Essay Sample on International Human Rights

Introduction

Human rights is a term used to refer to the fundamental freedoms and rights entitled to all humans. some of the rights include the right to liberty, right to life, freedom of expression, right to privacy, freedom of religion and equal treatment. The United Nations recognizes these rights and features them on the Charter of the United Nation's preamble; "... to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small..." (Monteiro, 2014). The United Nations is responsible for the legislation and jurisdiction for human rights. Despite their achievements in promoting peace, development, and upholding human rights, their effectiveness has often come into question. Human rights have not been respected worldwide where there are numerous cases of extrajudicial killings, detainment, child labor, political infringement, and discrimination against women. The ambiguity of the laws has left them open to interpretation, and the institutions tasked to provide guidance are lax and derailed by their agenda. Focusing on these impediments can help to improve the international response to human rights violations.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Effectiveness of the International Human Rights UN Charter and Declaration of Human Rights

Recent arrest, torture, and murder of Amarildo de Souza in 2013 sparked protests in Brazil. The protests demanded justice and the end of extrajudicial killings that are rampant in the country (Posner, 2014). Pressure from the public led to an investigation that convicted some police officers for the incident. It was one of many protests not only in Brazil but in many places around the world where citizens complain about infringement of human rights. Currently, there are numerous cases of human rights violations that include torture, extrajudicial killing, child labor, gender discrimination, slavery and racism that occur in many regions. There has been a laxity in the human rights agenda despite a majority of countries signature on the human rights treaties. The United States and Europe that are depended upon to uphold human rights have fallen short of their expectations. The US engaged in torture after the 9/11 incident while Europe has engaged in xenophobia against Muslims after their economic crisis (Monteiro, 2014). Treatment of refugees and asylum seekers from these pioneer countries has also gained criticism. The UN declaration of human rights and the UN charter have minimal effect and require a different approach.

The UN declaration of human rights traces its beginning in 1948 after the end of the Second World War (Dickson, 2017). It aimed at improving international relations by setting rules for political rights and social rights. Problems with the declaration began earlier on, first because it was not legally binding. The UN charter did not provide the tenet to enforce international law. In addition, the terms used were vague and open to interpretation. Many countries including the United States were wary of any binding commitments. They did not agree to stop racial segregation while Europe did not commit to liberate the populations in their colonies (Monteiro, 2014). Other countries such as Saudi Arabia, Yugoslavia, and the Soviet Union were against the declaration. At the time of its conception, the UN declaration of human rights lacked any means of enforcement.

The Soviet Union and the United States, who were superpowers at the time, had different viewpoints on what constitutes human rights. According to the Soviets, human rights consisted of economic or social rights such as the right to healthcare, education, and work (Dickson, 2017). On the other hand, the United States considered human rights as the right to vote, freedom of religion and speech, and right not to be detained arbitrarily. Sides were exclusively taken globally based on the political rights proposed by the US and the social rights favored by the Soviets (Monteiro, 2014). The split dragged negotiations until the year 1976 when the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights took effect.

The 1970s was the period when international relations began to feel the effect of human rights. The American President at the time, Jimmy Carter, was inspired by the events of the Vietnam War to emphasize the importance of human rights (Posner, 2014). However, the watchdog country was unable to be consistent because of its relations with countries that allied with them against the Soviets. Countries such as Saudi Arabia and Iran were known to violate human rights, but their economic partnership with the US took precedence. Human rights violations such as torture, extrajudicial killings, and infringement on freedom of speech were not addressed in those countries due to the economic partnerships (Monteiro, 2014). Presidents after Carter all came out with the promise to uphold human rights, but it then became evident that it was only an expression of idealistic goals and with hidden agenda.

An example of America using the human rights framework to push their agenda was in the war with Iraq. Many sources described their action to go to war as one motivated by oil but disguised as protection from the then President of Iraq Saddam Hussein (Dickson, 2017). Hussein was later tried and convicted for crimes against humanity, but that did not stabilize Iraq government or the purported violations on human rights. Allegations later arose that the American government falsified their reason for interruption on Iraq's sovereignty, and they actually benefited from the expedition (Posner, 2014). There are cases where human rights are ignored over economic gains, but it will take time to fully realize the dream in the UN Charter.

The 1990s saw the idea of human rights take shape. This period witnessed the Civil War in Yugoslavia and the 1994 genocide in Rwanda (Dickson, 2017). Correspondingly, the Soviet Union collapsed signaling the end of communism being associated with social and economic rights. Many western countries then adopted the economic and social rights into their constitutional law. Human rights were seen to shape the major issues of public policy in the countries. The European Union as well was shaped with the tenets of human rights such that any country that wanted to join and enjoy the economic benefits had to oblige to the UN Charter (Monteiro, 2014). The countries that emerged from the split of the Soviet Union including Russia also made strides to accommodate the aspects of human rights into their governance. It was also a period when there was an emergence of many NGOs devoted to upholding human rights

America has since been at the forefront of advancing human rights in other countries, but the 9/11 incident seemed to alter their stance. The war on terror introduced torture as America's recourse, and it challenged the international regime of human rights (Posner, 2014). At the core of the regime is the prohibition against torture, and if America absolved it, then the other rights stipulated in the Charter could also be voided.

China has risen to become an economic superpower, and similar to America provides an example of human rights undermining. It is a country that oppresses its citizens political, and also goes further to offer aid to countries like Sudan that have been sanctioned by the UN for human rights violations (Monteiro, 2014). Russia and China have used their position in the UN security council to undermine efforts by western countries to advance human rights. Western countries use military intervention and economic pressure to prevent countries that go against the stipulations of the United Nation's Charter (Dickson, 2017). Together with rising powers such as Vietnam and other Islamic states, Russia and China undermine the core values of human rights in the fear of Western secularization.

Many countries still remain hostile to the tenets of human rights despite having ratified the major treaties. Nonetheless, countries such as Columbia and Japan changed after signing the treaties. They enacted laws that prohibited all form of discrimination and violence against women (Posner, 2014). But still, numerous countries that continue to violate their agreement. For example, Saudi Arabia continues to subordinate women despite having signed the treaty in 2007 that bans all forms of discrimination against gender (Monteiro, 2014). Additionally, countries such as Tanzania, India, and Uzbekistan practice child labor even after they ratified the Convention. The United States and other western countries continue to do business with countries known to abuse human rights.

The UN Declaration of Human Rights and the UN Charter's influence on world events is questionable. Many of the countries that agree to abide by the treaty violate them in truth. Others use them to propagate their agenda, and then there are those countries that are openly against the treaty. It is only natural to assume that world events have been shaped by other factors such as economic growth rather than the efforts of the UN. Indeed, the world is a better place than it was in the conception of the human rights treaty. However, the collapse of communism and the aforementioned economic growth have played their part in shaping international relations (Posner, 2014). Therefore, one cannot simply credit the United Nations because in itself is an organization with many faults.

Ambiguity in the human rights law has been quoted as an impediment to its implementation. Its ambiguous nature can be viewed to have been done purposefully to allow governments to rationalize their actions. The obligations stated in the treaties are overloaded and poorly defined (Posner, 2014). It is a characteristic that can be seen in many countries where people have close to 400 rights and freedoms that include right to privacy, right to religion, right to worship, right to leisure, right to work, freedom of expression among many others. Governments do not have guidance on how to avail the enormous quantity and variety of human rights. In reality, governments cannot provide all of its citizens with all of the stipulated rights mainly due to their budget limitations.

To illustrate the problem, Brazil can be used as an example. The country uses torture to come up with results as in the case of a police investigation. Torture is seen as an effective way to maintain order (Posner, 2014). The country would need well-paid investigators to monitor the police and wipe out torture. There would be a need for an overhaul in the police department with increment in salaries. Changes would also be made in the judiciary and the political process. Such changes are impossible given their financial circumstances, therefore, they would argue that it is easier to help people using the limited resources at their disposal. Resources in similar countries are used to build clinics and schools. The human rights law ignores their plight, and thus responsible for allowing torture.

Yet another example of the ambiguity of the UN Charter is seen in the freedom of expression. The US allows all forms of expression save for those that perpetuate defamation, obscenity, and fraud. Unlike America, European countries discourage hate speech. In Islamic states, they prohibit defamatory remarks on religion. The law on human rights limits its freedom of expression in the context of morals and public order (Posner, 2014). A government that wants to comply with the human rights law does not have guidance. Countries are left to interpret the freedom of expression in their preferred way (Dickson, 2017). The discretion permits the governments to cynically avoid complying with certain laws while abiding by other...