Human Rights and Cultural Processes of Change - Book Report/Review Example

?RUNNING HEAD: HUMAN RIGHTS AND PROCESSES OF CHANGE Human Rights and Processes of Change School Human Rights and Processes of Change Introduction Human right is one of the most important values in modern times. The current human rights norms and practices have evolved from centuries of war and struggle. Blood has been the capital of many of our forefathers so that the present generation will benefit from their sacrifices. Scholars and theorists have endeavoured to refine the elements that comprise human rights. And in the process, several theoretical underpinnings were developed to clearly define a universal definition of human rights. The evolution of the concept does not happen in isolation but integrated with culture and society at large, as well as the cultural practices and processes. Evolution is also a slow process since cultural elements have to evolve along with it. The members of the community have to accept the current concept and reject the previous one. There is also a battle of definitions on what human rights would be, on the level of society and academic level. In society for instance, there will be groups that push for a particular notion of human rights. The general membership of society may accept or reject it depending on justifiability of the new concept proposed. Many groups within society that advocate for different notions of human rights, each of them has differing agenda. In will be observed that the definition and elements of human rights change. In the level of academic debate, scholars and researchers debate on the concept. They proposed specific theories in order to better understand the concept and its evolution. Their studies cover actual cases and run for years. Academic debate is a very valuable tool in the evolution of the concept and society at large. Their theories are discussed in colleges and universities to instill upon the minds of students critical thinking. Thoughts and ideas are honed inside schools, and the present students will become the future leaders of society, in the public sector or the private sector. They will be the future educators and mentors. As teachers, they will be passing to their students the concepts they have learned, or the new theoretical researches they have developed. These ideas flow outside the walls of the academe and can be read in print media, conferences and symposia, and television broadcasts. Human rights scholars and experts are also invited as resource persons in the formulation of laws of states that would govern the lives of the people and government institutions tasks with the protection and enforcement of these rights. Government institutions utilize academic discourses in framing social and welfare laws and issuances for the people. The Congress or Parliament encourages debate in the sessions in order to thresh out the best concept that will be adopted so that the outcome will be relevant to actual societal circumstances. It is not uncommon that during debates, academic books and discourses are cited as references. Evolving Concept of Human Rights Conceptions about human rights started in the West (Turner, 1997). Human rights represent the universal concept that governs the normative global relations (Kirmayer, 2008). It is not a mere abstraction but requires specific actions that apply to specific social context and threats (Kirmayer, 2008). It serves to protect individuals against abuses of those on power and exercising power. Violation of human rights has been justified under the guise of culture (Kirmayer, 2008). Anthropologically, rights are not universal traits but generally accepted standards of right and justice (Turner, 1997). Human rights have been changing along historical and political lines according to state response to crisis and ethnic identity issues (Turner, 1997). These rights have been recognized in the West as a universal principle with which “human” is a mere adjective describing the general principle of justice and equity (Turner, 1997). Rights are claims that can be enforced against society or segments within it such as individuals, groups or corporations (Turner, 1997). The claim may be an exercise of power, acquisition of benefits, compensation for damages, or protection from abuse (Turner, 1997). This presupposes that there is an existing institution that would enforce the rights, and which decision would be binding upon the whole society (Turner, 1997). There would be no problem when the society is homogenous. However, an issue can arise especially since states are not homogenous (Turner, 1997). And that, a question can arise when rights that can be enforced in a limited sense become a universal principle (Turner, 1997). Anthropological perspective sees the use of “human” problematic since it connotes a property of an individual, or a social actor that inhabits individual body (Turner, 1997). Culture and society have an influence in the construction of the individual and collective people, as well as humanness (Turner, 1997). Social relationships also affect the determination of what is human, which is seen in the light of enculturation and social integration (Turner, 1997). Rights, according to Turner (1997), do not arise from precultural and bio-psychological organization of man but from man’s social and cultural constitution. Cultural relativism is a theoretical underpinning that recognizes the differences in cultures, beliefs, practices, etc. in different societies. Anthropology subscribes to suspension of moral judgement upon the culture and belief of another society until they are fully understood in the light of “cultural, material, and historical contexts” (Turner, 1997, p. 275). Elvin Hatch termed this suspension as nonjudgemental relativist approach, which recognises pluralism and counters the myopic judgemental approach of conservative religious right (Turner, 1997). Turner 276 Interest on international human rights and democratisation has been growing since the middle of the 1980s from various governments, private groups and other organization, thus, their development of human rights and democracy projects (Andreassen & Sano, 2004). But to properly address the projects success, indicators must be designed to measure their impact (Andreassen & Sano, 2004). These projects include legal advocacy, legislation training, and others (Andreassen & Sano, 2004). However, the objectives and project activities must be matched through the use of indicators (Andreassen & Sano, 2004). The interventions must be able to meet the following changes, a) ensure that political, social and economic changes are addressed by the state, b) the intervention facilitates a social change which is conducive to human rights norms (e.g. equality of sexes), and c) it will enhance the capacity of the institution through related activities (Andreassen & Sano, 2004). Civic organisations are recognised as the sector that promote human rights (Andreassen & Sano, 2004). In relation to this, the indicators must be able to show the capacity of the organizations to monitor human rights, to coordinate and promote advocacy directed to the government (Andreassen & Sano, 2004). Human rights projects implemented by the government and civic groups are direct activities that affect human rights in society (Andreassen & Sano, 2004). Indicators also identify the unintended effects of the laws and policies issued, and the influence of the actors in manifesting human rights (Andreassen & Sano, 2004). Moreover, they will be able to identify impending infringement of human rights, thus, appropriate intervention can be introduced to prevent its occurrence (Andreassen & Sano, 2004). Indicators must also be able to show the willingness of the government to comply with human rights treaties (Andreassen & Sano, 2004). Andreassen & Sano, 2004, p. 9 An acceptable international norm can be established through the acceptance of treaties, declarations and agreements by different states to make them accountable (Marsh & Payne, 2007). However, it is not guaranteed that a government will establish the required legal protection so that human rights will be protected or that laws already passed will be implemented (Marsh & Payne, 2007). But signing an accord is enough indication that acceptance of normative human rights globally would have an impact upon societies (Marsh & Payne, 2007). And that governments must protect these rights against violation of its agents and other members of society (Marsh & Payne, 2007). Conclusion The concept of human rights is continually changing. Human rights and society both influence each other. Human rights advocates and groups rally for the approval of specific rights by the government. When recognised and adopted by the government and legislated into law, the law will be implemented in society to which the people have to adhere to. The acceptance of the general membership of society the new concept and its corresponding elements will transform it into the norm of society despite repudiation by the minority. Society will sanction and penalize violators of the new accepted concept of human rights through incarceration, fines, community service, etc. Society is a dynamic organism, and so is the concept of human rights. They will continually change and evolve with time as human beings discover a higher level of truth from the platform of human experience. Culture has been used to justify oppression . . . . Different societies and states have different concepts about human rights at present. But there are attempts to have a universal definition that would be applicable on the worldwide level and the members of a global organisation that would adhere to it. Thus, the United Nations (UN) has a specialised agency handles international human rights issues. UN has also adopted a universal definition of human rights that it would like to impose upon all the members, and which will govern all issues and concerns brought before the body by the members. References Andreassen, B.A. & Sano, H. (2004). What’s the goal? What’s the purpose? Observations on human rights impact assessment, pp. 1-24. The Norwegian Centre for Human Rights. Kirmayer, L.J. (2008, June 6). Culture and context in human rights. Division of Social & Transcultural Psychiatry. McGill University. pp. 1-41. Kukathas, C. (1992, February). Are there any cultural rights? Political Theory, 20(1), pp. 105-139. Sage Publications, Inc. Marsh, C. & Payne, D.P. (2007, August 16). The globalization of human rights and the socialization of human rights norms. Brigham Young University Law Review, pp. 665-688. Turner, T. (1997, Autumn). Human rights, human difference: Anthropology's contribution to an emancipatory cultural politics. Journal of Anthropological Research, 53(3), Universal Human Rights versus Cultural Relativity, pp. 273-291. University of New Mexico. Read More