.S. Constitution. Art./Amend iv, Sec. 3). Using this argument, the government would be allowed to conduct seizure as far as it would not interfere with freedom of movement. The complainants should find out whether their rights of movements have been violated. The defendants should protect and guarantee the complainant the rights of movement and privacy.
Therefore, it is important for the parties involved in the lawsuit to respect the roles of each other. If the government allows this practice to continue, human rights, which are essential for citizens, would continue to be violated. The administration should continue utilizing other ways to apprehend criminals and terrorists in order to protect citizens.
Works Cited
Epistein, Lee and Thomas, Walker. Rights, Liberties, and Justice: Constitutional law for a changing America. 8th ed. 2012. Thousand Oaks, CA: CQ Press. Print.
Greenwald, Glenn, Ewen MacAskill, Laura Poitras, Spencer Ackerman and Dominic Rushe. 2013. Microsoft handed the NSA access to encrypted messages. Web.
Murphy, Erin. “The Politics of Privacy in the Criminal Justice System: Information Disclosure, the Fourth Amendment, and Statutory Law Enforcement Exemptions.” Michigan Law Review 111.8(2013): 485-493. Print.
Sinha, Alex. “NSA Surveillance Since 9/11 and the Human Right to Privacy.” Loy. L. Rev. 59.2(2013): 861-1049. Print.
Rosen, Jeffrey. “Deciders: The Future of Privacy and Free Speech in the Age of Facebook and Google.” Fordham L. Rev. 80.5(2011): 1525 1625. Print.
People get used to thinking that war is something impermissible, wrong, and unnecessary for society. However, a war can be allowed and even desirable in case it has a just cause, right intentions, and the protection of human rights as its core. People may consider war as just only in case all possible non-violent ideas and options are exhausted, and violence is used as a means to cover injuries. It is wrong to believe that the war and its outcomes may be justified in regards to a human rights perspective, still, sometimes, it is impossible to find another way out of a situation. A discussion of a just war in a human rights perspective helps to realize that the combination of such different and conflicting concepts is possible, and the just war should be regarded as an opportunity to establish a lasting peace, protect and respect human rights, and offer a new idea for society.
Human rights are regarded as a class of rights that play a crucial role in the development of foreign policy, politic relations, and even some economic affairs. When a war is about to begin, people, who start the war, have to understand the role of human rights in the process of making decisions and clearly identify the peculiarities of the just war. A just war has the following characteristics: a just cause, good intentions, chance of success, and respect for human rights. Human rights philosophers like John Rawls, Henry Shue, and Michael Walzer make an attempt to “ground just war theory partly or wholly on human rights” (Chan 134). They say that war has to be accepted as an ability to protect human rights, still, this kind of perspective faces two main challenges – an inability to interpret the problems that may appear during the war and combine the standards of human rights on local and national levels (Chan 134). People cannot understand how the protection of human rights as the main reason for a just war can be used by those people who participate in the war directly. What about the rights of soldiers, who are also people, and have all human rights? The answer to this question varies on a number of factors like the reasons why soldiers join the war, soldiers’ attitudes to the civilians, chances to overcome the use of violence, etc. Regardless of the duties that should be performed during the just war, all people have to be respected, and their human rights have to be equally considered. Only in this case, military actions leading to human sacrifices may be identified as just and permissible.
In general, a human rights perspective in regards to a just war deserves much attention. People are eager to use the idea of human rights’ defense as one of the most frequent reasons to justify their actions during the war. Men of arms believe that they protect their rights, improve the current living conditions, and think about the better future when they start wars, even just wars. Unfortunately, people forget that even just wars may take human lives. Of course, it is easy to talk about just wars, right intentions, and thoughts about the future if military actions do not touch upon directly. However, any kind of war will always be something terrible that has to be overcome by any possible means even if a human rights perspective is discussed, because no idea may justify a single civilian life.
Works Cited
Chan, David, K. Beyond Just War: A Virtue Ethics Approach. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012. Print.
The contemporary western world claims to be the place of tolerance and equality. However, with the rapid development of globalization, the cultural and social compositions of the modern western population have been growing more and more diverse. As a result, tensions around various issues continue to appear. One of such issues occurs right during the holiday season. Specifically, the problem revolves around the way people are expected to greet one another at this merry time. Should we stick to the habitual “Merry Christmas” and stay loyal to the traditions of the majority or embrace a more neutral “Happy Holidays” and show respect to the cultural diversity?
Due to the increasing level of cultural diversity in the west, the greeting “Merry Christmas” can be offensive to non-Christians. In that way, it would be logical to use “Happy Holidays” as a neutral type of greeting. After all, “Happy Holidays” was designed specifically to include people of all cultural backgrounds in the celebration regardless of their worldviews. This tendency is particularly relevant in the western countries of Europe and the United States that are known for a very high rate of social and cultural diversity.
Moreover, “Happy Holidays” is a greeting inclusive not only for people but also for the actual holidays. To be more precise, wishing someone “Happy Holidays,” one includes all the holidays of the season. Such holidays are multiple.
For example, December alone is the month when representatives of various cultures celebrate their traditional holidays, some of which are the African Kwanzaa, the Mexican Fiesta of Our Lady of Guadalupe, the Japanese Omisoka, the pagan Yule, and the Jewish Hannukah. All of these celebrations occur in the same month as Christmas, Epiphany, and Boxing Day. In that way, instead of separating Christmas and isolating it as the ‘main’ celebration of the month, one could simply wish “Happy Holidays,” sincerely referring to the wide variety of such holidays happening all at the same time.
On the other hand, “Merry Christmas” does not have to be an offensive greeting that should be taken as an attempt to isolate and alienate the representatives of non-Christian cultures. Wishing someone a “Merry Christmas” does not mean that Christmas is the only “real” or relevant holiday of the season. It may mean that it is particularly important for the greeter. As a result, a greeting of this type does not have to be interpreted as an attempt to position Christianity as superior to other worldviews and religions.
Moreover, “Merry Christmas” is, most commonly, the type of greeting that is said and meant in good spirit. Consequently, it should not be taken by non-Christians as something mean or selfish. For instance, people can be unaware of the worldviews of the surrounding individuals and sincerely wish them a “Merry Christmas” without meaning to intimidate, offend, or deny another religion.
To sum up, both types of greetings are equally popular in the modern western world, and it is still debated which one should be used as dominant. “Happy Holidays” is inclusive for every holiday and every person, while “Merry Christmas” is usually meant as a sincere and hearty greeting to anyone regardless of religion. Both forms of greetings are expected to bring joy and happiness.
To reach a compromise, it may be helpful to inquire one another about the preferred greeting and then use it respectively. Also, knowing the loving and joyful nature of winter holidays, it may make sense to take any greetings in good spirit. Understanding and sensitivity can help solve the issue without forcing society to pick just one acceptable way to wish happiness to others.
Perceptions of people with intellectual disabilities have changed over time in that, the society no longer views them as disabled members but see them as having unique abilities that require nurturing.
Since disability is not inability, human rights’ advocates argue that perception of people with disabilities as disabled is discriminative and therefore call for their recognition as a minority people with unique abilities that do not require any fixing but integration into mainstream activities of economic, social, and political development.
According to Lindqvist (2004), the United Nation World Summit for Social Development agreed that to preserve human rights of people with disabilities and attain capacity for social development; they need empowerment and integration into social, political, and economic spheres of modern society (p.3).
Thus, provision of special schools to intellectually disabled children is recognition of their unique abilities and contribution to the society. At special schools, intellectually disabled children get a chance to hone their unique talents and skills, which can significantly boost their independence in the society.
In the past, people with disabilities experienced discrimination because the society considered them as lesser human beings due their inability to perform normal tasks. However, human rights’ advocates have tremendously changed such simplistic and undignified thinking and consequently, people with disabilities are progressively achieving equal treatment in various aspects of life.
Although human rights’ code and constitutions of various countries clearly stipulate that, no individual should receive any form of discrimination based on disability, the rights of intellectually and physically disabled persons have been continually restricted.
Griffiths, Owen, and Gosse (2009) argue that restrictions that are in place require justification whether they protect the rights of disabled persons or violate their inalienable rights as stipulated in human rights code (p.26).
Thus, government and society should not restrict or deny intellectually disabled children from accessing education as other students. Moreover, education system should not discriminate against children with intellectual disabilities for they have inalienable rights to access education.
References
Griffiths, D., Owen, F., & Gosse, L. (2009). Human Rights and Persons with Intellectual Disabilities: An Action-Research Approach for Community-Based Organizational Self-Evaluation. Journal on Developmental Disabilities, 10(2), 24-42.
Lindqvist, B. (2004). Disability and Human Rights Approach to Development. The International Disability and Human Rights Network, 1-9.
‘Human rights and human dignity: an analytic critique of non-Western conceptions of human rights’ by Jack Donnelly is an article that presents the discussion based on the origin of human rights. It has been accepted that human rights are the notion which was developed in the West, however, some scientists tried to contradict this idea presenting the arguments that many nations battled for human rights many years before the West did it, therefore, the origin of the human rights is put under question.
Presenting arguments and making all possible to sound convincing Jack Donnelly provides the ideas which show that non-Western people struggled for human dignity trying to make others respect them as human beings. Human rights and human dignity are not interchangeable notions, the meaning is different, therefore, it is impossible to say that non-Western civilizations fought for human rights. Having presented strong arguments, Jack Donnelly has managed to prove that human dignity was fought many years before West was put in the struggle for human rights, however, human rights are the product of the Western civilization.
Main body
The idea of the non-Western origin of human rights has been discussed by some scholars who wanted to understand whether the authorship of this notion has been correctly provided or not. The significance of the research is really important for the international system, as being the first civilization who talked about human rights, the West tries to formulate their own vision of the issue. If it comes out that the idea of human rights does not have any Western origin and it is important to search for the roots of the issue in non-Western countries, the whole democratic and human rights system may be changed due to other peculiarities which might be offered by those who have the right to be the creators of the problem.
However, the author of the article managed to prove that the worries are not supported by the arguments and the roots of human rights come from the West. The ideas of human dignity have been presented many years before the rise of modern Western civilization, therefore, the problem has become up to date, still, there is nothing to talk about due to strong arguments and reasonable argumentation.
Conclusion
The failure to identify the notions of human rights and human dignity has become the reason for the problem’s appearance. Looking at the history of non-Western countries, it is really possible to find a lot of examples of human battles for their dignity. The inability to distinguish between the notions of dignity and rights has created this issue for discussion. The article gives a detailed explanation of the issue trying to make sure that all the members of the controversy (the Western representatives and the Easters ones) managed to agree on the final outcome of the discourse.
The problem is really important as the changes in the roots of the human rights appearance could bring a new vision of the problem. However, this has not happened. The ideas of the non-Western origin of human rights could be an interesting issue for discussion and research, however, Jack Donnelly (1982) managed to prove that there is nothing to talk about as the ideas of human rights could not be raised in non-Western countries due to the absence of the necessary concepts there.
Reference List
Donnelly, J 1982, ‘Human rights and human dignity: an analytic critique of non-Western conceptions of human rights’, The American Political Science Review, vol. 76, no. 2, pp. 303-316.