Recognition and Implementation of Human Rights - Coursework Example

Recognition and Implementation of Human Rights “Imagine all of people, living life in peace.” These are the resounding words in the song, “Imagine” by John Lennon. Living in peace has a lot of meaning. It could mean living without worries, getting rid of pain, or respecting life. No matter how one interprets the song, the thought of living in peace cannot be disassociated with exercising human rights. The liberty to live in the absence of persecution, fear or illness is all part of a person’s human rights. Therefore, living in peace also equates the ability to exercise human rights. The topic of human rights has a long list of arguments. Among these is the recognition and implementation of universal human rights. The adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948 was a major achievement for the United Nations (UN). The event marked the agreement among member countries regarding universal human rights and values that the organization will review and later implement as laws, irrespective of gender, race or ethnicity. With the declaration came the belief that member nations will regulate similar laws, which were later identified in the Magna Carta of Human Rights. However, several UN-member countries do not abide by the same laws. Many nations, especially Islamic ones, have their own declaration of rights and values, hence treating UN agreements and laws as immaterial. In the article titled, “The Framework of Democracy is Human Rights Law by Ebadi Shirin, the Iranian human rights lawyer makes an analysis of the impacts human rights has had on democracy in different countries. Shirin claims that Islamic countries do not practice democratic laws as they such to be Westerners’ tools to control them. This contention denotes that Iran, a UN member since 1945, regulates its own set of human rights and values. Similarly, this finding also suggests that Iran and other Islamic countries have agreed to tie up with other nations under UN yet they violate the terms set by the organization. Literally, this means opposing human rights proclaimed by the UN or worse, violating basic human rights of their people. To claim that UN’s Declaration of Human Rights is only a way to control people is a huge issue. Although the UN has gained a good control of its member countries through the years, this is not enough to claim that the declared human rights laws are colonizing strategies of the West. Moreover, since 1948, there have been improvements in the way human rights are served in most countries. For instance, justice is now served to everyone through judicial systems put across to determine the guilt or innocence of a person. Likewise, human rights values represent a beacon of hope for oppressed citizens as the only way to bring equality within their countries. In contrast, the author points out those Islamic countries that are not applying human rights into their systems have led their citizens to suffer and have curtailed their freedom. Various international reports have testified to this. One good example was the chopping off the hand of an individual found to have committed stealing. Islamic countries that consider such rule to be correct do not allow their citizens the privilege of human rights values today. One good example is the fact that women in Iran are suffering because religious beliefs take precedence over their government. Nevertheless, It should be noted from the article that democracy is a cultural tool, as when the culture does not believe in its credibility, the laws put across to govern such individuals. However, as much as the two work in harmony, culture and democracy are two separate things. This said democracy should just be a tool of its own because there are certain cultural practices which were formerly observed due to lack of laws but are inapplicable and impracticable today. In other words, states which consider themselves to be democratic should not apply a section of human rights values and leave out the rest. Rather, they should apply all rules pointed out in the human rights document. After all, the framework of democracy is based on people’s knowledge and not on human rights as Shirin thinks so. When individuals practice human rights but lack knowledge of what is good or wrong, then the values will be baseless as only the learned and privileged in the society will enjoy such a democracy. In the article titled, “Protect Human Rights” by the United Nations, different ways and organizations have been highlighted as the mechanisms through which the United Nations protects human rights. Likewise, these organizations are the ones responsible for the freedom being enjoyed in different corners of the world. The reports highlight the importance of the United Nations in keeping peace across different countries by pointing out to the organizations main role of investigating and reporting issues related to human rights. Conversely, I do believe that different bodies and organizations are not required to keep in the world as world peace is for the benefit of everyone; therefore individuals are the ones to do the task of keeping peace and practicing human rights. The author states that the United Nations’ purpose is to point out different agencies and offices responsible for handling different cases of human rights violations in different parts of the world. Cases of human rights violations have gone unreported in some countries because of the legal process involved in filing and pursuing such cases. Likewise, the article highlights numerous legal instruments which can be used as basis for promoting democracy in different regions and continents. Nevertheless, the best legal instruments for promoting democracy are leaders themselves as they are the ones who make either good or bad choices for citizens. In Ojeda Almerindo’s article titled, “Guantanamo Speak and the Manufacture of Consent,” the author highlights the sympathetic condition of prisoners and how their rights were continually abused by officers assigned to man them. The author sympathizes with the prisoners as he defends their right for better treatment. He emphasizes the unfair treatment by the prisoner officials which is aggravated by the use of deceitful language. The argument that Almerindo proposes is not just of national concern because it has attracted global attention through his writing. The unjust treatment of prisoners is not a new issue. In fact, his argument mirrors the same situation of prisoners in other states and nations; therefore instigating the need to review human rights law at the global perspective. Almerindo’s argument is debatable because in as much as prisoners should be granted rights, such rights should also be limited because granting them complete rights equal to those of free citizens will dismiss the fact that they are being punished as prisoners. Conversely, the author points out that as much as human rights values are present in the prison’s policies, the rights of the prisoners were abused because prison officials use language to demoralize prisoners, thus violate their human rights. For instance, the prisoners are referred to as dangerous individuals capable of anything. This label instills among prisoners a notion of fear towards the guards who are tasked to look after them. In a nutshell, the guards use the power of language to oppress and tame the prisoners. As a result, they are able to conceal actual things that happen inside the prison. A good example of the linguistic façade happens every time a prisoner is taken in for interrogation. The officials use a lighter term to conceal the torture that a prisoner will go through. This is done to make things appear as if they are in compliance with the human rights charter created to govern a prison. Consequently, the ability of the officials to win public trust obliterates the capability and right of the prisoners to fight for their right. What happens is that the disguise of the officials destroys the image of the prisoners, hence the former gains more public trust than the latter. In her article, “Mea Culpa Mea Amore” Nolan Higdon describes ways in which the government censors various information being given to the public through different media channels. The government does this as a security check to monitor against unforeseen events like riots. Likewise, the article points out critical stories which should appear as headlines by the highlight of news for different media houses, but are avoided or not shown at all because of biases from different media networks and the government. Interestingly, media networks are signs of democracy within a country but the thought of media networks being censored by the government or refusing to show specific news due to internal biases demonstrate that the meaning of democracy as a whole becomes rubbish. This is because in democratic states, mass media people have freedom to operate as a different entity from the government and should not under any circumstances operate as a government underdog. In sum, Higdon tries to open the minds of his readers to see how the government though claiming to be democratic, controls and manages facts and information about them. In a journal article, Burton and Tsuisui (1397) discuss what happens to international laws once they are ratified in a certain country. According to them, it takes a lot of time before international human rights laws to become fully implemented. They observe that state compliance with international law depends on state preference and domestic political bargaining. This means that before international human right laws become part of the system, they have to go through different stages. According to Burton and Tsuitsui (1397), states have their way of exercising compliance. Before they fully comply with international standards, they need to convince people, from the officials down to the commons. In this regard, full compliance to human rights laws is truly impossible in Islamic countries due to the religious values that may conflict with the laws. Therefore, officials need to do political bargaining, which could take a lot of time even before they could get to the core of the issue. Simply to say, they cannot readily revise laws upon the orders of the UN or other governing bodies simply because they would conflict with the values of the people. If they insist, then a more chaotic environment will surface. Burton and Tsuitsui also explain that once laws are ratified there are chances that they will not be implemented. Unfortunately, signed papers only exist so that the state can have a reference even though there is no proof or even plans for compliance. Mearsheimer (cited in Burton and Tsuitsui 1377) calls the phenomenon epiphenomenal. This means that states comply with universal principles only when they intend to do so. In most cases, racial discrimination and extortion worsened after the ratification of laws. The compliance actually depends on the interest of the officials and the people. By this, the authors practically explain how several Islamic countries can do away with compliance to the set standards. Nevertheless, the existence of the laws also helps improve situations of the people and the government. Serving as reference, human rights groups can later demand compliance from the government, hence correcting wrong practices or fully implementing laws. As a consequence, full compliance to international standards, especially on the aspect of implementing human rights becomes difficult and time-consuming. Human rights is a serious issue. Often, people do not know the depth of their rights and the consequences of their actions. This is because they are not aware of human right laws and its scope. In order to educate people of their rights as individuals, officials should extend a hand to reach out to the people. Community symposia, local school seminars and lectures should exposure the common people to the right information in order to properly implement international standards. Likewise, the school has a big role in information dissemination. It should teach students everything about human rights, from definition to application, and from individual to the national level. In doing so, teachers should set behind their personal biases relating to religion, culture, and politics. Furthermore, the implementation of human rights starts within the most basic unit of society, the family. For children to learn their rights and know how to fight for them, parents should be the first teachers to demonstrate respecting of rights within the home. This could mean respecting their things, providing them with their needs (e.g., food, shelter, education, clothing, etc.), teaching them how to value life around them, making them feel how important they are by appreciating their efforts, commending their achievements, and a lot more. Parents play a big role in the implementation of human rights in our society. They should do their share in honoring human rights and upholding the dignity of people. Works Cited Burton, Emilie and Kiyoteru Tsuitsui. “Human Rights in a Globalizing World: The Paradox of Empty Promises.” American Journal of Sociology. Vol.110, 5: 1373-1411. Human Rights Law.” https://www.opendemocracy.net. Open Democracy. 2013. Web. 23 Mar 2015. . Higdon, Nolan. Mea Culpa Mea Amore. New York: Inspiring We the People, 2014. 70. Print. Lennon, John. “Imagine.” Capitol Records, 1971. Song. Ojeda, Almerindo. “Guantanamo Speak and the manufacture of Consent.” The Guantanano Testimonial Project. 2011: 1-8. Print. United Nations, . "Protect Human Rights."http://www.un.org. UN, 2010. Web. 23 Mar. 2015. . Read More