essay on the human rights

45,000+ students realised their study abroad dream with us. Take the first step today

Here’s your new year gift, one app for all your, study abroad needs, start your journey, track your progress, grow with the community and so much more.

Verification Code

An OTP has been sent to your registered mobile no. Please verify

Thanks for your comment !

Our team will review it before it's shown to our readers.

Essay on Human Rights: Samples in 500 and 1500

Updated on
Jun 20, 2024

Essay writing is an integral part of the school curriculum and various academic and competitive exams like IELTS , TOEFL , SAT , UPSC , etc. It is designed to test your command of the English language and how well you can gather your thoughts and present them in a structure with a flow. To master your ability to write an essay, you must read as much as possible and practise on any given topic. This blog brings you a detailed guide on how to write an essay on Human Rights , with useful essay samples on Human rights.

This Blog Includes:

The basic human rights, 200 words essay on human rights, 500 words essay on human rights, 500+ words essay on human rights in india, 1500 words essay on human rights, importance of human rights, essay on human rights pdf, what are human rights.

Human rights mark everyone as free and equal, irrespective of age, gender, caste, creed, religion and nationality. The United Nations adopted human rights in light of the atrocities people faced during the Second World War. On the 10th of December 1948, the UN General Assembly adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). Its adoption led to the recognition of human rights as the foundation for freedom, justice and peace for every individual. Although it’s not legally binding, most nations have incorporated these human rights into their constitutions and domestic legal frameworks. Human rights safeguard us from discrimination and guarantee that our most basic needs are protected.

8 Universities with higher ROI than IITs and IIMs

Grab this one-time opportunity to download this ebook

Connect With Us

45,000+ students realised their study abroad dream with us. take the first step today..

Resend OTP in

Need help with?

Study abroad.

UK, Canada, US & More

IELTS, GRE, GMAT & More

Scholarship, Loans & Forex

Country Preference

New Zealand

Which English test are you planning to take?

Which academic test are you planning to take.

Not Sure yet

When are you planning to take the exam?

Already booked my exam slot

Within 2 Months

Want to learn about the test

Which Degree do you wish to pursue?

When do you want to start studying abroad.

September 2024

January 2025

What is your budget to study abroad?

How would you describe this article ?

Please rate this article

We would like to hear more.

Games & Quizzes
History & Society
Science & Tech
Biographies
Animals & Nature
Geography & Travel
Arts & Culture
On This Day
One Good Fact
New Articles
Lifestyles & Social Issues
Philosophy & Religion
Politics, Law & Government
World History
Health & Medicine
Browse Biographies
Birds, Reptiles & Other Vertebrates
Bugs, Mollusks & Other Invertebrates
Environment
Fossils & Geologic Time
Entertainment & Pop Culture
Sports & Recreation
Visual Arts
Demystified
Image Galleries
Infographics
Top Questions
Britannica Kids
Saving Earth
Space Next 50
Student Center
Introduction

Origins in ancient Greece and Rome

Natural law transformed into natural rights
“Nonsense upon stilts”: the critics of natural rights
The persistence of the notion
The nature of human rights: commonly accepted postulates
Liberté : civil and political rights
Égalité : economic, social, and cultural rights
Fraternité : solidarity or group rights
Liberté versus égalité
The relevance of custom and tradition: the universalist-relativist debate
Inherent risks in the debate
Developments before World War II
The UN Commission on Human Rights and its instruments
The UN Human Rights Council and its instruments
Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights
The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and Its Optional Protocols
Other UN human rights conventions and declarations
Human rights and the Helsinki process
Human rights in Europe
Human rights in the Americas
Human rights in Africa
Human rights in the Arab world
Human rights in Asia
International human rights in domestic courts
Human rights in the early 21st century

human rights

Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article.

U. S. Department of State - Human Rights
Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy - Human Rights
The History Learning Site - Human Rights
Cornell University Law School - Human rights
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy - Human Rights
Social Sciences Libretexts - Human Rights
human rights - Children's Encyclopedia (Ages 8-11)
human rights - Student Encyclopedia (Ages 11 and up)
Table Of Contents

Recent News

human rights , rights that belong to an individual or group of individuals simply for being human, or as a consequence of inherent human vulnerability, or because they are requisite to the possibility of a just society. Whatever their theoretical justification, human rights refer to a wide continuum of values or capabilities thought to enhance human agency or protect human interests and declared to be universal in character, in some sense equally claimed for all human beings, present and future.

It is a common observation that human beings everywhere require the realization of diverse values or capabilities to ensure their individual and collective well-being. It also is a common observation that this requirement—whether conceived or expressed as a moral or a legal demand—is often painfully frustrated by social as well as natural forces, resulting in exploitation, oppression, persecution, and other forms of deprivation. Deeply rooted in these twin observations are the beginnings of what today are called “human rights” and the national and international legal processes associated with them.

Historical development

The expression human rights is relatively new, having come into everyday parlance only since World War II , the founding of the United Nations in 1945, and the adoption by the UN General Assembly of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948. It replaced the phrase natural rights, which fell into disfavour in the 19th century in part because the concept of natural law (to which it was intimately linked) had become controversial with the rise of legal positivism . Legal positivism rejected the theory, long espoused by the Roman Catholic Church , that law must be moral to be law. The term human rights also replaced the later phrase the rights of Man, which was not universally understood to include the rights of women.

Most students of human rights trace the origins of the concept of human rights to ancient Greece and Rome , where it was closely tied to the doctrines of the Stoics , who held that human conduct should be judged according to, and brought into harmony with, the law of nature . A classic example of this view is given in Sophocles ’ play Antigone , in which the title character, upon being reproached by King Creon for defying his command not to bury her slain brother, asserted that she acted in accordance with the immutable laws of the gods.

In part because Stoicism played a key role in its formation and spread, Roman law similarly allowed for the existence of a natural law and with it—pursuant to the jus gentium (“law of nations”)—certain universal rights that extended beyond the rights of citizenship. According to the Roman jurist Ulpian , for example, natural law was that which nature, not the state, assures to all human beings, Roman citizens or not.

It was not until after the Middle Ages , however, that natural law became associated with natural rights. In Greco-Roman and medieval times, doctrines of natural law concerned mainly the duties, rather than the rights, of “Man.” Moreover, as evidenced in the writings of Aristotle and St. Thomas Aquinas , these doctrines recognized the legitimacy of slavery and serfdom and, in so doing, excluded perhaps the most important ideas of human rights as they are understood today—freedom (or liberty) and equality .

The conception of human rights as natural rights (as opposed to a classical natural order of obligation) was made possible by certain basic societal changes, which took place gradually beginning with the decline of European feudalism from about the 13th century and continuing through the Renaissance to the Peace of Westphalia (1648). During this period, resistance to religious intolerance and political and economic bondage; the evident failure of rulers to meet their obligations under natural law; and the unprecedented commitment to individual expression and worldly experience that was characteristic of the Renaissance all combined to shift the conception of natural law from duties to rights. The teachings of Aquinas and Hugo Grotius on the European continent, the Magna Carta (1215) and its companion Charter of the Forests (1217), the Petition of Right (1628), and the English Bill of Rights (1689) in England were signs of this change. Each testified to the increasingly popular view that human beings are endowed with certain eternal and inalienable rights that never were renounced when humankind “contracted” to enter the social order from the natural order and never were diminished by the claim of the “ divine right of kings .”

Table of Contents
Random Entry
Chronological
Editorial Information
About the SEP
Editorial Board
How to Cite the SEP
Special Characters
Advanced Tools
Support the SEP
PDFs for SEP Friends
Make a Donation
SEPIA for Libraries
Entry Contents

Bibliography

Academic tools.

Friends PDF Preview
Author and Citation Info
Back to Top

Human Rights

Human rights are norms that aspire to protect all people everywhere from severe political, legal, and social abuses. Examples of human rights are the right to freedom of religion, the right to a fair trial when charged with a crime, the right not to be tortured, and the right to education. The philosophy of human rights addresses questions about the existence, content, nature, universality, justification, and legal status of human rights. The strong claims often made on behalf of human rights (for example, that they are universal, inalienable, or exist independently of legal enactment as justified moral norms) have frequently provoked skeptical doubts and countering philosophical defenses (on these doubts see Lacroix & Pranchère 2016; Mutua 2002; and Waldron 1987). Reflection on these doubts and the responses that can be made to them has become a sub-field of political and legal philosophy with a very substantial literature (see the extensive Bibliography below). This entry addresses the concept of human rights, the existence and grounds of human rights, the question of which rights are human rights, and relativism about human rights.

1. The General Idea of Human Rights

2.1 how can human rights exist, 2.2 justifications for human rights, 3.1 civil and political rights, 3.2 economic and social rights, 3.3 human rights of women, minorities, and groups, 3.4 new human rights, 4. universal human rights in a world of diverse beliefs and practices, a. books and articles in the philosophy of human rights, b. legal declarations, other internet resources, related entries.

This section attempts to explain the general idea of human rights by identifying four defining features. The goal is to answer the question of what human rights are with a description of the concept rather than with a list of specific rights. Two people can have the same general idea of human rights even though they disagree about which rights are really human rights and even about whether universal human rights are a good idea. The four-part explanation just below attempts to cover all kinds of human rights including both moral and legal human rights as well as old and new human rights (e.g., both Lockean natural rights and contemporary human rights). The explanation anticipates, however, that particular kinds of human rights will have additional features. Starting with this general concept does not commit us to treating all kinds of human rights in a single unified theory (see Buchanan 2013 for an argument that we should not attempt to theorize together universal moral rights and international legal human rights).

Human rights are rights . Lest we miss the obvious, human rights are rights (see Cruft 2012 and the entry on rights ). Rights focus on a freedom, protection, status, immunity, or benefit for the rightholders. Most human rights are claim rights that impose duties or responsibilities on their addressees or dutybearers. The duties associated with human rights often require actions involving respect, protection, facilitation, and provision. Although human rights are usually mandatory in the sense of imposing duties on specified parties, some legal human rights seem to do little more than declare high-priority goals and assign responsibility for their progressive realization. One can argue, of course, that goalish rights are not real rights, but it may be better to recognize that they comprise a weak but useful notion of a right. (See Beitz 2009 for a defense of the view that not all human rights are rights in a strong sense. Also, see Feinberg 1973 for the idea of “manifesto rights” and Nickel 2013 for a discussion of “rightslike goals”.)

Human rights are plural and come in lists . If someone accepted that there are human rights but held that there is only one of them, this might make sense if she meant that there is one abstract underlying right that generates a list of specific rights (see Dworkin 2011 for a view of this sort). But if this person meant that there is just one specific right such as the right to peaceful assembly this would be a highly revisionary view. Some philosophers advocate very short lists of human rights but nevertheless accept plurality (see Ignatieff 2004).

Human rights are universal . All living humans—or perhaps we should say all living persons —have human rights. One does not have to be a particular kind of person or a member of some specific nation or religion to have human rights. Included in the idea of universality is some conception of independent existence. People have human rights independently of whether such rights are present in the practices, morality, or law of their country or culture. This idea of universality needs several qualifications, however. First, some rights, such as the right to vote, are held only by adult citizens or residents and apply only to voting in one’s own country. Second, some rights can be suspended. For example, the human right to freedom of movement may be suspended temporarily during a riot or a wildfire. And third, some human rights treaties focus not on the rights of everyone but rather on the rights of specific groups such as minorities, women, indigenous peoples, and children.

Human rights have high-priority . Maurice Cranston held that human rights are matters of “paramount importance” and their violation “a grave affront to justice” (Cranston 1967: 51, 52). If human rights were not very important norms they would not have the ability to compete with other powerful considerations such as national stability and security, individual and national self-determination, and national and global prosperity. High priority does not mean, however, that human rights are absolute. As James Griffin says, human rights should be understood as “resistant to trade-offs, but not too resistant” (Griffin 2008: 77). Further, there seems to be priority variation among human rights. For example, the right to life is generally thought to have greater importance than the right to privacy; when the two conflict the right to privacy will generally be outweighed.

Let’s now consider four other features or functions that might be added to these four.

Should human rights be defined as inalienable? Inalienability does not mean that rights are absolute or can never be overridden by other considerations. Rather it means that its holder cannot lose it temporarily or permanently by bad conduct or by voluntarily giving it up. It is doubtful that all human rights are inalienable in this sense. One who endorses both human rights and imprisonment as punishment for serious crimes must hold that people’s rights to freedom of movement can be forfeited temporarily or permanently by just convictions of serious crimes. Perhaps it is sufficient to say that human rights are very hard to lose. (For a stronger view of inalienability, see Donnelly 1989 [2020] and Meyers 1985.)

Should human rights be defined as minimal rights? A number of philosophers have proposed the view that human rights are minimal in the sense of not being too numerous (a few dozen rights rather than hundreds or thousands), and not too demanding (see Joshua Cohen 2004 and Ignatieff 2004). Their views suggest that human rights are—or should be—more concerned with avoiding the worst than with achieving the best. Henry Shue suggests that human rights concern the “lower limits on tolerable human conduct” rather than “great aspirations and exalted ideals” (Shue 1996: ix). When human rights are modest standards they leave most legal and policy matters open to democratic decision-making at the national and local levels. This allows human rights to have high priority, to accommodate a great deal of cultural and institutional variation among countries, and to leave open a large space for democratic decision-making at the national level. Still, there is no contradiction in the idea of an extremely expansive list of human rights and hence minimalism is not a defining feature of human rights (for criticism of the view that human rights are minimal standards see Brems 2009; Etinson forthcoming; and Raz 2010). Minimalism is best seen as a normative prescription for what international human rights should be. Moderate forms of minimalism have considerable appeal as recommendations, but not as part of the definition of human rights.

Should human rights be defined as always being or “mirroring” moral rights? Philosophers coming to human rights theory from moral philosophy sometimes assume that human rights must be, at bottom, moral rather than legal rights. There is no contradiction, however, in people saying that they believe in human rights, but only when they are legal rights at the national or international levels. As Louis Henkin observed,

Political forces have mooted the principal philosophical objections, bridging the chasm between natural and positive law by converting natural human rights into positive legal rights. (Henkin 1978: 19)

It has also been suggested that legal human rights can be justified without directly appealing to any corresponding moral human right (see Buchanan 2013).

Should human rights be defined in terms of serving some sort of political function? Instead of seeing human rights as grounded in some sort of independently existing moral reality, a theorist might see them as the norms of a highly useful political practice that humans have constructed. Such a view would see the idea of human rights as playing various political roles at the national and international levels and as serving thereby to protect urgent human and national interests. These political roles might include providing standards for international evaluations of how governments treat their people and specifying when use of economic sanctions or military intervention is permissible. This kind of view may be plausible for the very salient international human rights that have emerged in international law and politics in the last fifty years. But human rights can exist and function in contexts not involving international scrutiny and intervention such as a world with only one state. Imagine, for example, that a massive asteroid strike makes New Zealand the only remaining state in existence. Surely the idea of human rights along with many dimensions of human rights practice could continue in New Zealand, even though there would be no international relations, law, or politics (for an argument of this sort see Tasioulas 2012a). And if in the same scenario a few people were discovered to have survived in Iceland and were living without a government or state, New Zealanders would know that human rights governed how these people should be treated even though they were stateless. How deeply the idea of human rights must be rooted in international law and practice should not be settled by definitional fiat. We can allow, however, that the sorts of political functions that Rawls and Beitz describe are typically served by international human rights today.

2 The Existence and Grounds of Human Rights

The most obvious way in which human rights exist is as norms of national and international law. At the international level, human rights norms exist because of treaties that have turned them into international law. For example, the human right not to be held in slavery or servitude in Article 4 of the European Convention on Human Rights and in Article 8 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights exists because these treaties establish it. At the national level, human rights norms exist because they have—through legislative enactment, judicial decision, or custom—become part of a country’s law. For example, the right against slavery exists in the United States because the 13th Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits slavery and servitude. When rights are embedded in international law, we are apt to speak of them as human rights; but when they are enacted in national law we more frequently describe them as civil or constitutional rights.

Although enactment in national and international law is one of the ways in which human rights exist, many have suggested that this is not the only way. If human rights exist only because of enactment, their availability is contingent on domestic and international political developments. Many people have looked for a way to support the idea that human rights have roots that are deeper and less subject to human decisions than legal enactment. One version of this idea is that people are born with rights, that human rights are somehow innate or inherent in human beings (see Morsink 2009). One way that a normative status could be inherent in humans is by being god-given. The American Declaration of Independence claims that people are “endowed by their Creator” with natural rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. On this view, god, the supreme lawmaker, enacted some basic human rights.

Rights plausibly attributed to divine decree must be very general and abstract (life, liberty, etc.) so that they can apply across thousands of years of human history, not just to recent centuries. But contemporary human rights are specific and many of them presuppose contemporary institutions (e.g., the right to a fair trial, the right to social security, and the right to education). Even if people are born with god-given natural rights, we need to explain how to get from those general and abstract rights to the specific rights found in contemporary declarations and treaties.

Attributing human rights to god’s commands may give them a secure status at the metaphysical level, but in a very diverse world it does not make them practically secure. Billions of people today do not believe in the god of Christianity, Islam, and Judaism. If people do not believe in god, or in the sort of god that prescribes rights, then if you want to base human rights on theological beliefs you must persuade these people to accept a rights-supporting theological view. This is likely to be even harder than persuading them of human rights. Legal enactment at the national and international levels provides a far more secure status for practical purposes.

Human rights could also exist independently of legal enactment by being part of actual human moralities. All human groups seem to have moralities, that is, imperative norms of behavior backed by reasons and values. These moralities contain specific norms (for example, a prohibition on the intentional murder of innocent persons) and specific values (for example, valuing human life). One way in which human rights could exist apart from divine or human enactment is as norms accepted in almost all actual human moralities. If almost all human groups have moralities containing norms that prohibit murder, for example, these norms could constitute the human right to life.

This view is attractive but has serious difficulties. Although worldwide acceptance of human rights has increased in recent decades (see below section 4. Universal Human Rights in a World of Diverse Beliefs and Practices ), worldwide moral unanimity about human rights does not exist. Human rights declarations and treaties are intended to change existing norms, not just describe an existing moral consensus.

Yet another way of explaining the existence of human rights is to say that they exist most basically in true or justified ethical outlooks. On this account, to say that there is a human right against torture is mainly to assert that there are strong reasons for believing that it is always morally wrong to engage in torture and that protections should be provided against its practice. This approach would view the Universal Declaration as attempting to formulate a justified political morality: that is, as not merely trying to identify a preexisting moral consensus, but trying to create a consensus that could be supported by very plausible moral and practical reasons. This approach requires commitment to the objectivity of such reasons. It holds that just as there are reliable ways of finding out how the physical world works, or what makes buildings sturdy and durable, there are reliable ways of finding out what individuals may justifiably demand of each other and of governments. Even if unanimity about human rights is currently lacking, rational agreement is available to humans if they will commit themselves to open-minded and serious moral and political inquiry. If moral reasons exist independently of human construction, they can—when combined with premises about current institutions, problems, and resources—generate moral norms different from those currently accepted or enacted. The Universal Declaration seems to proceed on exactly this assumption (see Morsink 2009).

One problem with this view is that an existence based on good reasons seems a rather thin form of existence for human rights. But perhaps we can view this thinness as a practical rather than a theoretical problem—that is, as something to be remedied by the formulation and enactment of legal norms. The best form of existence for human rights would combine robust legal existence with the sort of moral existence that comes from being supported by strong moral and practical reasons.

Justifications for human rights should identify plausible starting points for defending the key features of human rights and offer an account of the transition from those starting points to a list of specific rights (see Nickel 2007). Further, justifying international human rights is likely to require additional steps (see Buchanan 2013). These requirements make the construction of a good justification a daunting task.

Recent attempts to justify human rights offer a dizzying variety of grounds. These include prudential reasons; linkage arguments (Shue 1996); agency and autonomy (Gewirth 1996; Griffin 2008); basic needs (D. Miller 2012); capabilities and positive freedom (Gould 2004; Nussbaum 2000; and Sen 2004) dignity (Gilabert 2018b; Kateb 2011, Tasioulas 2015); and fairness, status equality, and equal respect (Dworkin 2011; Buchanan 2013).

There is a lot of overlap between these approaches, but also important differences that are likely to make them yield different results. For example, an approach framed in terms of agency and autonomy will be more strongly and directly supportive of fundamental freedoms than one framed in terms of basic human needs. Justifications can be based on just one of these types of reasons or be pluralistic and appeal to several. Seeing so much diversity in philosophical approaches to justification may be discouraging (although great disagreement in approaches is common in philosophy) but its good side is that it suggests that there are at least several plausible ways of justifying human rights.

Philosophical justifications for human rights differ in how much credibility they attribute to contemporary lists of human rights, such as the one found in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948). Some take fidelity to contemporary human rights practice as nearly imperative while others prioritize particular normative frameworks even if they can only justify some of the rights in contemporary lists.

Attempting to discuss all of these approaches would be a task for a large book, not an encyclopedic entry. The discussion here is limited to two approaches: agency/autonomy and dignity.

2.2.1 Agency and Autonomy

Grounding human rights in human agency and autonomy has had strong advocates in recent decades (Griffin 2008; Gould 2004). An important forerunner in this area was Alan Gewirth. In Human Rights: Essays on Justification and Application (1982), Gewirth argued that human rights are indispensable conditions of a life as an agent who survives and acts. Abstractly described, the conditions of such a life are basic freedom and well-being. A prudent rational agent who must have freedom and well-being will assert a “prudential right claim” (1982: 31)to them. But, having demanded that others must respect her freedom and well-being, consistency requires her to recognize and respect the freedom and well-being of all other persons, too. She “logically must accept” (1982: 20) that other people as agents have equal rights to freedom and well-being. These two abstract rights work alone and together to generate a list of more determinate human rights of familiar sorts (Gewirth 1978, 1982, 1996). Gewirth’s argument generated a large critical literature (see Beyleveld 1991 and Boylan 1999).

A more recent attempt to base human rights on agency and autonomy is found in James Griffin’s book, On Human Rights (2008). Griffin does not share Gewirth’s goal of providing a logically inescapable argument for human rights, but his overall view shares key structural features with Gewirth’s. These include basing the justification on the unique value of agency and autonomy, postulating some abstract rights, and making place for a right to well-being within an agency-based approach.

In the current dispute between “moral” (or “orthodox”) and “political” conceptions of human rights, Griffin strongly sides with those who see human rights as fundamentally moral rights (on this debate see Liao & Etinson 2012). Their defining role, in Griffin’s view, is protecting people’s ability to form and pursue conceptions of a worthwhile life—a capacity that Griffin variously refers to as “autonomy”, “normative agency”, and “personhood”. This ability to form, revise, and pursue conceptions of a worthwhile life is taken to be of paramount value, the exclusive source of human dignity, and thereby the basis of human rights. Griffin holds that people value this capacity “especially highly, often more highly than even our happiness” (2008: 32 [§2.3])

“Practicalities” also shape human rights in Griffin’s view. He describes practicalities as “a second ground” (2008: 37–39 [§2.5]) of human rights. They prescribe making the boundaries of rights clear by avoiding “too many complicated bends” (2008: 37 [§2.5]), enlarging rights a little to give them safety margins, and consulting facts about human nature and the nature of society. Accordingly, the justifying generic function that Griffin assigns to human rights is protecting normative agency while taking account of practicalities.

Griffin thinks that he can explain the universality of human rights by recognizing that normative agency is a threshold concept—once one is above the threshold one has the same rights as everyone else. One’s degree of agency above the threshold does not matter. There are no “degrees of being a person” (2008: 67 [§3.5]) among competent adults. Treating agency in this way, however, is a normative policy, not just a fact about concepts. An alternative policy is possible, namely proportioning people’s rights to their level of normative agency. This is what we do with children; their rights grow as they develop greater agency and responsibility. To exclude proportional rights, and to explain the egalitarian dimensions of human rights, including their character as universal and equal rights to be enjoyed without discrimination, some additional ground pertaining to fairness and equality seems to be needed.

This last point raises the question of whether agency-based approaches in general can adequately account for the universality, equality, and anti-discriminatory character of human rights. The idea that human rights are to be respected and protected without discrimination seems to be most centrally a matter of fairness rather than one of agency, freedom, or welfare. Discrimination often harms and hinders its victims, but even when it doesn’t it is still deeply unfair. For example, human rights that explicitly refer to fair wages and equal pay for equal work (ICESCR Articles 3 and 7.i) seem to be much more about fairness than about agency, freedom, or welfare—particularly since human rights to a wage that ensures a decent standard of living are often mentioned separately (ICESCR Article 7.ii).

2.2.2 Dignity

Many human rights declarations and treaties invoke human dignity as the ground of human rights. In recent decades numerous books and articles have been published that advocate dignitarian approaches to justifying human rights (for example, Gilabert 2018b; Kateb 2014; McCrudden 2013 and the many essays therein; Tasioulas 2015; Waldron 2012 and 2015). There have also been many critics, including Den Hartogh 2014; Etinson 2020; Green 2010; Macklin 2003; Rosen 2012; and Sangiovanni 2017.

A well-worked out conception of human dignity is likely to have at least three parts. The first describes the nature of human dignity, specifying for example whether it is a kind of value, status, or virtue (see Rosen 2012). The second explains the grounds of human dignity—that is, why, or in virtue of which shared capacities or features we all have the sort of dignity described in the first step. Finally, and third, there is the question of human dignity’s practical requirements, or what is concretely involved in “respecting” it. (See the entry on dignity for a broader discussion.)

Human dignity is often understood as a special worth or status which all human beings share in contrast to other animals (e.g., Kateb 2011). We can call this the “Special Worth Thesis”. Attempts to provide good explanatory grounds for the Special Worth Thesis identify one or more valuable features that all human persons share and that non-human animals mostly do not possess or have at much lower levels. The valuable features identified will presumably once again need to be “threshold concepts”, so that people can vary in how much of the feature or capacity they have without thereby losing, lessening, or increasing their human dignity in comparison to other persons. Human dignity is, after all, supposed to be a strongly egalitarian idea. Plausible candidates for such grounds might include moral abilities (to understand and follow moral values and norms and to reason and act in terms of them); thought, imagination, and rationality; self-consciousness and reflective capacities; and the use of complicated language and technologies, among others.

One worry about the Special Worth Thesis is its self-glorifying character. In claiming special worth we humans seem to excuse our many faults—including a terrible capacity for evil, routinely evidenced in our behavior towards other humans and towards non-human animals (Rosen 2013). Another closely associated and increasingly prominent worry is that the Special Worth Thesis is speciesist, arbitrarily ranking the interests, status, and/or value of human beings above that/those of non-human animals (Kymlicka 2018; Meyer 2001). In the context of these reasonable concerns, it is worth noting that support for, or a belief in, human dignity need not be prejudicial towards non-human animals; one can affirm the dignity of homo sapiens while also affirming the equal dignity of other species and forms of life (Etinson 2020; Gilabert 2018b). The Special Worth Thesis is optional and only defended by some theorists.

What attitudes, actions, policies, and rights follow from the duty or reason to respect human dignity? And are human rights among them? The answer will at least in part depend on what we think human dignity is. If it is a kind of virtue shared or shareable by all persons then its practical requirements will include things like praising and/or admiring those who possess it, and perhaps developing or cultivating “dignitarian” dispositions in one’s own character. If human dignity is, by contrast, a kind of value or worth (as in Immanuel Kant’s famous understanding of dignity as a worth “beyond all price” Kant 1785/1996: 43), then it is something we have reason to protect, promote, preserve, cherish, restore and perhaps even maximize, if possible. The human right to life, and its material conditions, is an intuitive product of human dignity understood in this way. If, on the other hand, we think of human dignity as a kind of legal (Waldron 2012 and 2015), moral (Gilabert 2018b; Lee & George 2008), or social status (Etinson 2020; Killmister 2020), then duties of “respect” more naturally follow.

These options are not mutually exclusive. In principle, human dignity can refer to all of these things: value, status, and virtue. If human dignity yields human rights, however, this is going to depend on exactly how we understand its practical requirements in light of its nature and grounds. This practical elaboration is the workhorse of a conception of human dignity. It normally results in one or more general maxims or guidelines: e.g., not to humiliate or degrade, never to treat persons merely as a means, to treat others in justifiable ways, to avoid severe cruelty, to respect autonomy, etc. The prospect of grounding human rights in human dignity faces critical challenges at this juncture. As we saw in the preceding discussion of agency-based approaches, the more specific and singular one’s dignitarian maxim is, the less plausible it will be as an exhaustive ground for standard lists of human rights in all their variety. On the other hand, a pluralistic set of grounding maxims will make human dignity a better source of human rights, but it is unclear whether in doing so we are simply explaining its implicit content or bringing in other values and norms to fill in its indeterminate scope. This raises the possibility that values and norms such as promoting human welfare; agency/autonomy; and fairness partially constitute the idea of human dignity rather than being derived from it (see Macklin 2003).

3. Which Rights are Human Rights?

This section discusses the question of which rights belong on lists of human rights. The Universal Declaration’s list, which has been very influential, consists of six families:

Security rights that protect people against murder, torture, and genocide;
Due process rights that protect people against arbitrary and excessively harsh punishments and require fair and public trials for those accused of crimes;
Liberty rights that protect people’s fundamental freedoms in areas such as belief, expression, association, and movement;
Political rights that protect people’s liberty to participate in politics by assembling, protesting, voting, and serving in public office;
Equality rights that guarantee equal citizenship, equality before the law, and freedom from discrimination; and
Economic and social rights that require that governments to forbid slavery and forced labor, enforce safe working conditions, ensure to all the availability of work, education, health services, and a standard of living that is adequate.

A seventh category, minority and group rights, has been created by subsequent treaties. These rights protect women, racial and ethnic minorities, indigenous peoples, children, migrant workers, and the disabled. This list of human rights seems normatively diverse: the issues addressed cover include security, liberty, fairness, equality before the law, access to work and good working conditions, unduly cruel treatment, and political participation.

In spite of the ample list above, not every question of social justice or wise governance is a human rights issue. For example, a country could have too many lawyers or inadequate provision for graduate-level education without violating any human rights. Deciding which norms should be counted as human rights is a matter of considerable difficulty. And there is continuing pressure to expand lists of human rights to include new areas. Many political movements would like to see their main concerns categorized as matters of human rights, since this would publicize, promote, and legitimize their concerns at the international level. A possible result of this is “human rights inflation”, the devaluation of human rights caused by producing too much bad human rights currency (see Cranston 1973; Orend 2002; Wellman 1995; Griffin 2008).

One way to avoid rights inflation is to follow Cranston in insisting that human rights only deal with extremely important goods, protections, and freedoms. A supplementary approach is to impose several justificatory tests for specific human rights. For example, it could be required that a proposed human right not only protect some very important good but also respond to one or more common and serious threats to that good (Dershowitz 2004; Donnelly 1989 [2003]; Shue 1996; Talbott 2005), impose burdens on the addressees that are justifiable and no larger than necessary, and be feasible in most of the world’s countries (on feasibility see Gheaus 2022; Gilabert 2009; Nickel 2007; and Richards 2023). This approach restrains rights inflation with several tests, not just one master test.

In deciding which norms should be considered human rights it is possible to make either too little or too much of international documents such as the Universal Declaration and the European Convention. One makes too little of them by proceeding as if drawing up a list of important rights were a new question, never before addressed, and as if there were no practical wisdom to be found in the choices of rights that went into the historic documents. And one makes too much of them by presuming that those documents tell us everything we need to know about human rights. This approach involves a kind of fundamentalism: it holds that when a right is on the official lists of human rights that settles its status as a human right (“If it’s in the book that’s all I need to know”.) But the process of identifying human rights in the United Nations and elsewhere was a political process with plenty of imperfections. There is little reason to take international diplomats as the most authoritative guides to which human rights there are. Further, even if a treaty’s ratification by most countries can settle the question of whether a certain right is a human right within international law, such a treaty cannot settle its weight. The treaty may suggest that the right is supported by weighty considerations, but it cannot make this so. If an international treaty enacted a right to visit national parks without charge as a human right, the ratification of that treaty would make free access to national parks a human right within international law, but it may well fail to persuade us that national park access is important enough to be a genuine human right.

The least controversial family of human rights is civil and political rights. These rights are familiar from historic bills of rights such as the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen (1789) and the U.S. Bill of Rights (1791, with subsequent amendments). Contemporary sources include the first 21 Articles of the Universal Declaration , and treaties such as the European Convention , the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights , the American Convention on Human Rights , and the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights . Some representative formulations follow:

Everyone has the right to freedom of thought and expression. This right includes freedom to seek, receive, and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing, in print, in the form of art, or through any other medium of one’s choice. ( American Convention on Human Rights , Article 13.1) Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and to freedom of association with others, including the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests. ( European Convention , Article 11) No one shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks on his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks. (ICCPR Article 17)

Most civil and political rights are not absolute—they can sometimes be overridden by other considerations. For example, the right to freedom of movement can be restricted by public and private property rights, by restraining orders related to domestic violence, and by legal punishments. Further, after a disaster such as a hurricane or earthquake free movement is often appropriately suspended to keep out the curious, permit access of emergency vehicles and equipment, and prevent looting. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights permits most rights to be suspended during times “of public emergency which threatens the life of the nation” (ICCPR Article 4). But it excludes some rights from suspension including the right to life, the prohibition of torture, the prohibition of slavery, the prohibition of ex post facto criminal laws, and freedom of thought and religion.

The Universal Declaration included economic and social rights (“ESRs”) that address matters such as education, food, health services, and employment. Their inclusion has been the source of much controversy (see Beetham 1995). The European Convention did not include them (although it was later amended to include the right to education). Instead ESRs were put into a separate treaty, the European Social Charter . When the United Nations began the process of putting the rights of the Universal Declaration into international law, it followed the same pattern by placing ESRs in a treaty separate from the one dealing with civil and political rights. This treaty, the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (ICESCR, 1966), treated these standards as rights—albeit rights to be progressively realized.

The ICESCR includes rights to: freedom from slavery and forced labor; adequate income or services to cover food, water, clothing, and shelter; basic health conditions and services; free public education; freedom to work, choose one's occupation, and have adequate opportunities for remunerative employment; fair pay and safe conditions of work; social security; equality for women in the workplace, including equal pay for equal work; freedom to form trade unions and to strike; special protections for mothers and children; adequate rest and leisure; and nondiscrimination in respecting, protecting, and fulfilling these rights. In terms of underlying values and norms, some of these rights are welfare-oriented, others are fairness-oriented, and still others are freedom-oriented (Nickel 2022b).

Article 2.1 of the ICESCR sets out what each of the parties commits itself to do about this list, namely to

take steps, individually and through international assistance and co-operation…to the maximum of its available resources, with a view to achieving progressively the full realization of the rights recognized in the present Covenant.

In contrast, the Civil and Political Covenant commits its signatories to immediate compliance, to

respect and to ensure to all individuals within its territory the rights recognized in the present Covenant. (ICCPR Article 2.1)

The contrast between these two levels of commitment has led some people to suspect that ESRs are really just valuable goals. For many countries, noncompliance due to inability would have been certain if these standards had been treated as immediately binding.

ESRs have often been defended with linkage arguments which claim that ESRs provide indispensable support to the realization of civil and political rights. This approach was first developed philosophically by Henry Shue. He argued that security and subsistence are so indispensable to the full realization of other rights that anyone who endorses the realization of any other right must also endorse ESRs (Shue 1980; for analysis and critical assessments of linkage arguments see Nickel 2007, 2016, and 2022a).

Do ESRs protect sufficiently important human interests? Maurice Cranston opposed ESRs by suggesting that they are mainly concerned with matters such as holidays with pay which are not of deep and universal human interest (Cranston 1967, 1973; treatments of objections to ESRs include Beetham 1995; Howard 1983; and Nickel 2007). It is far from the case, however, that most ESRs pertain only to superficial interests. Consider two examples: the right to an adequate standard of living and the right to free public education. The former requires governments to work hard at remedying widespread and serious evils such as severe poverty, starvation and malnutrition, and ignorance. The importance of food and other basic material conditions of life is easy to show. These goods are essential to people’s ability to live, function, and flourish. Without adequate access to these goods, interests in life, health, and liberty are endangered and serious illness and death are probable. The unavailability of educational opportunities typically limits (both absolutely and comparatively) people’s abilities to participate fully and effectively in the political and economic life of their county

Are ESRs too burdensome? Another objection to ESRs is that they are too burdensome on their dutybearers. It is very expensive to guarantee everyone basic education and minimal material conditions. Frequently the claim that ESRs are too burdensome suggests that ESRs are substantially more burdensome or expensive than liberty rights. Suppose, however, that we use as a basis of comparison liberty rights such as freedom of communication, association, and movement. These rights require both respect and protection from governments. And people cannot be adequately protected in their enjoyment of liberties such as these unless they also have security and due process rights. The costs of liberty, as it were, include the costs of law and criminal justice. Once we see this, liberty rights start to look a lot more costly.

Further, we need not generally think of ESRs as simply giving everyone a free supply of the goods they protect. Guarantees of things like food and housing may be intolerably expensive and undermine productivity if everyone simply receives a free supply. A viable system of ESRs can require most people to provide these goods for themselves and their families through work, as long as they are given the necessary opportunities, education, and infrastructure. Government-implemented ESRs provide guarantees of availability (or “secure access”), but under many conditions governments should only have to supply the requisite goods in a small fraction of cases.

Countries that do not accept and implement ESRs must still somehow bear the costs of providing for the needy since these countries are unlikely to find it tolerable to allow sizable parts of the population to starve and be homeless. If government does not supply food, clothing, and shelter to those unable to provide for themselves, then families, friends, and communities will have to shoulder this burden. It is only in the last hundred or so years that government-sponsored ESRs have taken over a substantial part of the burden of providing for the needy. The taxes associated with ESRs are partial replacements for other burdensome duties, namely the duties of families and communities to provide adequate care for the unemployed, sick, disabled, and aged. Deciding whether to implement ESRs is not a matter of deciding whether to bear such burdens, but rather of deciding whether to continue with total reliance on systems of informal provision that distribute assistance in a very spotty way and whose costs fall very unevenly on families, friends, and communities.

Are ESRs feasible worldwide? Another objection to ESRs alleges that they are not feasible in many countries (on feasibility see Gheaus 2013, Gilabert 2009, and Nickel 2007). It is very expensive to provide guarantees of subsistence, measures to protect and restore people’s health, and education. Many governments will be unable to provide these guarantees while meeting other important responsibilities. Rights are not magical sources of supply (Holmes & Sunstein 1999). As we saw earlier, the ESR Covenant dealt with the issue of feasibility by calling for progressive implementation, that is, implementation as financial and other resources permit. Does this view of implementation turn ESRs into high-priority goals? And if so, is that a bad thing?

Standards that outrun the abilities of many of their addressees are good candidates for treatment as goals. Viewing them as largely aspirational rather than as imposing immediate duties avoids problems of inability-based noncompliance. One may worry, however, that this is too much of a demotion for ESRs because goals seem much weaker than rights (see O’Neill 2005 and Tomalty 2014). But goals can be formulated in ways that make them more like rights. They can be assigned addressees (the parties who are to pursue the goal), beneficiaries, scopes that define the objective to be pursued, and a high level of priority (see Langford, Sumner, & Yamin 2013 and Nickel 2013; see also OHCHR and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, UN ). Strong reasons for the importance of these goals can be provided. And supervisory bodies can monitor levels of progress and pressure low-performing addressees to attend to and work on realizing their goals.

Treating very demanding rights as goals has some advantages. Goals coexist easily with low levels of ability to achieve them. And goals are flexible: addressees with different levels of ability can choose ways of pursuing the goals that suit their circumstances and means. Because of these attractions it may be worth exploring sophisticated ways to transform very demanding human rights into goals. The transformation may be full or partial. It is possible to create right-goal mixtures that contain some mandatory elements (see Brems 2009). A right-goal mixture might include some rights-like goals, some mandatory steps to be taken immediately, and duties to realize the rights-like goals as quickly as possible.

Do ESRs yield a sufficient commitment to equality? Objections to ESRs as human rights have come from both the political right and the political left. A common objection from the left, including liberal egalitarians and socialists, is that ESRs as enumerated in human rights documents and treaties provide too weak of a commitment to material equality (Gilabert 2018a and Moyn 2018). Realizing ESRs requires governments to ensure everyone an adequate minimum of resources in some key areas but does not require strong commitments to equality of opportunity, redistributive taxation, or wealth ceilings (see the entries on equality , distributive justice , and liberal feminism ).

The egalitarian objection cannot be that human rights documents and treaties show no concern for people living in poverty and misery. One of the main purposes of including ESRs in human rights documents and treaties was to promote serious efforts to combat poverty, lack of education, and unhealthy living conditions in countries all around the world (see also Langford, Sumner, & Yamin 2013 on the UN Millennium Development Goals). The objection also cannot be that human rights facilitated the hollowing out of systems of welfare rights in many developed countries that occurred after 1980 (for criticism of this view see Song 2019). Those cuts in welfare programs were often in violation of the requirements of realizing ESRs.

Perhaps it should be conceded that human rights documents and treaties have not said enough about positive measures to promote equal opportunity in education and work. A positive right to equal opportunity, like the one Rawls proposed, would require countries to take serious measures to reduce disparities between the opportunities effectively available to children of high-income and low-income parents (see Rawls 1971 and the entry on equality of opportunity ).

A strongly egalitarian political program is probably best pursued partially within but mostly beyond the human rights framework. One reason for this is that the human rights movement will have better prospects for ongoing acceptance and support if it has widespread political acceptance. To achieve this, the rights it endorses must appeal to people with a variety of political views, ranging from center-left to center-right. Support from the broad political center is less likely to emerge and survive if the human rights platform is perceived as mostly a leftist program.

Equality of rights for historically disadvantaged or subordinated groups is a longstanding concern of the human rights movement. Human rights documents repeatedly emphasize that all people, including women and members of minority ethnic and religious groups, have equal human rights and should be able to enjoy them without discrimination. The right to freedom from discrimination figures prominently in the Universal Declaration and subsequent treaties. The Civil and Political Covenant, for example, commits participating states to respect and protect their people’s rights without distinction of any kind, such as race, color, sex, language, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth, or social status (ICCPR Article 2.1). On minority and group rights see Kymlicka 1995.

A number of standard civil and political rights are especially important to ethnic and religious minorities, including rights to freedom of association, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion, and freedom from discrimination. Human rights documents also include rights that refer to minorities explicitly and give them special protections. For example, the Civil and Political Covenant in Article 27 says that persons belonging to ethnic, religious, or linguistic minorities

shall not be denied the right, in community with other members of their group, to enjoy their own culture, to profess and practice their own religion, or to use their own language. (ICCPR Article 27)

Feminists have often protested that standard lists of human rights do not sufficiently take into account the unique risks faced by women. For example, issues like domestic violence, reproductive choice, and the trafficking of women and girls for sex work did not have a prominent place in early human rights documents and treaties. Lists of human rights have had to be expanded “to include the degradation and violation of women” (Bunch 2006; see also Okin 1998). Violations of women’s human rights often occur in the “private” sphere, i.e., in the home at the hands of other family members. This suggests that governments cannot be seen as the only addressees of human rights and that the right to privacy of home and family needs qualification to allow police to protect women within the home.

The issue of how formulations of human rights should respond to variations in the sorts of risks and dangers that different people face is difficult and arises not just in relation to gender but also in relation to age, race, sexual orientation, profession, political affiliation, religion, and personal interests. Due process rights, for example, are much more useful to young people (and particularly young men) than they are to older people since the latter are far less likely to run afoul of the criminal law.

Since 1964 the United Nations has mainly dealt with the rights of women and minorities through specialized treaties such as the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (1965); the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (1979); the Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989), and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (2007). See also the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (2007). Specialized treaties allow international norms to address unique problems of particular groups such as assistance and care during pregnancy and childbearing in the case of women, custody issues in the case of children, and the loss of historic territories by indigenous peoples.

Minority groups are often targets of violence. Human rights norms call upon governments to refrain from such violence and to provide protections against it. This work is partly done by the right to life, which is a standard individual right. It is also done by the right against genocide which protects groups from attempts to destroy or decimate them. The Genocide Convention was one of the first human rights treaties after World War II. The right against genocide is clearly a group right. It is held by both individuals and groups and provides protection to groups as groups. It is largely negative in the sense that it requires governments and other agencies to refrain from destroying groups; but it also requires that legal and other protections against genocide be created at the national level.

As a group right, can the right against genocide be a human right? More generally, can a group right fit the general idea of human rights as rights of individual persons proposed earlier? Perhaps it can if we broaden our conception of who can hold human rights to include important groups that people form and cherish (see the entry on group rights ). This can be made more palatable, perhaps, by recognizing that the beneficiaries of the right against genocide are individual humans who enjoy greater security against attempts to destroy the group to which they belong (Kymlicka 1989).

Although contemporary lists of human rights are already long, there are doubtless norms that should be counted as human rights but are not generally recognized as such. After all, there are lots of areas in which people’s basic welfare, dignity, and fundamental interests are threatened by the actions and omissions of individuals and governments. New technologies create new problems and require us to rethink old solutions. And new political movements emerge and create demands for their goals and norms as human rights.

Prominent recent proposals of new human rights include Kimberley Brownlee’s advocacy of a right against social deprivation that would address severe unwanted loneliness (Brownlee 2020 and 2022), the proposal of a universal right to internet access that was endorsed by the UN General Assembly in 2016 (UN Resolution 32/13), and the similar endorsement in 2022 of a right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment (UN Resolution 76/300; see also the entry on environmental ethics ).

The right to a healthy environment provides a good example of how new human rights can slowly emerge. After a right of this sort was added to many national bills of rights, environmental NGOs began to promote it within international organizations. In 2000 the European Union’s Bill of Rights, the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union , included in Article 37 an environmental protection norm:

A high level of environmental protection and the improvement of the quality of the environment must be integrated into the policies of the Union and ensured in accordance with the principle of sustainable development.

In 2012 the UN Human Rights Council created a Special Rapporteur (independent expert) on the Environment, eventually approved the right to “a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment”, and forwarded it to the General Assembly—where 80 percent of the world’s countries voted for it (UN Resolution 76/300). Human rights approaches to climate change have also been developed in recent decades (see Bodansky 2009; Caney 2009; Gardiner 2013; and Vanderheiden 2008).

Worries about the proliferation of human rights have not disappeared. Lawyers and international organizations have proposed standards to limit the introduction of new human rights (for example, Alston 1984 and the UN General Assembly 1986). And human rights treaty-making has slowed. After the approval of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court in 1999, the only human rights treaty approved by the UN is the 2006 Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. In 2007 a declaration (not a treaty) on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples was approved by the General Assembly. Prominent philosophers have also advocated smaller lists of human rights (see, for example, Cranston 1967 and 1973; Rawls 1999; and Griffin 2008). Griffin also opposed squeezing new content into existing human rights—which he described as the “ballooning” of rights.

Two familiar philosophical worries about human rights are that they are based on beliefs and attitudes that are culturally relative and that their creation and advocacy involves ethnocentrism. Human rights prescribe universal standards in areas such as security, law enforcement, equality, political participation, and education. The peoples and countries of planet Earth are, however, enormously varied in their practices, traditions, religions, and levels of economic and political development. Putting these two propositions together may be enough to justify the worry that universal human rights do not sufficiently accommodate the diversity of Earth’s peoples. A theoretical expression of this worry is “relativism”, the idea that ethical, political, and legal standards are only true or justified relative to the traditions, beliefs, and conditions of a particular country, culture or region (see the entry on moral relativism ).

During the drafting in 1947 of the Universal Declaration, the Executive Board of the American Anthropological Association (“AAA”) warned of the danger that the Declaration would be “a statement of rights conceived only in terms of the values prevalent in Western Europe and America”. A central concern of the AAA Board in the period right after World War II was to condemn intolerant colonialist attitudes of the day and to advocate cultural and political self-determination. But the Board also made the stronger assertion that “standards and values are relative to the culture from which they derive” and thus “what is held to be a human right in one society may be regarded as anti-social by another people” (AAA 1947).

Such assertions have continued to fuel accusations that human rights are instruments of ethnocentrism, arrogance, and cultural imperialism (Renteln 1990). Ethnocentrism is the assumption, usually unconscious, that “one’s own group is the center of everything” and that its beliefs, practices, and norms provide the standards by which other groups are “scaled and rated” (Sumner 1906; see also Etinson 2018a who argues that ethnocentrism is best understood as a kind of cultural bias rather than a belief in cultural superiority). Ethnocentrism can lead to arrogance and intolerance in dealings with other countries, ethical systems, and religions. Finally, cultural imperialism occurs when the economically, technologically, and militarily strongest countries impose their beliefs, values, and institutions on the rest of the world (for a useful discussion of several power-related concerns about human rights, see Gilabert 2018a).

As in the AAA Board’s case, relativists often combine these charges with a prescription, namely that tolerance of varied practices and traditions ought to be instilled and practiced through measures that include extended learning about other cultures. The idea that relativism and exposure to other cultures promote tolerance may be correct from a psychological perspective. People who are sensitive to differences in beliefs, practices, and traditions, and who are suspicious of the grounds for extending norms across borders, may be more inclined to be tolerant of other countries and peoples than those who believe in an objective universal morality. Still, philosophers have been generally critical of attempts to argue from relativism to a prescription of tolerance (see Williams 1972 [1993] and Talbott 2005). If the culture and religion of one country has long fostered intolerant attitudes and practices, and if its citizens and officials act intolerantly towards people from other countries, they are simply following their own traditions and cultural norms. Accordingly, a relativist from a tolerant country will be hard-pressed to find a basis for criticizing the citizens and officials of the intolerant country. To do so the relativist will have to endorse a transcultural principle of tolerance and to advocate as an outsider cultural change in the direction of greater tolerance. Because of this, relativists who are deeply committed to tolerance may find themselves attracted to a qualified commitment to human rights.

Perhaps for these reasons, relativism is not the stance of most anthropologists today. Currently the AAA has a central Committee whose objectives include promoting, protecting, and developing an anthropological perspective on human rights. While still emphasizing the importance of cultural differences, anthropologists now often support the protection of vulnerable cultures, non-discrimination, and the rights and land claims of indigenous peoples (see the AAA’s 2020 Statement on Anthropology and Human Rights).

The conflict between relativists and human rights advocates may be partially based on differences in their underlying philosophical beliefs, particularly in metaethics. Relativists are often subjectivists or noncognitivists and think of morality as entirely socially constructed and transmitted. In contrast, philosophically-inclined human rights advocates are more likely to adhere to or presuppose cognitivism, moral realism, and intuitionism.

As the AAA’s 1947 Statement shows, the accommodation of diversity has been a concern facing the contemporary human rights regime since its inception. As part of a 1946–47 UNESCO inquiry into the theoretical basis of human rights, the French philosopher, Jacques Maritain, famously suggested that universal agreement on human rights was possible so long as questions of underlying justification were ignored: “Yes… we agree about the rights but on condition no one asks us why” (Maritain 1949: 9). The International Bill of Human Rights appears to violate this embargo when it asserts, in the Preamble to both major Covenants, that “these rights derive from the inherent dignity of the human person”. Nonetheless, Maritain’s idea has strong echoes in contemporary philosophical work (see Taylor 1999), including John Rawls’ idea that human rights can have a minimal public or “political” justification which may be accepted from various “comprehensive” religious, moral, and philosophical points of view (Rawls 1999; Beitz 2009). Indeed, some have argued that international human rights law’s justificatory appeal to human dignity should be understood in precisely this ecumenical way (McCrudden 2008).

Other important methods of accommodating diversity include the abstract formulation of human rights norms, which allows for diverse, context-sensitive modes of social and institutional implementation (see Etinson 2013). As discussed in section 1 , a modest understanding of the aims of human rights would leave more room for democratic decision-making at the domestic level, and for cultural and political variation across countries (see also the European Court of Human Rights’ notion of a “margin of appreciation”, discussed in Letsas 2006). And it is worth noting that, within limits, state parties to international human rights treaties are entitled to submit “reservations” that alter the legal effect of treaty provisions as they pertain to that state. This provides a further avenue for legal variation and accommodation.

In the 1990s, Singapore’s Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew and others argued that international human rights as found in United Nations declarations and treaties were insensitive to distinctive “Asian values”, such as prizing families and community (in contrast to strong individualism); putting social harmony over personal freedom; respect for political leaders and institutions; and emphasizing responsibility, hard work, and thriftiness as means of social progress (on the Asian Values debate see Bauer & Bell [eds] 1999; Bell 2000; and Sen 1997). Proponents of the Asian values idea did not wish to abolish all human rights; they rather wanted to deemphasize some families of human rights, particularly the fundamental freedoms and rights of democratic participation (and in some cases the rights of women). They also wanted Western governments and NGOs to stop criticizing them for human rights violations in these areas.

At the 1993 World Conference on Human Rights in Vienna, countries including Singapore, Malaysia, China, and Iran advocated accommodations within human rights practice for cultural and economic differences. Western representatives tended to view the position of these countries as excuses for repression and authoritarianism. The Conference responded by approving the Vienna Declaration . It included in Article 5 the assertion that countries should not pick and choose among human rights:

All human rights are universal, indivisible and interdependent and interrelated. The international community must treat human rights globally in a fair and equal manner, on the same footing, and with the same emphasis. While the significance of national and regional particularities and various historical, cultural and religious backgrounds must be borne in mind, it is the duty of States, regardless of their political, economic and cultural systems, to promote and protect all human rights and fundamental freedoms.

In recent decades widespread acceptance of human rights has occurred in most parts of the world. Three quarters of the world’s countries have ratified the major human rights treaties, and many countries in Africa, the Americas, and Europe participate in regional human rights regimes that have international courts (see the Georgetown University Human Rights Law Research Guide in the Other Internet Resources below). Ratification does not, of course, guarantee compliance. Further, all of the world’s countries now use similar political institutions (law, courts, legislatures, executives, militaries, bureaucracies, police, prisons, taxation, and public schools) and these institutions carry with them characteristic problems and abuses (Donnelly 1989 [2020]). Finally, globalization has diminished the differences among peoples. Today’s world is not the one that early anthropologists and missionaries found. National and cultural boundaries are breached not just by international trade but also by millions of travelers and migrants, electronic communications, international law covering many areas, and the efforts of international governmental and non-governmental organizations. International influences and organizations are everywhere and countries borrow freely and regularly from each other’s inventions and practices.

[AAA] American Anthropological Association, 1947, “Statement on Human Rights”, American Anthropologist , 49(4): 539–543. doi:10.1525/aa.1947.49.4.02a00020 [ AAA 1947 available online ]
–––, 2020, “Declaration on Anthropology and Human Rights” [ AAA 1999 available online ].
Alston, Philip, 1984, “Conjuring Up New Human Rights: A Proposal For Quality Control”, American Journal of International Law , 78(3): 607–621. doi:10.2307/2202599
Ashford, Elizabeth, 2006, “The Inadequacy of Our Traditional Conception of the Duties Imposed by Human Rights”, The Canadian Journal of Law and Jurisprudence , 19(2): 217–235. doi:10.1017/S0841820900004082
–––, 2014, “Responsibility for Violations of the Human Right to Subsistence”, in Meyers 2014 : 94–118 (ch. 4).
–––, 2015, “A Moral Inconsistency Argument for a Basic Human Right to Subsistence”, in Cruft, Liao, and Renzo 2015 : 515–534 (ch. 29). doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199688623.003.0030
Bauer, Joanne R. and Daniel Bell (eds), 1999, The East Asian Challenge for Human Rights , Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press.
Beetham, David, 1995, “What Future for Economic and Social Rights?”, Political Studies , 43(1): 41–60. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9248.1995.tb01735.x
Beitz, Charles R., 2009, The Idea of Human Rights , Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199572458.001.0001
–––, 2013, “Human Dignity in the Theory of Human Rights: Nothing But a Phrase?”, Philosophy & Public Affairs , 41(3): 259–290. doi:10.1111/papa.12017
–––, 2015, “The Force of Subsistence Rights”, in Cruft, Liao, and Renzo 2015 : 535–552 (ch. 30). doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199688623.003.0031
Besson, Samantha, 2015, “The Bearers of Human Rights’ Duties and Responsibilities for Human Rights: A Quiet (R)evolution?”, Social Philosophy and Policy , 32(1): 244–268. doi:10.1017/S0265052515000151
Beyleveld, Deryck, 1991, The Dialectical Necessity of Morality: An Analysis and Defense of Alan Gewirth’s Argument to the Principle of Generic Consistency , Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Bodansky, Daniel, 2009, “Introduction: Climate Change and Human Rights: Unpacking the Issues Symposium: International Human Rights and Climate Change”, Georgia Journal of International and Comparative Law , 38(3): 511–524.
Boylan, Michael (ed.), 1999, Gewirth: Critical Essays on Action, Rationality, and Community (Studies in Social, Political, and Legal Philosophy), Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Brake, Elizabeth, 2022, “Rights to Belong and Rights to Be Left Alone?: Claims to Caring Relationships and Their Limits”, in Brownlee, Jenkins, and Neal 2022 : 211–233 (ch. 11). doi:10.1093/oso/9780198871194.003.0012
Brandt, Richard B., 1983, “The Concept of a Moral Right and Its Function”, The Journal of Philosophy , 80(1): 29–45. doi:10.2307/2026285
Brems, Eva, 2009, “Human Rights: Minimum and Maximum Perspectives”, Human Rights Law Review , 9(3): 349–372. doi:10.1093/hrlr/ngp016
Brock, Gillian, 2020, Justice for People on the Move: Migration in Challenging Times , Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/9781108774581
Brownlee, Kimberley, 2015, “Do We Have a Human Right to the Political Determinants of Health?”, in Cruft, Liao, and Renzo 2015 : 502–514 (ch. 28). doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199688623.003.0029
–––, 2018, “Dwelling in Possibility: Ideals, Aspirations, and Human Rights”, in Etinson 2018b : 313–326 (ch. 9). doi:10.1093/oso/9780198713258.003.0019
–––, 2020, Being Sure of Each Other: An Essay on Social Rights and Freedoms , Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/oso/9780198714064.001.0001
Brownlee, Kimberley, David Jenkins, and Adam Neal (eds), 2022, Being Social: The Philosophy of Social Human Rights , Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/oso/9780198871194.001.0001
Buchanan, Allen E., 2010, Human Rights, Legitimacy, and the Use of Force , Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.
–––, 2013, The Heart of Human Rights , Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199325382.001.0001
Bunch, Charlotte, 1990, “Women’s Rights as Human Rights: Toward a Revision of Human Rights”, Human Rights Quarterly 12: 486–498.
Campbell, Tom and Kylie Bourne (eds), 2017, Political and Legal Approaches to Human Rights , Abingdon/New York: Routledge. doi:10.4324/9781315179711
Caney, Simon, 2009, “Climate Change, Human Rights and Moral Thresholds”, in Human Rights and Climate Change , Stephen Humphreys (ed.), Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press, 69–90. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511770722.004
Cohen, Joshua, 2004, “Minimalism About Human Rights: The Most We Can Hope For?”, Journal of Political Philosophy , 12(2): 190–213. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9760.2004.00197.x
Collins, Stephanie, 2016, “The Claims and Duties of Socioeconomic Human Rights”, The Philosophical Quarterly , 66(265): 701–722. doi:10.1093/pq/pqw010
–––, 2022, “A Human Right to Relationships?”, in Brownlee, Jenkins, and Neal 2022 : 31–51 (ch. 2). doi:10.1093/oso/9780198871194.003.0003
Corradetti, Claudio, 2009, Relativism and Human Rights: A Theory of Pluralistic Universalism , Dordrecht: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-1-4020-9986-1
––– (ed.), 2012, Philosophical Dimensions of Human Rights: Some Contemporary Views , Dordrecht: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-94-007-2376-4
Corrigan, Daniel P., 2022, “Political Confucianism and Human Rights”, Journal of Confucian Philosophy and Culture , 37: 91–116.
Cranston, Maurice, 1967, “Human Rights, Real and Supposed”, in Political Theory and the Rights of Man , D. D. Raphael (ed.), Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 43–51.
–––, 1973, What Are Human Rights? , London, Bodley Head. A greatly extended version of the 1962 original.
Crisp, Roger (ed.), 2014, Griffin on Human Rights , New York: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199668731.001.0001
Cruft, Rowan, 2005, “Human Rights, Individualism and Cultural Diversity”, Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy , 8(3): 265–287. doi:10.1080/13698230500187151
–––, 2012, “Human Rights as Rights”, in Ernst and Heilinger 2012 : 129–158. doi:10.1515/9783110263886.129
–––, 2019, Human Rights, Ownership, and the Individual , Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/oso/9780198793366.001.0001
Cruft, Rowan, S. Matthew Liao, and Massimo Renzo (eds), 2015, Philosophical Foundations of Human Rights (Philosophical Foundations of Law), Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199688623.001.0001
Darby, Derrick, 2009, Rights, Race, and Recognition , Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511626616
Den Hartogh, Govert, 2014, “Is Human Dignity the Ground of Human Rights?”, in The Cambridge Handbook of Human Dignity , Marcus Düwell, Jens Braarvig, Roger Brownsword, and Dietmar Mieth (eds), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 200–207. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511979033.025
Dershowitz, Alan M., 2004, Rights from Wrongs: A Secular Theory of the Origins of Rights , New York: Basic Books.
Donnelly, Jack, and Daniel J. Whelan, 2020, Universal Human Rights in Theory and Practice , 6th edition, New York: Routledge.
Dworkin, Ronald, 1978, Taking Rights Seriously , Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
–––, 2011, Justice for Hedgehogs , Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Ernst, Gerhard and Jan-Christoph Heilinger (eds), 2012, The Philosophy of Human Rights: Contemporary Controversies , Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter. doi:10.1515/9783110263886
Etinson, Adam, 2013, “Human Rights, Claimability and the Uses of Abstraction”, Utilitas , 25(4): 463–486. doi:10.1017/S0953820813000101
–––, 2018a, “Some Myths about Ethnocentrism”, Australasian Journal of Philosophy , 96(2): 209–224. doi:10.1080/00048402.2017.1343363
––– (ed.), 2018b, Human Rights: Moral or Political? , Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/oso/9780198713258.001.0001
–––, 2020, “What’s So Special About Human Dignity?”, Philosophy & Public Affairs , 48(4): 353–381. doi:10.1111/papa.12175
–––, forthcoming, “The Lure of Minimalism” in Routledge Handbook of Philosophy of Human Rights , Jesse Tomalty and Kerri Woods (eds), London: Routledge.
Feinberg, Joel, 1973, Social Philosophy (Foundations of Philosophy Series), Englewood Cliffs, N.J: Prentice-Hall.
Fellmeth, Aaron Xavier, 2016, Paradigms of International Human Rights Law , New York: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190611279.001.0001
Finnis, John, 2011, Natural Law and Natural Rights (Clarendon Law Series), second edition, Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.
–––, 2015, “Grounding Human Rights in Natural Law”, The American Journal of Jurisprudence , 60(2): 199–225. doi:10.1093/ajj/auv013
Flikschuh, Katrin, 2011, “On the Cogency of Human Rights”, Jurisprudence , 2(1): 17–36. doi:10.5235/204033211796290335
–––, 2016, “How Far Human Rights?”, Jurisprudence , 7(1): 85–92. doi:10.1080/20403313.2016.1148425
Follesdal, Andreas, 2018, “Appreciating the Margin of Appreciation”, in Etinson 2018b : 269–294 (ch. 8). doi:10.1093/oso/9780198713258.003.0017
Forst, Rainer, 2007, Recht auf Rechtfertigung , Frankfurt (am Main): Suhrkamp. Translated as The Right to Justification: Elements of a Constructivist Theory of Justice (New Directions in Critical Theory), Jeffrey Flynn (trans.), New York: Columbia University Press.
Gardiner, Stephen M., 2013, “Human Rights in a Hostile Climate”, in Holder and Reidy 2013 : 211–230 (ch. 11).
Gewirth, Alan, 1978, Reason and Morality , Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
–––, 1982, Human Rights: Essays on Justification and Applications , Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
–––, 1996, The Community of Rights , Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Gheaus, Anca, 2013, “The Feasibility Constraint on The Concept of Justice”, The Philosophical Quarterly , 63(252): 445–464. doi:10.1111/1467-9213.12058
–––, 2022, “The Role of Solitude in the Politics of Sociability”, in Brownlee, Jenkins, and Neal 2022 : 234–251 (ch. 12). doi:10.1093/oso/9780198871194.003.0013
Gilabert, Pablo, 2009, “The Feasibility of Basic Socioeconomic Human Rights: A Conceptual Exploration”, The Philosophical Quarterly , 59(237): 659–681. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9213.2008.590.x
–––, 2010, “The Importance of Linkage Arguments for the Theory and Practice of Human Rights: A Response to James Nickel”, Human Rights Quarterly , 32(2): 425–438. doi:10.1353/hrq.0.0143
–––, 2012, From Global Poverty to Global Equality: A Philosophical Exploration , Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199639717.001.0001
–––, 2018a, “Reflections on Human Rights and Power”, in Etinson 2018b : 375–399 (ch. 11). doi:10.1093/oso/9780198713258.003.0023
–––, 2018b, Human Dignity and Human Rights , Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/oso/9780198827221.001.0001
Glendon, Mary Ann, 2001, A World Made New: Eleanor Roosevelt and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights , New York: Random House.
Gould, Carol C., 2004, Globalizing Democracy and Human Rights , Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511617096
Green, Leslie, 2010, “Two Worries about Respect for Persons”, Ethics , 120(2): 212–231. doi:10.1086/651425
Griffin, James, 2008, On Human Rights , Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199238781.001.0001
Hart, H. L. A., 1955, “Are There Any Natural Rights?”, The Philosophical Review , 64(2): 175–191. doi:10.2307/2182586
Hassoun, Nicole, 2013, “Human Rights and the Minimally Good Life”, Res Philosophica , 90(3): 413–438. doi:10.11612/resphil.2013.90.3.6
–––, 2020a, Global Health Impact: Extending Access to Essential Medicines , New York: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/oso/9780197514993.001.0001
–––, 2020b, “The Human Right to Health: A Defense”, Journal of Social Philosophy , 51(2): 158–179. doi:10.1111/josp.12298
Hayden, Patrick (ed.), 2001, The Philosophy of Human Rights (Paragon Issues in Philosophy), St. Paul, MN: Paragon House.
Hayward, Tim, 2005, Constitutional Environmental Rights , Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/0199278687.001.0001
Henkin, Louis, 1978, The Rights of Man Today (Gottesman Lectures), Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Holder, Cindy and David Reidy (eds), 2013, Human Rights: The Hard Questions , New York: Cambridge University Press.
Holmes, Stephen and Cass R. Sunstein, 1999, The Cost of Rights: Why Liberty Depends on Taxes , New York: W.W. Norton.
Hoover, Joe, 2016, Reconstructing Human Rights: A Pragmatist and Pluralist Inquiry into Global Ethics , Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198782803.001.0001
Hope, Simon, 2015, “Human Rights Without the Human Good?”, in Cruft, Liao, and Renzo 2015 : 608–623 (ch. 34). doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199688623.003.0035
Howard, Rhoda, 1983, “The Full-Belly Thesis: Should Economic Rights Take Priority over Civil and Political Rights? Evidence from Sub-Saharan Africa”, Human Rights Quarterly , 5(4): 467–490. doi:10.2307/762231
Ignatieff, Michael, 2004, The Lesser Evil: Political Ethics in an Age of Terror (The Gifford Lectures), Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Jones, Peter, 1994, Rights , Houndmills/Basingstoke: Macmillan.
Kamm, Frances Myrna, 1986, “Harming, Not Aiding, and Positive Rights”, Philosophy & Public Affairs , 15(1): 3–32.
–––, 2001, “Conflicts of Rights: Typology, Methodology, and Nonconsequentialism”, Legal Theory , 7(3): 239–255. doi:10.1017/S1352325201073025
–––, 2007, Intricate Ethics: Rights, Responsibilities, and Permissible Harm (Oxford Ethics Series), Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195189698.001.0001
Kant, Immanuel, 1785 [1996], The Metaphysics of Morals , in Mary J. Gregor, ed., Practical Philosophy, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 37–108. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511813306.007.
Kateb, George, 2011, Human Dignity , Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Kaufmann, Paulus, Hannes Kuch, Christian Neuhäuser, and Elaine Webster (eds), 2011, Humiliation, Degradation, Dehumanization: Human Dignity Violated (Library of Ethics and Applied Philosophy 24), Dordrecht/New York: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-90-481-9661-6
Kennedy, David, 2004, The Dark Sides of Virtue: Reassessing International Humanitarianism , Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Killmister, Suzy, 2020, Contours of Dignity , Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/oso/9780198844365.001.0001
–––, 2019, “The Warty Conception of Human Rights”, Journal of Human Rights , 18(5): 564–578. doi:10.1080/14754835.2019.1647099
King, Jeff, 2012, Judging Social Rights (Cambridge Studies in Constitutional Law), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9781139051750
Kiyama, Kosuke, 2019, “Human Rights Based on Human Dignity: Defence and Elaboration through an Examination of Andrea Sangiovanni’s Critique”, Journal of Global Studies , 9: 1–24.
Kymlicka, Will, 1989, Liberalism, Community, and Culture , Oxford: Clarendon Press.
––– (ed.), 1995, The Rights of Minority Cultures , Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.
–––, 2018, “Human Rights without Human Supremacism”, Canadian Journal of Philosophy , 48(6): 763–792. doi:10.1080/00455091.2017.1386481
Lacroix, Justine and Jean-Yves Pranchère, 2016, Le procès des droits de l’homme: généalogie du scepticisme démocratique (La couleur des idées), Paris: Éditions du Seuil. Translated as Human Rights on Trial: A Genealogy of the Critique of Human Rights (Human Rights in History), Gabrielle Maas (trans.), Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press, 2018. doi:10.1017/9781108334884
Lafont, Cristina, 2012, Global Governance and Human Rights , Amsterdam: van Gorcum.
Langford, Malcolm, Andy Sumner, and Alicia Ely Yamin (eds), 2013, The Millennium Development Goals and Human Rights: Past, Present and Future , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9781139410892
Langford, Malcolm and Katharine G. Young (eds), 2022, The Oxford Handbook of Economic and Social Rights , Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780197550021.001.0001
Lauren, Paul Gordon, 1998 [2003], The Evolution of International Human Rights: Visions Seen (Pennsylvania Studies in Human Rights), Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press. Second edition, 2003.
Lee, Patrick and Robert P. George, 2008, “The Nature and Basis of Human Dignity”, Ratio Juris , 21(2): 173–193. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9337.2008.00386.x
Letsas, George, 2006, “Two Concepts of the Margin of Appreciation”, Oxford Journal of Legal Studies , 26(4): 705–732. doi:10.1093/ojls/gql030
–––, 2014, “Review of Buchanan, The Heart of Human Rights ”, Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews , 2014.05.24. [ Letsas 2014 available online ]
–––, 2015a, “Dworkin on Human Rights”, Jurisprudence , 6(2): 327–340. doi:10.1080/20403313.2015.1044309
–––, 2015b, “Rescuing Proportionality”, in Cruft, Liao, and Renzo 2015 : 316–340 (ch. 17). doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199688623.003.0018
Liao, S. Matthew, 2015a, “Human Rights as Fundamental Conditions for a Good Life”, in Cruft, Liao, and Renzo 2015 : 79–100 (ch. 3). doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199688623.003.0004
–––, 2015b, The Right to Be Loved , New York: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190234836.001.0001
Liao, S. Matthew and Adam Etinson, 2012, “Political and Naturalistic Conceptions of Human Rights: A False Polemic?”, Journal of Moral Philosophy , 9(3): 327–352. doi:10.1163/17455243-00903008
Locke, John, 1689, “The Second Treatise of Government”, in Two Treatises of Government , London. New York: Prometheus Books, 1986.
Lockwood, Bert B. (ed.), 2006, Women’s Rights: A Human Rights Quarterly Reader , Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Luban, David, 2015, “Human Rights Pragmatism and Human Dignity”, in Cruft, Liao, and Renzo 2015 : 263–278 (ch. 14). doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199688623.003.0015
Macklin, Ruth, 2003, “Dignity is a Useless Concept,” BMJ 327(7429): 1419–1420.
Maliks, Reidar and Johan Karlsson Schaffer (eds), 2017, Moral and Political Conceptions of Human Rights: Implications for Theory and Practice , Cambridge, UK/New York: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/9781316650134
Maritain, Jacques, 1948, “Introduction” to Human Rights: Comments and Interpretations , Paris: UNESCO.
McCrudden, Christopher, 2008, “Human Dignity and Judicial Interpretation of Human Rights”, European Journal of International Law , 19(4): 655–724. doi:10.1093/ejil/chn043
––– (ed.), 2013, Understanding Human Dignity (Proceedings of the British Academy 192), Oxford: Published for the British Academy by Oxford University Press. doi:10.5871/bacad/9780197265642.001.0001
Meckled-Garcia, Saladin, 2013, “Giving Up the Goods: Rethinking the Human Right to Subsistence, Institutional Justice, and Imperfect Duties”, Journal of Applied Philosophy , 30(1): 73–87. doi:10.1111/japp.12005
–––, 2015, “Specifying Human Rights”, in Cruft, Liao, and Renzo 2015 : 300–315 (ch. 16). doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199688623.003.0017
Metz, Thaddeus, 2012, “African Conceptions of Human Dignity: Vitality and Community as the Ground of Human Rights”, Human Rights Review , 13(1): 19–37. doi:10.1007/s12142-011-0200-4
–––, 2010, “Human Dignity, Capital Punishment, and an African Moral Theory: Toward a New Philosophy of Human Rights”, Journal of Human Rights , 9(1): 81–99. doi:10.1080/14754830903530300
Meyer, Michael J., 1989, “Dignity, Rights, and Self-Control”, Ethics , 99(3): 520–534. doi:10.1086/293095
–––, 2001, “The Simple Dignity of Sentient Life: Speciesism and Human Dignity”, Journal of Social Philosophy , 32(2): 115–126. doi:10.1111/0047-2786.00083
Meyers, Diana T., 1985, Inalienable Rights: A Defense , New York: Columbia University Press.
––– (ed.), 2014, Poverty, Agency, and Human Rights , Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199975877.001.0001
–––, 2016, Victims’ Stories and the Advancement of Human Rights , New York: Oxford University Press.
Miller, David, 2012, “Grounding Human Rights”, Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy , 15(4): 407–427. doi:10.1080/13698230.2012.699396
Miller, Richard, 2010, Global Justice: The Ethics of Poverty and Power , Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.
Morsink, Johannes, 1999, The Universal Declaration of Human Rights: Origins, Drafting, and Intent (Pennsylvania Studies in Human Rights), Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.
–––, 2009, Inherent Human Rights: Philosophical Roots of the Universal Declaration (Pennsylvania Studies in Human Rights), Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Moyn, Samuel, 2010, The Last Utopia: Human Rights in History , Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
–––, 2018, Not Enough: Human Rights in an Unequal World , Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Mutua, Makau, 2002, Human Rights: A Political and Cultural Critique (Pennsylvania Studies in Human Rights), Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Nickel, James W., 2007, Making Sense of Human Rights , second edition, Malden, MA: Blackwell. Revised and extended version of the 1987 first edition, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
–––, 2008, “Rethinking Indivisibility: Towards A Theory of Supporting Relations between Human Rights”, Human Rights Quarterly , 30(4): 984–1001. doi:10.1353/hrq.0.0046
–––, 2013, “Goals and Rights--Working Together?”, in Malcolm Langford, Andy Sumner, andd Alicia Ely Yamin, eds., The Millenium Development Goals: Past, Present, and Future , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 37–48. doi:10.1017/CB09781139410892
–––, 2016, “Can a Right to Health Care Be Justified by Linkage Arguments?”, Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics , 37(4): 293–306. doi:10.1007/s11017-016-9369-5
–––, 2022a, “Linkage Arguments For and Against Rights”, Oxford Journal of Legal Studies , 42(1): 27–47. doi:10.1093/ojls/gqab020
–––, 2022b, “Moral Grounds for Economic and Social Rights”, in Langford and Young 2022 . doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780197550021.013.83
Nozick, Robert, 1974, Anarchy, State, and Utopia , New York: Basic Books.
Nussbaum, Martha C., 1997, “Capabilities and Human Rights”, Fordham Law Review , 66(2): 273–300.
–––, 2000, Women and Human Development: The Capabilities Approach (The John Robert Seeley Lectures), Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511841286
–––, 2006, Frontiers of Justice: Disability, Nationality, Species Membership (The Tanner Lectures on Human Values), Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press : Harvard University Press.
O’Neill, Onora, 1986, Faces of Hunger: An Essay on Poverty, Justice, and Development (Studies in Applied Philosophy), London/Boston: G. Allen & Unwin.
–––, 2005, “The Dark Side of Human Rights”, International Affairs , 81(2): 427–439. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2346.2005.00459.x
Okin, Susan Moller, 1998, “Feminism, Women’s Human Rights, and Cultural Differences”, Hypatia , 13(2): 32–52. doi:10.1111/j.1527-2001.1998.tb01224.x
Orend, Brian, 2002, Human Rights: Concept and Context , Peterborough, Ont./Orchard Park, NY: Broadview Press.
Pogge, Thomas, 2002, World Poverty and Human Rights: Cosmopolitan Responsibilities and Reforms , Cambridge: Polity Press.
Rathore, Aakash Singh and Alex Cistelecan (eds), 2012, Wronging Rights? Philosophical Challenges for Human Rights (Ethics, Human Rights and Global Political Thought), Abingdon/New Delhi: Routledge. doi:10.4324/9780203814031
Rawls, John, 1971, A Theory of Justice , Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
–––, 1999, The Law of Peoples: with, The Idea of Public Reason Revisited , Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Raz, Joseph, 2010, “Human Rights Without Foundations”, in The Philosophy of International Law , Samantha Besson and John Tasioulas (eds), Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press, 321–338 (ch. 15).
Reidy, David A., 2010, “Human Rights and Liberal Toleration”, Canadian Journal of Law & Jurisprudence , 23(2): 287–317. doi:10.1017/S084182090000494X
–––, 2012, “On the Human Right to Democracy: Searching for Sense without Stilts”, Journal of Social Philosophy , 43(2): 177–203. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9833.2012.01557.x
–––, 2013, “Cosmopolitanism and Human Rights”, in The Routledge Companion to Social and Political Philosophy , Gerald F. Gaus and Fred D’Agostino (eds), New York: Routledge, 494–504.
Reinbold, Jenna, 2017, Seeing the Myth in Human Rights (Pennsylvania Studies in Human Rights), Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Renteln, Alison Dundes, 1990, International Human Rights: Universalism versus Relativism (Frontiers of Anthropology 6), Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Renzo, Massimo, 2012, “Crimes Against Humanity and the Limits of International Criminal Law”, Law and Philosophy , 31(4): 443–476. doi:10.1007/s10982-012-9127-4
–––, 2015a, “Human Needs, Human Rights*”, in Cruft, Liao, and Renzo 2015 : 570–587 (ch. 32). doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199688623.003.0033
–––, 2015b, “Human Rights and the Priority of the Moral”, Social Philosophy and Policy , 32(1): 127–148. doi:10.1017/S0265052515000102
Richards, Charlie, 2023, “Feasibility and Social Rights”, Politics, Philosophy & Economics , 22(4): 470–494. doi:10.1177/1470594X231163280
Rosen, Michael, 2012, Dignity: Its History and Meaning , Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. doi:10.4159/harvard.9780674065512
–––, 2013, “Dignity: The Case Against”, in McCrudden 2013 : 143–154.
Rorty, Richard, 1993 [1998], “Human Rights, Rationality, and Sentimentality”, in On Human Rights: The Oxford Amnesty Lectures 1993 , Stephen Shute and Susan L. Hurley (eds), New York: Basic Books, 111–134. Collected in his Truth and Progress: Philosophical Papers, volume 3 , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 167–185.
Sangiovanni, Andrea, 2016, “Are Moral Rights Necessary for the Justification of International Legal Human Rights?”, Ethics & International Affairs , 30(4): 471–481. doi:10.1017/S0892679416000447
–––, 2017, Humanity without Dignity: Moral Equality, Respect, and Human Rights , Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Sen, Amartya, 1997, Human Rights and Asian Values (Sixteenth Morgenthau Memorial Lecture on Ethics & Foreign Policy), New York: Carnegie Council on Ethics and International Affairs. [ Sen 1997 available online ]
–––, 2004, “Elements of a Theory of Human Rights”, Philosophy & Public Affairs , 32(4): 315–356. doi:10.1111/j.1088-4963.2004.00017.x
–––, 2005, “Human Rights and Capabilities”, Journal of Human Development , 6(2): 151–166. doi:10.1080/14649880500120491
Shue, Henry, 1980, Basic Rights: Subsistence, Affluence, and U.S. Foreign Policy , Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press; second edition, 1996; 40th anniversary edition, 2020.
–––, 2022, “Interlocking Rights, Layered Protections: Varieties of Justifications for Social Rights”, in Brownlee, Jenkins, and Neal 2022 : 18–30 (ch. 1). doi:10.1093/oso/9780198871194.003.0002
Sim, May, 2013, “Confucian Values and Human Rights”, The Review of Metaphysics , 67(1): 3–27.
Simmons, Beth A., 2009, Mobilizing for Human Rights: International Law in Domestic Politics , Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press.
Song, Jiewuh, 2019, “Human Rights and Inequality”, Philosophy & Public Affairs , 47(4): 347–377. doi:10.1111/papa.12152
Sreenivasan, Gopal, 2005, “A Hybrid Theory of Claim-Rights”, Oxford Journal of Legal Studies , 25(2): 257–274. doi:10.1093/ojls/gqi013
Stemplowska, Zofia, 2009, “On the Real World Duties Imposed on Us by Human Rights”, Journal of Social Philosophy , 40(4): 466–487. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9833.2009.01466.x
–––, 2022, “Is Humanity under a Duty to Deliver Socioeconomic Human Rights?”, Journal of Applied Philosophy , 39(2): 202–211. doi:10.1111/japp.12521
Sumner, L. W., 1987, The Moral Foundation of Rights , Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Sumner, William Graham, 1906, Folkways: A Study of the Sociological Importance of Usages, Manners, Customs, Mores, and Morals , Boston: Ginn and Co.
Talbott, W. J., 2005, Which Rights Should Be Universal? , New York: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/oso/9780195331349.001.0001
–––, 2010, Human Rights and Human Well-Being (Oxford Political Philosophy), Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195173482.001.0001
Tasioulas, John, 2010, “Taking Rights out of Human Rights” (review of Griffin 2008 ), Ethics , 120(4): 647–678. doi:10.1086/653432
–––, 2012a, “On the Nature of Human Rights”, in Ernst and Heilinger 2012 : 17–60. doi:10.1515/9783110263886.17
–––, 2012b, “Towards a Philosophy of Human Rights”, Current Legal Problems , 65(1): 1–30. doi:10.1093/clp/cus013
–––, 2015, “On the Foundations of Human Rights”, in Cruft, Liao, and Renzo 2015 : 45–70 (ch. 1). doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199688623.003.0002
–––, 2019, “Saving Human Rights from Human Rights Law”, Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law , 52(5): 1167–1207 (article 5).
Taylor, Charles, 1999, “Conditions of an Unforced Consensus on Human Rights”, in Bauer and Bell 1999 : 124–146 (ch. 6).
Tesón, Fernando R., 1988 [2005], Humanitarian Intervention: An Inquiry into Law and Morality , Dobbs Ferry, NY: Transnational Publishers. 3rd edition, fully revised and updated, Ardsley, NY: Transnational Publishers, 2005.
Thomson, Judith Jarvis, 1990, The Realm of Rights , Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Tierney, Brian, 1997, The Idea of Natural Rights: Studies on Natural Rights, Natural Law, and Church Law, 1150–1625 (Emory University Studies in Law and Religion 5), Atlanta, GA: Scholars Press.
Tomalty, Jesse, 2014, “The Force of the Claimability Objection to the Human Right to Subsistence”, Canadian Journal of Philosophy , 44(1): 1–17. doi:10.1080/00455091.2014.900211
–––, 2016, “Justifying International Legal Human Rights”, Ethics & International Affairs , 30(4): 483–490. doi:10.1017/S0892679416000459
–––, 2020, “The Link between Subsistence and Human Rights”, in The Oxford Handbook of Global Justice , Thom Brooks (ed.), Oxford: Oxford University Press, 182–198. doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198714354.013.9
Tomasi, John, 2012, Free Market Fairness , Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Tuck, Richard, 1979, Natural Rights Theories: Their Origin and Development , Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9781139163569
Valentini, Laura, 2017, “Dignity and Human Rights: A Reconceptualisation”, Oxford Journal of Legal Studies , 37(4): 862–885. doi:10.1093/ojls/gqx011
Vanderheiden, Steve, 2008, Atmospheric Justice: A Political Theory of Climate Change , Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195334609.001.0001
Waldron, Jeremy (ed.), 1987, ‘Nonsense upon Stilts’: Bentham, Burke, and Marx on the Rights of Man (University Paperbacks), London/New York: Methuen.
–––, 2012, Dignity, Rank, and Rights , Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.
–––, 2015, “Is Dignity the Foundation of Human Rights?”, in Cruft, Liao, and Renzo 2015 : 117–137 (ch. 5). doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199688623.003.0006
–––, 2018, “Human Rights: A Critique of the Raz/Rawls Approach”, in Etinson 2018b : 117–138 (ch. 3). doi:10.1093/oso/9780198713258.003.0007
–––, 2020, “Rights and Human Rights”, in The Cambridge Companion to the Philosophy of Law , John Tasioulas (ed.), Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press, 152–170. doi:10.1017/9781316104439.009
Wellman, Carl, 1995, Real Rights , New York: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/oso/9780195095005.001.0001
–––, 1998, The Proliferation of Rights: Moral Progress or Empty Rhetoric? , Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
–––, 2010, The Moral Dimensions of Human Rights , Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199744787.001.0001
Wellman, Christopher Heath, 2012, “Debate: Taking Human Rights Seriously*”, Journal of Political Philosophy , 20(1): 119–130. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9760.2011.00407.x
Wenar, Leif, 2005, “The Nature of Rights”, Philosophy & Public Affairs , 33(3): 223–252. doi:10.1111/j.1088-4963.2005.00032.x
–––, 2013, “Rights and What We Owe to Each Other”, Journal of Moral Philosophy , 10(4): 375–399. doi:10.1163/174552412X628968
–––, 2015, Blood Oil: Tyrants, Violence, and the Rules That Run the World , New York: Oxford University Press.
Williams, Bernard, 1972 [1993], Morality: An Introduction to Ethics (Harper Torchbooks, TB 1632), New York: Harper & Row. New edtion, Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press, 1993. doi:10.1017/CBO9781107325869
Wolff, Jonathan, 2012, The Human Right to Health (Amnesty International Global Ethics Series), New York: W.W. Norton & Co.
Wolterstorff, Nicholas, 2008, Justice: Rights and Wrongs , Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), adopted 1950, came into force 3 September 1953. ECHR available online (PDF) ]
European Social Charter, came into force 26 February 1965 [ European Social Charter available online (pdf) ]
Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (CFR), adopted 7 December 2007, came into force 1 December 2009. [ Fundamental Rights available online ]
Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), proclaimed 10 December 1948. [ UDHR available online ]
International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, adopted 21 December 1965. [ available online ]
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), adopted 16 December 1966. ICCPR available online ]
International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), adopted 16 December 1966. [ ICESCR available online ]
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), adopted 1979. [ CEDAW available online ]
Convention on the Rights of the Child, adopted 20 November 1989. [ CRC available online ]
Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), adopted 13 December 2006, opened for signing 2007. [ CRPD available online ]
Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (DRIP), adopted 13 September 2007. [ DRIP available online ]
A/RES/76/300 The human right to a clean, healthy and substainable environment, adopted 28 July 2022. [ A/RES/76/300 available online (pdf) ]
Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, adopted 17 July 1998, came into force 1 July 2002. [ Rome Statute available online ]
Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action, adopted 25 June 1993, World Conference of Human Rights in Vienna. [ Vienna Declaration 1993 available online ]
United States Constitution
Declaration of Independence (United States), July 1776. US Declaration of Independence available online
American Convention on Human Rights (Pact of San José), adopted 22 November 1969, came into force 18 July 1978. [ American Convention on Human Rights available online ]
African (Banjul) Charter on Human and People’s Rights, adopted 27 June 1981, came into force 21 October 1986. [ African Charter available online (pdf) ]

How to cite this entry . Preview the PDF version of this entry at the Friends of the SEP Society . Look up topics and thinkers related to this entry at the Internet Philosophy Ontology Project (InPhO). Enhanced bibliography for this entry at PhilPapers , with links to its database.

The International (UN) Human Rights System , Georgetown Law Library Human Rights Law Research Guide
International Human Rights Law , United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights
Human Rights entry in the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy .

Acknowledgments

For the 2024 update, Adam Etinson has joined James Nickel in authoring and revising this entry.

Accessibility

Support SEP

Mirror sites.

View this site from another server:

Info about mirror sites

Library of Congress Catalog Data: ISSN 1095-5054

Search the United Nations

Member States

Main Bodies

Secretary-General
Secretariat
Emblem and Flag
ICJ Statute
Nobel Peace Prize
Peace and Security
Human Rights
Humanitarian Aid
Sustainable Development and Climate
International Law
Global Issues
Official Languages
Observances
Events and News
Get Involved
Israel-Gaza
Universal Declaration of Human Rights

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is a milestone document in the history of human rights. Drafted by representatives with different legal and cultural backgrounds from all regions of the world, the Declaration was proclaimed by the United Nations General Assembly in Paris on 10 December 1948 ( General Assembly resolution 217 A ) as a common standard of achievements for all peoples and all nations. It sets out, for the first time, fundamental human rights to be universally protected and it has been translated into over 500 languages . The UDHR is widely recognized as having inspired, and paved the way for, the adoption of more than seventy human rights treaties, applied today on a permanent basis at global and regional levels (all containing references to it in their preambles).

Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,

Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people,

Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law,

Whereas it is essential to promote the development of friendly relations between nations,

Whereas the peoples of the United Nations have in the Charter reaffirmed their faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and women and have determined to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,

Whereas Member States have pledged themselves to achieve, in co-operation with the United Nations, the promotion of universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms,

Whereas a common understanding of these rights and freedoms is of the greatest importance for the full realization of this pledge,

Now, therefore,

The General Assembly,

Proclaims this Universal Declaration of Human Rights as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society, keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance, both among the peoples of Member States themselves and among the peoples of territories under their jurisdiction.

All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.

Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.

No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.

No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.

All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.

Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law.

No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.

Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.

Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.
No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the penal offence was committed.

No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state.
Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.
Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution.
This right may not be invoked in the case of prosecutions genuinely arising from non-political crimes or from acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.
Everyone has the right to a nationality.
No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.
Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.
Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses.
The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.
Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others.
No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.

Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.
No one may be compelled to belong to an association.
Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representatives.
Everyone has the right of equal access to public service in his country.
The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures.

Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security and is entitled to realization, through national effort and international co-operation and in accordance with the organization and resources of each State, of the economic, social and cultural rights indispensable for his dignity and the free development of his personality.

Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.
Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.
Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.
Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.

Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay.

Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.
Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.
Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.
Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.
Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.
Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits.
Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author.

Everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration can be fully realized.

Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible.
In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.
These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.

Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)

Text of the Declaration
History of the Declaration
Drafters of the Declaration
The Foundation of International Human Rights Law
Human Rights Law

2023: UDHR turns 75

What is the Declaration of Human Rights? Narrated by Morgan Freeman.

UN digital ambassador Elyx animates the UDHR

cards with stick figure illustrating human rights

To mark the 75th anniversary of the UDHR in December 2023, the United Nations has partnered once again with French digital artist YAK (Yacine Ait Kaci) – whose illustrated character Elyx is the first digital ambassador of the United Nations – on an animated version of the 30 Articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

UDHR Illustrated

Cover of the illustrated version of the UDHR.

Read the Illustrated edition of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights

UDHR in 80+ languages

Watch and listen to people around the world reading articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in more than 80 languages.

Women Who Shaped the Declaration

Mrs. Eleanor Roosevelt, seated at right speaking with Mrs. Hansa Mehta who stands next to her.

Women delegates from various countries played a key role in getting women’s rights included in the Declaration. Hansa Mehta of India (standing above Eleanor Roosevelt) is widely credited with changing the phrase "All men are born free and equal" to "All human beings are born free and equal" in Article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

General Assembly
Security Council
Economic and Social Council
Trusteeship Council
International Court of Justice

Departments / Offices

UN System Directory
UN System Chart
Global Leadership
UN Information Centres

Resources / Services

Emergency information
Reporting Wrongdoing
Guidelines for gender-inclusive language
UN iLibrary
UN Chronicle
UN Yearbook
Publications for sale
Media Accreditation
NGO accreditation at ECOSOC
NGO accreditation at DGC
Visitors’ services
Procurement
Internships
Academic Impact
UN Archives
UN Audiovisual Library
How to donate to the UN system
Information on COVID-19 (Coronavirus)
Africa Renewal
Ten ways the UN makes a difference
High-level summits 2023

Key Documents

Convention on the Rights of the Child
Statute of the International Court of Justice
Annual Report of the Secretary-General on the Work of the Organization

News and Media

Press Releases
Spokesperson
Social Media
The Essential UN
Awake at Night podcast

Issues / Campaigns

Sustainable Development Goals
Our Common Agenda
Summit of the Future
Climate Action
UN and Sustainability
Action for Peacekeeping (A4P)
Global Ceasefire
Global Crisis Response Group
Call to Action for Human Rights
Disability Inclusion Strategy
Fight Racism
Hate Speech
LGBTIQ+ People
Safety of Journalists
Rule of Law
Action to Counter Terrorism
Victims of Terrorism
Children and Armed Conflict
Violence Against Children (SRSG)
Sexual Violence in Conflict
Refugees and Migrants
Action Agenda on Internal Displacement
Spotlight Initiative
Preventing Sexual Exploitation and Abuse
Prevention of Genocide and the Responsibility to Protect
The Rwanda Genocide
The Holocaust
The Question of Palestine
The Transatlantic Slave Trade
Decolonization
Messengers of Peace
Roadmap for Digital Cooperation
Digital Financing Task Force
Data Strategy
Countering Disinformation
UN75: 2020 and Beyond
Women Rise for All
Stop the Red Sea Catastrophe
Black Sea Grain Initiative Joint Coordination Centre
Türkiye-Syria Earthquake Response (Donate)
Israel-Gaza Crisis

Human Rights Essay for Students and Children

500+ words essay on human rights.

Human rights are a set of rights which every human is entitled to. Every human being is inherited with these rights no matter what caste, creed, gender, the economic status they belong to. Human rights are very important for making sure that all humans get treated equally. They are in fact essential for a good standard of living in the world.

Moreover, human rights safeguard the interests of the citizens of a country. You are liable to have human rights if you’re a human being. They will help in giving you a good life full of happiness and prosperity.

Human Rights Categories

Human rights are essentially divided into two categories of civil and political rights, and social rights. This classification is important because it clears the concept of human rights further. Plus, they also make humans realize their role in different spheres.

When we talk about civil and political rights , we refer to the classic rights of humans. These rights are responsible for limiting the government’s authority that may affect any individual’s independence. Furthermore, these rights allow humans to contribute to the involvement of the government. In addition to the determination of laws as well.

Next up, the social rights of people guide the government to encourage ways to plan various ways which will help in improving the life quality of citizens. All the governments of countries are responsible for ensuring the well-being of their citizens. Human rights help countries in doing so efficiently.

Get the huge list of more than 500 Essay Topics and Ideas

Importance of Human Rights

Human rights are extremely important for the overall development of a country and individuals on a personal level. If we take a look at the basic human rights, we see how there are right to life, the right to practice any religion, freedom of movement , freedom from movement and more. Each right plays a major role in the well-being of any human.

Right to life protects the lives of human beings. It ensures no one can kill you and thus safeguards your peace of mind. Subsequently, the freedom of thought and religion allows citizens to follow any religion they wish to. Moreover, it also means anyone can think freely.

Further, freedom of movement is helpful in people’s mobilization. It ensures no one is restricted from traveling and residing in any state of their choice. It allows you to grab opportunities wherever you wish to.

Next up, human rights also give you the right to a fair trial. Every human being has the right to move to the court where there will be impartial decision making . They can trust the court to give them justice when everything else fails.

Most importantly, humans are now free from any form of slavery. No other human being can indulge in slavery and make them their slaves. Further, humans are also free to speak and express their opinion.

In short, human rights are very essential for a happy living of human beings. However, these days they are violated endlessly and we need to come together to tackle this issue. The governments and citizens must take efforts to protect each other and progress for the better. In other words, this will ensure happiness and prosperity all over the world.

Customize your course in 30 seconds

Which class are you in.

Travelling Essay
Picnic Essay
Our Country Essay
My Parents Essay
Essay on Favourite Personality
Essay on Memorable Day of My Life
Essay on Knowledge is Power
Essay on Gurpurab
Essay on My Favourite Season
Essay on Types of Sports

Download the App

"Why Human Rights?": Reflection by Eleni Christou

This post is the first installment from UChicago Law's International Human Rights Law Clinic in a series titled — The Matter of Human Rights. In this 16-part series, law students examine, question and reflect on the historical, ideological, and normative roots of the human rights system, how the system has evolved, its present challenges and future possibilities. Eleni Christou is a third year in the Law School at the University of Chicago.

Why Human Rights?

By: Eleni Christou University of Chicago Law School Class of 2019

When the term “human rights” is used, it conjures up, for some, powerful images of the righteous fight for the inalienable rights that people have just by virtue of being human. It is Martin Luther King Jr. before the Washington monument as hundreds of thousands gather and look on; it is Nelson Mandela’s long walk to freedom; or a 16-year-old Malala telling her story, so others like her may be heard. But what is beyond these archetypes? Does the system work? Can we make it work better? Is it even the right system for our times? In other words, why human rights?

Human rights are rights that every person has from the moment they are born to the moment they die. They are things that everyone is entitled to, such as life, liberty, freedom of expression, and the right to education, just by virtue of being human. People can never lose these rights on the basis of age, sex, nationality, race, or disability. Human rights offer us a principled framework, rooted in normative values meant for all nations and legal orders. In a world order in which states/governments set the rules, the human rights regime is the counterweight, one concerned with and focused on the individual. In other words, we need human rights because it provides us a way of evaluating and challenging national laws and practices as to the treatment of individuals.

The foundational human right text for our modern-day system is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights . Adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in December, 1948, this document lays out 30 articles which define the rights each human is entitled to. These rights are designed to protect core human values and prohibit institutions and practices that are contrary to the enjoyment of the rights. Rights often complement each other, and at times, can be combined to form new rights. For example, humans have a right to liberty, and also a right to be free from slavery, two rights which complement and reinforce each other. Other times, rights can be in tension, like when a person’s right to freedom of expression infringes upon another’s right to freedom from discrimination.

In this post, I’ll provide an example of how the human rights system has been used to do important work. The international communities’ work to develop the law and organize around human rights principles to challenge and sanction the apartheid regime in South Africa provides a valuable illustration of how the human rights system can be used successfully to alleviate state human rights violations that previously would have been written off as a domestic matter.

From 1948 to 1994, South Africa had a system of racial segregation called ‘ apartheid ,’ literally meaning ‘separateness.’ The minority white population was committing blatant human rights violations to maintain their control over the majority black population, and smaller multiethnic and South Asian communities. This system of apartheid was codified in laws at every level of the country, restricting where non-whites could live, work, and simply be. Non-whites were stripped of voting rights , evicted from their homes and forced into segregated neighborhoods, and not allowed to travel out of these neighborhoods without passes . Interracial marriage was forbidden, and transport and civil facilities were all segregated, leading to extremely inferior services for the majority of South Africans. The horrific conditions imposed on non-whites led to internal resistance movements , which the white ruling class responded to with extreme violence , leaving thousands dead or imprisoned by the government.

While certain global leaders expressed concern about the Apartheid regime in South Africa, at first, most (including the newly-formed UN) considered it a domestic affair. However, that view changed in 1960 following the Sharpeville Massacre , where 69 protesters of the travel pass requirement were murdered by South African police. In 1963, the United Nations Security Council passed Resolution 181 , which called for a voluntary arms embargo against South Africa, which was later made mandatory. The Security Council condemned South Africa’s apartheid regime and encouraged states not to “indirectly [provide] encouragement . . . [of] South Africa to perpetuate, by force, its policy of apartheid,” by participating in the embargo. During this time, many countries, including the United States, ended their arms trade with South Africa. Additionally, the UN urged an oil embargo, and eventually suspended South Africa from the General Assembly in 1974.

In 1973, the UN General Assembly passed the International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid , and it came into force in 1976. This convention made apartheid a crime against humanity. It expanded the prohibition of apartheid and similar policies outside of the South African context, and laid the groundwork for international actions to be taken against any state that engaged in these policies. This also served to further legitimize the international response to South Africa’s apartheid regime.

As the state-sanctioned violence in South Africa intensified, and the global community came to understand the human rights violation being carried out on a massive scale, countries worked domestically to place trade sanctions on South Africa, and many divestment movements gained popular support. International sports teams refused to play in South Africa and cut ties with their sports federations, and many actors engaged in cultural boycotts. These domestic actions worked in tandem with the actions taken by the United Nations, mirroring the increasingly widespread ideology that human rights violations are a global issue that transcend national boundaries, but are an international concern of all peoples.

After years of domestic and international pressure, South African leadership released the resistance leader Nelson Mandela in 1990 and began negotiations for the dismantling of apartheid. In 1994, South Africa’s apartheid officially ended with the first general elections. With universal suffrage, Nelson Mandela was elected president.

In a speech to the UN General Assembly , newly elected Nelson Mandela recognized the role that the UN and individual countries played in the ending of apartheid, noting these interventions were a success story of the human rights system. The human rights values embodied in the UDHR, the ICSPCA, and numerous UN Security Council resolutions, provided an external normative and legal framework by which the global community could identify unlawful state action and hold South Africa accountable for its system of apartheid. The international pressure applied via the human rights system has been considered a major contributing factor to the end of apartheid. While the country has not fully recovered from the trauma that decades of the apartheid regime had left on its people, the end of the apartheid formal legal system has allowed the country to begin to heal and move towards a government that works for all people, one that has openly embraced international human rights law and principles in its constitutional and legislative framework.

This is what a human rights system can do. When state governments and legal orders fail to protect people within their control, the international system can challenge the national order and demand it uphold a basic standard of good governance. Since the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the human rights system has grown, tackled new challenges, developed institutions for review and enforcement, and built a significant body of law. Numerous tools have been established to help states, groups, and individuals defend and protect human rights.

So why human rights? Because the human rights system has been a powerful force for good in this world, often the only recourse for marginalized and minority populations. We, as the global community, should work to identify shortcomings in the system, and work together to improve and fix them. We should not — as the US has been doing under the current administration — selectively withdraw, defund, and disparage one of the only tools available to the world’s most vulnerable peoples. The human rights system is an arena, a language, and a source of power to many around the world fighting for a worthwhile future built on our shared human values.

Pozen center 2022-23 director's report, interracial marriage under attack: thinking the unthinkable, read: "the politics of torture" by kathleen cavanaugh, read "democracies and international law" by tom ginsburg, read "agents of change: political philosophy in practice" by ben laurence.

Join our mailing list to receive a weekly digest of Pozen-related news, opportunities, and events.

Human Rights Essay: 10 Reasons why human rights are important

Human rights are important in a number of ways. First and foremost, they protect the basic dignity of each and every human being. Everyone has the right to life, liberty, and security of person, as well as freedom from torture, slavery, and arbitrary arrest or detention. These rights are essential in order for people to live with dignity and respect.

Thirdly, human rights promote economic development. When people have the same opportunities and access to education, health care, and other resources, they are more likely to participate in the economy and contribute to society.

Finally, human rights are important because they are universal. Everyone deserves to be treated with dignity and respect, no matter where they live or what their circumstances may be. By fighting for human rights, we can make the world a better place for everyone.

1. Keeps population density under control

2. reduces war.

When individuals are having their basic human rights denied or violated, it is natural to want to fight back. In fact, it is almost impossible to not do so. Human rights violations almost always benefit one group of people at the expense of another. Most human beings are only capable of tolerating the violation of their personhood up to a point before needing to fight back. This often results in war, which eventually brings about intense poverty, which in turn again places a strain on the resources of more democratic nations. When we address the underlying issue – human rights violations – before they erupt into outright conflict or civil war, we vastly reduce the amount of resources cleaning up the aftermath entails.

3. Reduces poverty

4. what you are not against, you are for, 5. what we stand against in other nations affects policy in our own.

When we don’t care about policies or practices affecting women, the poor or the LGBTQ community in other nations, we are communicating that we don’t care about the importance of human rights in our own. When we demonstrate we don’t care about the importance of human rights in our own countries, we essentially set our own law and policy makers free to discriminate against these individuals. This will eventually will lead to human rights violations in our own countries, which will eventually have a direct impact on our own human rights.

6. You are a human and your rights matter

7. what we stand for or against sends a message to our own children and young people, 8. protecting the human rights of others has a direct impact on members of our military.

In times of war, opposing militaries both occupy the same space and regularly capture members of the opposing military. How one countries’ soldiers are treated is often largely dependent by how their own military members are treated by the other country. When we fail to recognize the importance of human rights for even members of an opposing military, we open the door for them to violate the human rights of our own military members they capture. Honoring the human rights of military members our own country captures does not guarantee that our own military member’s rights will be honored, but it does go a long way towards ensuring that it does. In addition, it sends a message that the importance of human rights is such an important issue that it even applies to militaries in times of war – as it should.

9. Our stance on human rights affects our relationships with even our allies

10. protecting human rights affects our individual relationships with our own neighbors.

CBSE Class 10th
CBSE Class 12th
UP Board 10th
UP Board 12th
Bihar Board 10th
Bihar Board 12th

Top Schools

Top Schools in India
Top Schools in Delhi
Top Schools in Mumbai
Top Schools in Chennai
Top Schools in Hyderabad
Top Schools in Kolkata
Top Schools in Pune
Top Schools in Bangalore

Products & Resources

JEE Main Knockout April
Free Sample Papers
Free Ebooks
NCERT Notes
NCERT Syllabus
NCERT Books
RD Sharma Solutions
Navodaya Vidyalaya Admission 2024-25
NCERT Solutions
NCERT Solutions for Class 12
NCERT Solutions for Class 11
NCERT solutions for Class 10
NCERT solutions for Class 9
NCERT solutions for Class 8
NCERT Solutions for Class 7
JEE Main 2024
MHT CET 2024
JEE Advanced 2024
BITSAT 2024
View All Engineering Exams
Colleges Accepting B.Tech Applications
Top Engineering Colleges in India
Engineering Colleges in India
Engineering Colleges in Tamil Nadu
Engineering Colleges Accepting JEE Main
Top IITs in India
Top NITs in India
Top IIITs in India
JEE Main College Predictor
JEE Main Rank Predictor
MHT CET College Predictor
AP EAMCET College Predictor
GATE College Predictor
KCET College Predictor
JEE Advanced College Predictor
View All College Predictors
JEE Advanced Cutoff
JEE Main Cutoff
MHT CET Result 2024
JEE Advanced Result
Download E-Books and Sample Papers
Compare Colleges
B.Tech College Applications
AP EAMCET Result 2024
MAH MBA CET Exam
View All Management Exams

Colleges & Courses

MBA College Admissions
MBA Colleges in India
Top IIMs Colleges in India
Top Online MBA Colleges in India
MBA Colleges Accepting XAT Score
BBA Colleges in India
XAT College Predictor 2024
SNAP College Predictor
NMAT College Predictor
MAT College Predictor 2024
CMAT College Predictor 2024
CAT Percentile Predictor 2024
CAT 2024 College Predictor
Top MBA Entrance Exams 2024
AP ICET Counselling 2024
GD Topics for MBA
CAT Exam Date 2024
Download Helpful Ebooks
List of Popular Branches
QnA - Get answers to your doubts
IIM Fees Structure
AIIMS Nursing
Top Medical Colleges in India
Top Medical Colleges in India accepting NEET Score
Medical Colleges accepting NEET
List of Medical Colleges in India
List of AIIMS Colleges In India
Medical Colleges in Maharashtra
Medical Colleges in India Accepting NEET PG
NEET College Predictor
NEET PG College Predictor
NEET MDS College Predictor
NEET Rank Predictor
DNB PDCET College Predictor
NEET Result 2024
NEET Asnwer Key 2024
NEET Cut off
NEET Online Preparation
Download Helpful E-books
Colleges Accepting Admissions
Top Law Colleges in India
Law College Accepting CLAT Score
List of Law Colleges in India
Top Law Colleges in Delhi
Top NLUs Colleges in India
Top Law Colleges in Chandigarh
Top Law Collages in Lucknow

Predictors & E-Books

CLAT College Predictor
MHCET Law ( 5 Year L.L.B) College Predictor
AILET College Predictor
Sample Papers
Compare Law Collages
Careers360 Youtube Channel
CLAT Syllabus 2025
CLAT Previous Year Question Paper
NID DAT Exam
Pearl Academy Exam

Predictors & Articles

NIFT College Predictor
UCEED College Predictor
NID DAT College Predictor
NID DAT Syllabus 2025
NID DAT 2025
Design Colleges in India
Top NIFT Colleges in India
Fashion Design Colleges in India
Top Interior Design Colleges in India
Top Graphic Designing Colleges in India
Fashion Design Colleges in Delhi
Fashion Design Colleges in Mumbai
Top Interior Design Colleges in Bangalore
NIFT Result 2024
NIFT Fees Structure
NIFT Syllabus 2025
Free Design E-books
List of Branches
Careers360 Youtube channel
IPU CET BJMC
JMI Mass Communication Entrance Exam
IIMC Entrance Exam
Media & Journalism colleges in Delhi
Media & Journalism colleges in Bangalore
Media & Journalism colleges in Mumbai
List of Media & Journalism Colleges in India
CA Intermediate
CA Foundation
CS Executive
CS Professional
Difference between CA and CS
Difference between CA and CMA
CA Full form
CMA Full form
CS Full form
CA Salary In India

Top Courses & Careers

Bachelor of Commerce (B.Com)
Master of Commerce (M.Com)
Company Secretary
Cost Accountant
Charted Accountant
Credit Manager
Financial Advisor
Top Commerce Colleges in India
Top Government Commerce Colleges in India
Top Private Commerce Colleges in India
Top M.Com Colleges in Mumbai
Top B.Com Colleges in India
IT Colleges in Tamil Nadu
IT Colleges in Uttar Pradesh
MCA Colleges in India
BCA Colleges in India

Diploma Colleges

Top Diploma Colleges in Maharashtra
UPSC IAS 2024
SSC CGL 2024
IBPS RRB 2024
Previous Year Sample Papers
Free Competition E-books
Sarkari Result
QnA- Get your doubts answered
UPSC Previous Year Sample Papers
CTET Previous Year Sample Papers
SBI Clerk Previous Year Sample Papers
NDA Previous Year Sample Papers

Upcoming Events

NDA Application Form 2024
UPSC IAS Application Form 2024
CDS Application Form 2024
CTET Admit card 2024
HP TET Result 2023
SSC GD Constable Admit Card 2024
UPTET Notification 2024
SBI Clerk Result 2024

Other Exams

SSC CHSL 2024
UP PCS 2024
UGC NET 2024
RRB NTPC 2024
IBPS PO 2024
IBPS Clerk 2024
IBPS SO 2024
Top University in USA
Top University in Canada
Top University in Ireland
Top Universities in UK
Top Universities in Australia
Best MBA Colleges in Abroad
Business Management Studies Colleges

Top Countries

Study in USA
Study in UK
Study in Canada
Study in Australia
Study in Ireland
Study in Germany
Study in China
Study in Europe

Student Visas

Student Visa Canada
Student Visa UK
Student Visa USA
Student Visa Australia
Student Visa Germany
Student Visa New Zealand
Student Visa Ireland
CUET PG 2024
IGNOU B.Ed Admission 2024
DU Admission 2024
UP B.Ed JEE 2024
LPU NEST 2024
IIT JAM 2024
IGNOU Online Admission 2024
Universities in India
Top Universities in India 2024
Top Colleges in India
Top Universities in Uttar Pradesh 2024
Top Universities in Bihar
Top Universities in Madhya Pradesh 2024
Top Universities in Tamil Nadu 2024
Central Universities in India
CUET DU Cut off 2024
IGNOU Date Sheet
CUET DU CSAS Portal 2024
CUET Response Sheet 2024
CUET Result 2024
CUET Participating Universities 2024
CUET Previous Year Question Paper
CUET Syllabus 2024 for Science Students
E-Books and Sample Papers
CUET Exam Pattern 2024
CUET Exam Date 2024
CUET Cut Off 2024
CUET Exam Analysis 2024
IGNOU Exam Form 2024
CUET PG Counselling 2024
CUET Answer Key 2024

Engineering Preparation

Knockout JEE Main 2024
Test Series JEE Main 2024
JEE Main 2024 Rank Booster

Medical Preparation

Knockout NEET 2024
Test Series NEET 2024
Rank Booster NEET 2024

Online Courses

JEE Main One Month Course
NEET One Month Course
IBSAT Free Mock Tests
IIT JEE Foundation Course
Knockout BITSAT 2024
Career Guidance Tool

Top Streams

IT & Software Certification Courses
Engineering and Architecture Certification Courses
Programming And Development Certification Courses
Business and Management Certification Courses
Marketing Certification Courses
Health and Fitness Certification Courses
Design Certification Courses

Specializations

Digital Marketing Certification Courses
Cyber Security Certification Courses
Artificial Intelligence Certification Courses
Business Analytics Certification Courses
Data Science Certification Courses
Cloud Computing Certification Courses
Machine Learning Certification Courses
View All Certification Courses
UG Degree Courses
PG Degree Courses
Short Term Courses
Free Courses
Online Degrees and Diplomas
Compare Courses

Top Providers

Coursera Courses
Udemy Courses
Edx Courses
Swayam Courses
upGrad Courses
Simplilearn Courses
Great Learning Courses

Human Rights Essay - 100, 200, 500 Words

Essay on Human Rights -

Human rights are defined as the basic rights and freedoms that belong to every person in the world, from birth until death and they apply regardless of where you are from, what you believe or how you can choose to live your own life.

100 Word Essay on Human Rights

Human rights are the basic fundamental rights that we, as humans, are entitled to and mark everyone as free and equal, irrespective of their age, gender, caste, creed, religion and nationality. The United Nations adopted human rights in light of the atrocities people faced during the second world war. UDHR adoption led to recognising human rights as the foundation for freedom, justice and peace for every individual. Although it’s not legally binding, most nations have incorporated these human rights into their constitutions and domestic legal frameworks and guarantee that our most basic needs are to be protected.

200 Word Essay on Human Rights

500 word essay on human rights.

Human Rights Essay - 100, 200, 500 Words

The Basic Human Rights are given below-

Human Rights to Life

Human Right to Equal Treatment

Human Right to Privacy

Human Right to Marry

Human Right to Work

Human Right to Education

Human Right to Social Services

Human rights are considered a set of rights which is given to every human being regardless of gender, caste, creed, religion, nation, location or economic status. These rights are said to be moral principles that illustrate certain standards of human behaviour. Protected by law, human rights are applicable everywhere and at any time. Basic human rights mostly include the right to life, right to a fair trial, right to remedy by a competent tribunal, right to liberty and personal security, right to own their property, right to education, right to peaceful assembly and association, right to marriage, right to nationality and freedom to change it, freedom of speech, freedom from discrimination, freedom from slavery, freedom of their thought, conscience and their religion, freedom of movement, right of opinion and information, right to adequate living standard and freedom from interference with privacy, family, home and correspondence and so on.

While these human rights are protected by law, many of these are still violated by people for different reasons and some of these rights are even violated by the state. The United Nations committees (UNC) have been formed in order to ensure that every individual enjoys these basic rights. Governments of different countries and many non-government organizations have also been formed to monitor and protect these human rights.

Every person has their own dignity and value and we can recognise the fundamental worth of every person by acknowledging them and most importantly respecting their human rights. Human rights are a set of rules or principles that are concerned with equality and fairness and they can recognise our freedom to make choices about our lives and develop our potential as human beings. Human rights are about living a life free from fear, harassment and discrimination.

Human rights always connect us all through a shared set of rights and responsibilities. People’s ability to enjoy their human rights depends on other people respecting those rights, this means that human rights involve responsibility and duties towards other people and the community worldwide. Individuals have a responsibility to ensure that they can exercise their rights with consideration for the rights of others.

Governments must have a particular responsibility to ensure that people can enjoy their rights and they must establish and maintain laws and services that enable people to enjoy a life in which their rights are respected and protected with respect.

Human rights are a vital part of how people interact with others at all levels of society like in the family, the community, school, workplace, politics and international relations, etc. Hence, it is important that people everywhere strive to understand what human rights are and when people better understand human rights, it is easier for them to promote justice and the well-being of society.

Need For Human Rights

Human rights are a set of principles and values that are considered essential for the dignity and worth of every individual, regardless of race, gender, nationality, ethnicity, religion, or any other status. The need for human rights stems from the recognition that all human beings are entitled to certain fundamental freedoms and protections that are necessary for their well-being, autonomy, and happiness.

Some of the reasons why we need human rights include:

Protection against discrimination and inequality: Human rights ensure that everyone is treated equally and protected against discrimination, regardless of their background.

Ensuring personal freedom and autonomy: Human rights guarantee individuals the right to life, liberty, and security, allowing them to make decisions about their own lives and pursue their own goals and aspirations.

Providing basic needs and necessities: Human rights also ensure that individuals have access to basic needs such as food, shelter, health care, and education.

Promoting human dignity: Human rights uphold the dignity and worth of each person, recognizing that every individual has inherent value and deserves to be treated with respect.

Ensuring accountability and justice: Human rights provide a framework for holding governments and other actors accountable for their actions, and for ensuring that justice is served in cases of human rights violations.

Overall, human rights are an important component of a fair and just society, and are essential for ensuring that every person is able to live with dignity, security, and freedom. Human rights are essential for ensuring dignity, equality, and freedom for all individuals. They protect against discrimination, ensure basic needs and necessities, promote personal autonomy, and provide accountability and justice in cases of violations.

Applications for Admissions are open.

Aakash iACST Scholarship Test 2024

Get up to 90% scholarship on NEET, JEE & Foundation courses

JEE Main Important Physics formulas

As per latest 2024 syllabus. Physics formulas, equations, & laws of class 11 & 12th chapters

JEE Main Important Chemistry formulas

As per latest 2024 syllabus. Chemistry formulas, equations, & laws of class 11 & 12th chapters

TOEFL ® Registrations 2024

Accepted by more than 11,000 universities in over 150 countries worldwide

PTE Exam 2024 Registrations

JEE Main high scoring chapters and topics

As per latest 2024 syllabus. Study 40% syllabus and score upto 100% marks in JEE

Download Careers360 App's

Regular exam updates, QnA, Predictors, College Applications & E-books now on your Mobile

Certifications

We Appeared in

5 Human Rights Topics For Your Human Rights Essay

When you’re writing a paper on human rights, you want to pick a topic that’s relevant and compelling. It seems like our world is heading in a downwards spiral, but writing about the issues provokes action, which in turn results in change. Here are five topics that have been getting attention (or aren’t getting enough attention) in recent years. These are all important; choosing one just comes down to what speaks to you most powerfully:

Police brutality in the United States

Violence by American police is a major issue in the human rights arena these days and data indicates it’s getting worse. According to Killed By Police, a website that tracks police killings, 2018 has witnessed more deaths than in the last five years over the same period of time. It most likely won’t get better, as the DOJ recently ended a program that helped keep corrupt police departments in check. Black Americans are most vulnerable; in 2012, they made up 31% of police-killing victims, while only comprising 13% of the total US population.

Questions an essay could answer: Why are African-Americans and other minorities at a higher risk of police violence than white people? What has been done to undermine efforts to change the policing system? What could reduce killings by law enforcement?

Global mental health treatment

We hear a lot about how the mental health system in America is broken, but on a global scale, it’s just as much of a problem. Close to 800 000 people die due to suicide every year, which is one person every 40 seconds. Not much has been done to treat this issue, though according to a World Bank study, poor mental health has a drastic effect on one’s quality of life. Most governments have very small budgets for mental health treatment. In a WHO study, around 47 countries (out of 191) do not have any kind of national legislation or policies on mental health.

Questions an essay could answer: What is the current state of mental health treatment around the world? What specific treatments exist? What effect does poor mental health have on a nation’s economy, culture, etc? Why hasn’t the United Nations taken more aggressive action?

US policy on refugees

Since President Trump took office and instituted increasingly harsh limits and action on refugees and immigration, the US has entered a dark time. Just nine months after entering office, he capped the refugee admissions number to 45,000. Other programmes have been completely eliminated, such as the Central Americans Minors programme, which let children from El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras join their parents who are legally in the US. Those seeking asylum have also been met with significant opposition. The biggest story, of course, is how children are being separated and interned apart from their parents. These are just a few topics that a paper about the US refugee policy could cover.

Questions an essay could answer : How has the current US refugee policy affected other countries’ opinion on America? How is this policy different than America’s stance in the past? What are the potential consequences of letting so few refugees into the country, for them and for the United States?

Transgender rights in Europe

In recent years, transgender rights have been challenged in the political arena with legislation such as the Bathroom Laws and weakened legal protection against work discrimination. What’s happening in Europe? In many countries like Belgium and Switzerland, transgender individuals were until very recently legally required to undergo sterilization and surgery before obtaining new identification papers. What provoked this change?

Questions an essay could answer: What is the history of trans rights in Europe? What countries have made the most positive moves in accepting transgender individuals? What can the United States do to follow progressive European countries into a new era?

Disability rights in America

Though somewhat ignored by the media, disability rights are under attack in America. Various pieces of legislature include deep cuts to Medicaid and removals of protections for disabled workers and students. One of the biggest blows is the Medicaid work requirement, which is currently allowed in three states. In order to receive assistance, people must meet a certain number of hours, but those with disabilities or illnesses won’t be able to. In response, Americans with disabilities are rising up in protest.

Questions an essay could answer: How are disability advocates fighting for their cause? What is the Trump administration’s response to activists? What can be done to protect those with disabilities?

Apply Now for the United Nations The Hague Immersion Programme

The UN Immersion Programme Is Open for Applications!

The UN Young Leaders Online Training Programme is Open for Applications!

Apply now: Essex Human Rights Summer School (Fully Online)

17 International Organizations Offering Early-Career Opportunities

Gender Rights Jobs: Our Short Guide

Free MOOC on Children’s Right to Education in Armed Conflict

9 Online Courses on Leading Diverse Teams

40 Top-Rated Social Issues Courses to Study in 2024

10 Courses to Prepare for Your Human Rights Job

Register now: Global Institute of Human Rights Certificate Program

NGO Jobs: Our Short Guide

About the author, human rights careers.

Human Rights Careers (HRC) provides information about online courses, jobs, paid internships, masters degrees, scholarships and other opportunities in the human rights sector and related areas.

EWTN News, Inc. is the world’s largest Catholic news organization, comprised of television, radio, print and digital media outlets, dedicated to reporting the truth in light of the Gospel and the Catholic Church.

National Catholic Register
News Agencies
Catholic News Agency
CNA Deutsch
ACI Afrique
ACI Digital
Digital Media
ChurchPOP Español
ChurchPOP Italiano
ChurchPOP Português
EWTN News Indepth
EWTN News Nightly
EWTN Noticias
EWTN Pro-life Weekly
Register Radio

Get HALF OFF the Register!

National Catholic Register News https://www.ncregister.com/commentaries/jacques-maritain-s-essay-points-a-path-to-true-freedom

Synod on Synodality
Most Popular
Publisher’s Note
College Guide
Commentaries
Culture of Life
Arts & Entertainment
Publisher's Note
Letters to the Editor
Support the Register
Print subscriptions
E-Newsletter Sign-up
EWTN Religious Catalogue

Jacques Maritain’s Essay Points a Path to True Freedom

COMMENTARY: As someone who was influential in drafting the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights, how does the Catholic convert deal with ensuring certain inalienable rights, including liberty?

The scholarly works of Jacques Maritain, a prominent mid-20th-century Catholic philosopher, are beyond the comprehension of most casual readers. Fortunately, his essays on education are quite approachable.

Written after World War II, the essays in The Education of Man offer insight into the strong and ever-relevant quest for freedom.

For Maritain, freedom starts with the individual person. Unlike others who perceive human behavior as determined either by circumstances or exclusively by rational self-interest, he believed in free will. He does not ignore the vast and complex dynamism of instincts, tendencies, psycho-physical dispositions, acquired habits and hereditary traits.

Nevertheless, he proposed that a person can emerge from these circumstances such that a degree of choice is exercised. As such, a person can learn to give or withhold the inclinations and urges of his or her nature.

When speaking of human beings, Maritain does not refer to individuals, like blades of grass or flies, but rather as those who have a supernatural existence capable of knowledge and love. In other words, a person, made in the image of God, is a microcosm of the universe. Such a person cannot transcend external and internal constraints but retains a degree of spontaneity free of the compulsion imposed by an exterior agent. We become agents of our own personalities.

To simplify, Maritain characterizes a person as a bundle of animal spirits and self-regarding interests, along with a longing for freedom and the Divine. He admits that human personality is a great mystery, but one that develops through judgment and behavior. Success in achieving personal aspirations, however, is a constant struggle, because we cannot escape from being united substantially with matter and human limitations.

Certain aspirations are part of human nature and others to the supernatural. Human persons, Maritain maintains, aspire to escape from the dependency in which they are born in order to survive and thrive materially and socially. However, in aspiring to transcend human vulnerability, they can become trapped in a false quest for freedom which is illusory and homicidal.

Consider two ways in which the concept of freedom is perverted. In denying free will, some suggest that everyone should be “free” to do that which is determined by nature and circumstances. Also, certain atheists and those who deny the existence of a personal God propose that everyone be “free” to reject measures of goodness received from anyone other than themselves.

On the contrary, according to Maritain, human beings are born with an innate quest for genuine freedom that must be earned:

“…he becomes free, by warring upon himself and thanks to many sorrows; by the struggle of the spirit and virtue; by exercising his freedom he wins his freedom. So that at long last a freedom better than he expected is given him.”

The type of freedom, about which Maritain writes, is gained through the development of personality. As one conquers depersonalizing behaviors such as harmful addictions, he or she becomes freer in making judgments consistent with his or her higher aspirations.

Maritain does not limit the quest for autonomy to the personal. As someone who was influential in drafting the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights, how does he deal with ensuring certain inalienable rights, including liberty?

He saw the role of the state and the development of democracies as inseparable from the human impulse for freedom but proceeding as well from biblical inspiration. He believed that democratic aspirations were formed in peoples’ hearts through history and realized often at the price of heroic sacrifice. Maritain warns, however, that democratic freedom and human rights can be easily corrupted and deformed by a false philosophy of life.

What characterizes this false philosophy of life? Essentially, it perceives the person as somewhat divine, either as an individual, a government leader or a “bourgeois liberal” (a technical or business expert).

According to Maritain, this false philosophy proposes a practical atheism in which God is no longer God “except perhaps in a decorative way and for private use.” What is lost is a theoretical and practical understanding of the common good followed by the belief that any external authority is incompatible with freedom.

Attempts to divinize the personal, social and political realms, Maritain argues, paves the path to totalitarianism. In totalitarian regimes, people are reduced to an anonymous mass led by “a sort of inhuman monster whose omnipotence is based upon myths and lies.” In the normal way of arriving at freedom, however, people:

… must gradually win a freedom which consists, in the political and social order, above all in becoming, under given historical conditions, as independent as possible of the restrictions of material nature.

In this statement, Maritain suggests that progress is possible in the material, social and political realms and that such advances increase freedom. Government failure exists when officials cease striving for the common good.

In these essays, it is not clear if Maritain identifies the common good exclusively in terms of indivisible public goods, a pluralistic consensus, or some higher purpose. However, it is difficult to accept Maritain’s implication that the market economy, or what he refers to as “bourgeois liberalism,” provides only private goods. Surely, improvements in overall standards of living and increased trust, developed either by corporations or in the worker co-ops favored by Maritain, increase freedom from the restrictions of human nature.

Nevertheless, Maritain does emphasize the importance of all organic communities, regardless of structure, beginning with the family. He maintains that the soul of social life abounds from the life of individual persons and their gratuitous generosity. However, this fraternity is not a privilege of human nature. It comes at the end of a slow and difficult conquest.

Maritain offers an eloquent statement on the quest for liberty, and he clearly outlines the costs of freedom in no uncertain terms. From Maritain, we learn that personal freedom is unattainable unless we overcome harmful behaviors and accept the truth about ourselves and others.

He also suggests that the right to freely associate breaks down with unnecessary restrictions on private organizations responding to ever-changing human desires and needs. Finally, the pursuit of freedom requires that the state not be permitted to support special interests that crowd out common interests and religious aspirations.

Maryann O. Keating holds a Ph.D. in economics from the University of Notre Dame and is a member of the Indiana Policy Review Foundation. She frequently co-authors with her husband, Barry P. Keating, with whom she shares three adult children.

jacques maritain
constitutional freedoms
Related Stories
Latest News

Depiction of St. Joan of Arc standing in a field clutching a sword to chest.

To Judge or Not to Judge?

COMMENTARY: The day will come when God will judge each one of us. But who we are in the eyes of God is not someone that any one of us can know.

The lunette of one of the side doors depicting St. Thomas Aquinas, detail of the facade of the Church of Santa Maria Novella in Florence, Italy.

Is Thomas Aquinas’ Philosophy for Everyone?

COMMENTARY: ‘How is it that the billions of stars live in such harmony,’ Aquinas asked, ‘when most men can barely go a minute without declaring war in their minds?’

Assisted suicide in the United States: Red indicates states in which the practice is illegal. Green, states in which it is legal. Yellow, states in which there is pending legislation or court cases surrounding the issue. Blue, states in which the practice has been decriminalized. Purple, states in which the law differs between different jurisdictions within the state.

Culture-of-Death Word Games

COMMENTARY: The secular vision of humanity is defective because it sees only fragments and not the whole.

Spanish Ombudsman Ángel Gabilondo “warned” that in Madrid abortions are not performed in public hospitals, a situation that “should be subject to analysis.”

Spain Ombudsman ‘Concerned’ That Most Doctors Refuse to Perform Abortions

In Spain, abortion has been considered a non-fundamental right since 2010 and is included in the list of public medical services.

Father Emil Kapaun, painted by artist Sharon Clossick for Father Marcel Taillon. Father Kapaun, pray for us!

Sacred Art in the Service of God: How a Portrait of Father Emil Kapaun Is Stirring Vocations for the Military

‘Art, when it is rooted in truth and beauty, can lift people to God,’ Father Marcel Taillon said.

Jheanpiere Contreras, Genesis Contreras, and Daniel Soto, who two days ago arrived from Venezuela after crossing the U.S. border from Mexico, wait in line for dinner at a hotel provided by the Annunciation House on September 22, 2022 in El Paso, Texas.

Judge Throws Out Texas Lawsuit Against Nonprofit Accused of Facilitating Illegal Immigration

In an order issued on Monday, El Paso District Court Judge Francisco Dominguez dismissed the suit, partially because he said it violates the Texas Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

The Cinderella Story of St. Crescentia Hoess

Crescentia spent most of her life as the lowliest in her social circle, yet she endured every hardship with love and grace

French president Emmanuel Macron during the public ceremony of sealing the Constitutional Law on Voluntary Abortion of Pregnancy.

How Dobbs Accelerated Europe’s Abortion Culture

ANALYSIS: The end of Roe v. Wade seems to have galvanized abortion advocates in the Old Continent, where a series of controversial moves were applied on the political stage.

“Portrait of Martin Luther,” attributed to Frederick Kemmelmeyer, ca. 1800

Why Martin Luther Said He Was More Spiritual as a Catholic

‘I am much more careless than I was under the papacy.,’ said Luther after his apostasy

Italian Premier Giorgia Meloni receives Pope Francis as he arrives June 14 at the G7 Summit at Borgo Egnazia in Fasano, Italy.

5 Takes on What the Pope Said About AI

‘We need to ensure and safeguard a space for proper human control over the choices made by artificial intelligence,’ says the Pope. ‘Human dignity itself depends on it.’

400,000 Germans Quit Catholic Church as Talks Between Vatican, Synodal Way Continue

Why is catholic dating so hard panel to tackle topic in indianapolis, the rise of south carolina’s catholic population, 4th of july reflection: freedom’s fragile reality, arrested for reading the bible: armenian christian sentenced to 10 years in iranian prison, cardinals approve canonization of carlo acutis, date to be decided, on the subject of miracles, no tattoos or piercings: new rules for vatican employees, pope francis to canonize ‘martyrs of damascus,’ three others on oct. 20, subscription options.

Subscriber Service Center Already a subscriber? Renew or manage your subscription here .

Subscribe and Save HALF OFF! Start your Register subscription today.

Give a Gift Subscription Bless friends, family or clergy with a gift of the Register.

Order Bulk Subscriptions Get a discount on 6 or more copies sent to your parish, organization or school.

Sign-up for E-Newsletter Get Register Updates sent daily or weeklyto your inbox.

Human Rights Essay in english for Children and Students

Table of Contents

Human Rights Essay: Human Rights are basically the rights that every person has by virtue of being a human being. These are protected as legal rights ranging from municipal to international law. Human rights are universal. This is to say that these are applicable everywhere and at every time. Human rights are said to be a set of norms that portray certain standards of human behaviour. Protected as legal rights in municipal as well as international law, these rights are known to be incontrovertible fundamental rights that a person is entitled to just because he or she is a human being.

Fill Out the Form for Expert Academic Guidance!

Please indicate your interest Live Classes Books Test Series Self Learning

Verify OTP Code (required)

I agree to the terms and conditions and privacy policy .

Fill complete details

Target Exam ---

Long and Short Essay on Human Rights in English

Here are essays on Human Rights of varying lengths to help you with the topic in your exams/school assignments. You can choose any Human Rights essay as per your need and requirement:

Human Rights Essay 1 (200 words)

Human rights are a set of rights that are given to every human being regardless of his/her gender, caste, creed, religion, nation, location or economic status. These are said to be moral principles that illustrate certain standards of human behavior. Protected by law, these rights are applicable everywhere and at every time.

Basic human rights include the right to life, right to fair trial, right to remedy by competent tribunal, right to liberty and personal security, right to own property, right to education, right of peaceful assembly and association, right to marriage and family, right to nationality and freedom to change it, freedom of speech, freedom from discrimination, freedom from slavery, freedom of thought, conscience and religion, freedom of movement, right of opinion and information, right to adequate living standard and freedom from interference with privacy, family, home and correspondence.

While these rights are protected by law, many of these are still violated by people for different reasons. Some of these rights are even violated by the state. The United Nations committees have been formed in order to ensure that every individual enjoys these basic rights. Governments of different countries and many non-government organizations have also been formed to monitor and protect these rights.

Human Rights Essay 2 (300 words)

Human rights are norms that illustrate certain standards of human behaviour. These are fundamental rights to which every individual is inherently entitled just because he or she is a human being. These rights are protected by law. Here is a look at some of the basic human rights:

Right to Life

Every individual has the inherent right to live. Every human being has the right of not being killed by another person.

Right to Fair Trial

Every person has the right to fair trial by an impartial court. This includes the right to be heard within a reasonable time, right to public hearing and right to counsel.

Freedom of Thought, Conscience and Religion

Every person has the freedom of thought and conscience. He/she also has the freedom to choose his/her religion and is also free to change it at any time.

Freedom from Slavery

Slavery and slave trade is prohibited. However, these are still practised illegally in some parts of the world.

Freedom from Torture

Torture is prohibited under the international law. Every person has freedom from torture.

Other universal human rights include right to liberty and personal security, freedom of speech, right to remedy by competent tribunal, freedom from discrimination, right to nationality and freedom to change it, right to marriage and family, freedom of movement, right to own property, right to education, right of peaceful assembly and association, freedom from interference with privacy, family, home and correspondence, right to participate in government and in free elections, right of opinion and information, right to adequate living standard, right to social security and right to social order that articulates this document.

Though protected by law, many of these rights are violated by people and even by the state. However, many organizations have been formed to monitor the violation of human rights. These organizations take steps to protect these rights.

Human Rights Essay 3 (400 words)

Human rights are those rights that every person on this earth is entitled to merely on account of being a human being. These rights are universal and are protected by law. The idea of human rights and liberty has existed since centuries. However, it has evolved over the period of time. Here is a detailed look at the concept of human rights.

Universal Human Rights

Human rights include basic rights that are given to every human being regardless of his caste, creed, religion, gender or nationality. Here is a look at the universal human rights:

Right to Life, Liberty and Personal Security
Right to Equality
Right to Remedy by Competent Tribunal
Right to Recognition as a Person before law
Freedom from Discrimination
Freedom from Arbitrary Arrest and Exile
Right to be Considered Innocent until Proven Guilty
Right to Fair Public Hearing
Freedom of Movement
Freedom from Interference with Privacy, Family, Home and Correspondence
Right to Asylum in Other Countries from Persecution
Right to Nationality and Freedom to Change it
Right to Marriage and Family
Right to Education
Right to Own Property
Right of Peaceful Assembly and Association
Right to Participate in Government and in Free Elections
Freedom of Belief and Religion
Freedom of Opinion and Information
Right to Adequate Living Standard
Right to Participate in the Cultural Life of Community
Right to Social Security
Right to Desirable Work and to Join Trade Unions
Right to Rest and Leisure
Right to Social Order that Articulates this Document
Freedom from State or Personal Interference in the Above Rights

Violation of Human Rights

Though human rights are protected by various laws, these are still violated by people, groups and even by the state at times. For instance, freedom from torture is often violated by the state during interrogations. Similarly, freedom from slavery is said to be a basic human right. However, slavery and slave trade is still carried out illegally. Many institutions have been formed to monitor human right abuses. Governments and certain non-government organizations also keep a check on these.

Every individual deserves to enjoy the basic human rights. At times, some of these rights are denied or abused by the state. Government is taking measures to monitor these abuses with help from certain non-government organizations.

Human Rights Essay 4 (500 words)

Human rights are said to be universal rights that every person is entitled to regardless of his/her gender, caste, creed, religion, culture, social/ economic status or location. These are norms that depict certain standards of human behaviour and are protected by law.

Basic Human Rights

Human rights have been divided into two broad categories. These are the civil and political rights, and the social rights that also include the economic and cultural rights. Here is a detailed look at the basic human rights given to every individual:

Every human being on earth has the right to live. Each individual has the right of not being killed by anyone and this right is protected by the law. However, this right is subject to issues such as death penalty, self defence, abortion, euthanasia and war.

Freedom of Speech

Every human being has the right to speak freely and voice his opinions in public. However, this right comes with certain limitations such as obscenity, slur and crime provocation.

Every state gives its citizens the right to think freely and form conscientious beliefs. An individual also has the right to follow any religion of his choice and change it as per his free will at any point in time.

Under this right every individual has the right to fair trial by impartial court, right to be heard within reasonable time, right to counsel, right to public hearing and right to interpretation.

As per the international law, every individual has the right to freedom from torture. This has been prohibited since the mid 20 th century.

This means that every individual has the right to travel, live, work or study in any part of the state he resides in.

As per this right, slavery and slave trades are prohibited in every form. However, unfortunately these ill practices still go on illegally.

While every human being is entitled to human rights, these rights are often violated. The violation of these rights occurs when actions by state ignore, deny or abuse these rights.

The United Nations committees are set up to keep a check on human rights abuses. Many national institutions, non-governmental organizations and governments also monitor these to ensure that individuals are not denied of their basic rights.

These organizations work towards spreading awareness about the human rights so that people are well informed about the rights they have. They also protest against inhumane practices. These protests have led to calls for action many a times and eventually improved the situation.

Human rights are the basic rights given to every individual. Known to be universal, these rights are guarded by the law. However, unfortunately many a times these are violated by states, individuals or groups. It is almost inhuman to deprive a person of these basic rights. This is the reason why many organizations have been established to guard these rights.

Human Rights Essay 5 (600 words)

Human rights are said to be incontrovertible rights that every person on earth is entitled to just because he/ she is a human being. These rights are inherent in every human being irrespective of his/her gender, culture, religion, nation, location, caste, creed or economic status. The idea of human rights has been there for much of the human history. However, the concept differed in the earlier times. Here is a detailed look at this concept.

Classification of Human Rights

Human rights have broadly been classified into two categorizes at the international level: civil and political rights, and social rights that include economic and cultural rights.

Civil and Political Rights

Also known as classic rights, these limit the government’s power in respect of actions impacting individual’s autonomy. It grants people the chance to contribute in the participation of government and determination of laws.

Social Rights

These rights direct the government to act in a positive and interventionist way in order to devise conditions required for human life and development. Government of each country is expected to ensure the well-being of all its citizens. Every individual has the right to social security.

Here is a look at the basic human rights for every individual:

Every human being has the right to life. This right is protected by law. Every person is entitled to the right of not being killed by another person. This right is, however, subject to the issues of self defence, capital punishment, abortion, war and euthanasia. As per human rights activists, death penalty violates the right to life.

Every individual has the freedom of thought and conscience. He/she can think freely and hold conscientious beliefs. A person also has the freedom to choose and change his religion at any point in time.

This means that a citizen of a state has the right to travel, reside, work or study in any part of that state. However, this should be within the respect for rights of others.

Torture is prohibited under the international law since the mid-20 th century. Even though torture is considered to be immoral, organizations that monitor violation of human rights report that states use this extensively for interrogation and punishment. Many individuals and groups also inflict torture on others for different reasons.

Every individual has the right to fair trial by a competent and impartial court. This right also includes the right to be heard within reasonable time, right to public hearing, right to counsel and right to interpretation. This right has been defined in various regional and international human rights instruments.

As per this right, no one shall be held in slavery. Slavery and slave trades are said to be prohibited in all forms. However, despite this slave trade still goes on in many parts of the world. Many social groups are working to curb the issue.

Every individual has the right to speak freely and express his opinion. This is sometimes also referred to as the freedom of expression. However, this right is not given in absolute in any country. It is usually subject to certain limitations such as obscenity, defamation and provocation for violence or crime, etc.

Human Rights, the basic rights given to individuals on the account of them being human beings, are almost the same everywhere. Every country grants these rights irrespective of an individual’s caste, creed, colour, gender, culture and economic or social status. However, at times these are violated by individuals, groups or the state itself. So, people need to stay on their guard against any violation of human rights.

Other Helpful Resources on Human Rights

Please select class

Understanding Cruel and Unusual Punishment in Modern Legal Context

This essay about the concept of cruel and unusual punishment explores its significance in justice and human rights. It highlights the Eighth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, emphasizing that punishments must be proportionate to the crime and avoid excessive harshness and suffering. The essay discusses the evolving interpretations of this principle in judicial decisions and societal norms, and the influence of international human rights standards in preventing inhumane state punishments. It underscores the commitment to justice, equity, and human dignity across different legal systems.

How it works

Cruel and unusual punishment declares, that a foundational concept deeply built to the ideal of justice and human rights within the limits of legal frames globally. Then marks punishments, what is considered superfluously strict or barbarian in relation to nature of crime. Constitutions and systems of justice through people often keep this principle to the individuals of guarantee from incommensurable or inhumane state approvals.

For example, Eighth Amendment of Constitution of the states united obviously hides taxation of cruel and unusual punishments.

But more wide social consent of mirrors of amendment, that punishments must avoid too late strictness, unnecessary suffering, and degradation of human dignity. Through some time, interpretations of what is appointed by cruel and unusual punishment evolved through judicial managements and social moving.

Critical aspect in determination of such punishment is a proportion idea, that punishments must answer the gravitation of offense without shock of social conscience. For example, applying capital punishment, because insignificant violations today probably would be such, what is considered cruel and unusual, excelling, what is justified by a sin.

In addition, developing standards to respectability within the limits of society influence on these determinations. Practices accept once, presumably, now examined how cruel and unusual from development of norms and value. Courts often give other translation of additions of punishment in the light of modern standards. Additionally, an attentive review reaches after terms under that punishments take place, by the way treatment within the limits of correctional resources. Practices like overfilled, inadequate access of curative business, whether prolonged solitary confinement, presumably, examined by cruel and unusual depending on a context.

International, human norms of rights for example those in Universal Declaration of Human and International Agreeing Rights to Civil and Political Laws universally forbid tortures and cruel, superhuman, whether worsening treatment. These structures underline a global consent to the guard of human dignity and limitation of excessive state punishments.

In a sum, while interpretations of cruel and unusual punishment, presumably, change among the systems of justice, principle supports universally, that o?wiadczy?-obci??one of punishment must not vainly harm, to get worse, whether to be incommensurable to offense. Then principle of underscores obligation is before a justice, equity, and by human rights through societies. As norms evolve and interpretations adjust, a concept guarantees, that a justice evens with the movement of standards of respectability and human dignity.

Cite this page

Understanding Cruel and Unusual Punishment in Modern Legal Context. (2024, Jun 28). Retrieved from https://papersowl.com/examples/understanding-cruel-and-unusual-punishment-in-modern-legal-context/

"Understanding Cruel and Unusual Punishment in Modern Legal Context." PapersOwl.com , 28 Jun 2024, https://papersowl.com/examples/understanding-cruel-and-unusual-punishment-in-modern-legal-context/

PapersOwl.com. (2024). Understanding Cruel and Unusual Punishment in Modern Legal Context . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/understanding-cruel-and-unusual-punishment-in-modern-legal-context/ [Accessed: 3 Jul. 2024]

"Understanding Cruel and Unusual Punishment in Modern Legal Context." PapersOwl.com, Jun 28, 2024. Accessed July 3, 2024. https://papersowl.com/examples/understanding-cruel-and-unusual-punishment-in-modern-legal-context/

"Understanding Cruel and Unusual Punishment in Modern Legal Context," PapersOwl.com , 28-Jun-2024. [Online]. Available: https://papersowl.com/examples/understanding-cruel-and-unusual-punishment-in-modern-legal-context/. [Accessed: 3-Jul-2024]

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Hire a writer to get a unique paper crafted to your needs.

Our writers will help you fix any mistakes and get an A+!

Please check your inbox.

You can order an original essay written according to your instructions.

Trusted by over 1 million students worldwide

1. Tell Us Your Requirements

2. Pick your perfect writer

3. Get Your Paper and Pay

Hi! I'm Amy, your personal assistant!

Don't know where to start? Give me your paper requirements and I connect you to an academic expert.

short deadlines

100% Plagiarism-Free

Certified writers

Cette page n'est pas disponible en Français

Shaping a rights-oriented digital transformation

Digital transformation
Human rights in the digital age

Cite this content as:

Digital transformation shapes how individuals interact with each other and the world, offering opportunities to enhance people’s enjoyment of human rights while also creating new risks and exacerbating existing ones. This report explores how human rights are exercised, protected and promoted in the digital age. By examining this topic from three perspectives – rights, technological developments, and policy developments – the paper supports policy makers in shaping digital transformation so that it puts people at the centre.

In the same series

Related publications

The UN Human Rights System Essay

To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
As a template for you assignment

The human right system as defined by the United Nation Human Rights System is a system whereby, the fundamental rights of humans are observed as well as character and worth of all the persons. Included in this system is the application of equal rights and system to all persons.

The United Nations have set a preamble on the rights that should be assigned to humans. The preamble preaches of application of human rights to all people with maximum fairness and campaigns against discrimination, whether on the age of the person or sexual orientation.

Many rights are discussed in the universal declaration of human rights proposal in regard to the rights of individuals in a given country. The thirty articles contained in this declaration all aim at ensuring that the people rights are observed at all means.

The rights speak of a general importance of the people having the equal rights to others and living together in the spirit of brotherhood. The purpose of human rights is to be able to protect human agency and to protect humans against abuse and oppression.

Negative freedom is fought against through the underlined rights. According to Ignatieff, the rights subsistence is also important as the right of agency, since both of them fight against torture (Gutman, 2001). Though the subsistence right is not, negative freedom is equally as bad because it causes cruelty and punishment to the people.

The importance of human right is to protect human agency, which is not always inclusive of the negative freedom only. However, just because human rights are enforced does not mean that the people will live a wonderful life. The sole purpose of these rights is to ensure that individuals do not face any kind of abuse and torture.

Proliferation of right is however discouraged, as setting out rights that are not necessarily needed to protect agency may weaken even the power of the enforcers. Achievement of the international human rights may be a problem due to proliferation of rights since it is hard to achieve an intercultural assent to rights. Human right also faces a problem of nationalism.

By nationalism it means the right of self- determining. The problem with nationalism is that if it has to be practiced, the majority have their way while minority have just their say. Some people will benefit while others lose.

Ultimately, nationalism means that some rights will be observed and others violated; this is however not what human rights stands for since it seeks to make sure that the right of all individuals are observed and equality is the main driving force (Gutman, 2001).

The United Nation has a dream of creating a global community, which observes human rights. Anthropology plays a great role in this by carrying out a research on the different culture, and also monitoring the observance of rights and when need arises in fighting against incidences of violation of rights. Anthropology is a big advocator of the human rights through collectively fighting of human rights and for individuals.

Anthropologists have also shown great commitment in the political area, involving themselves in activities that fight away oppression in the society. Anthropology seeks to put back human back to their rights. Anthropologist can be of great help on the understanding of human rights through showing conceptions of rights, and how they function in different cultures.

For example, in Latin America traditionally citizenship excluded the locals and were subject to rights violations. Through the years anthropologists have studied the international law and tried to reform it to such a way that they revive legal pluralism. It is through this time that legal anthropology rose up that aimed at ensuring the right of individuals internationally.

A culture of transnational culture has been created where some countries like Hawaii have followed the international human rights law. Anthropology therefore embraces the need to have law in the society that guides the people (Wilson 2006).

Having the law will ensure that equality among the individuals is observed and the people in the society will have knowledge of the same. Incidences of violation of the rights are therefore minimal.

In Adams book on the suffering of winds of Lhasa, universal rights people are well advocated as compared to individualist rights of people. Vincanne is keen to note that the Tibetan refugees would endure lesser pain if the rights of all the individuals were considered. The data collected in this book reveal that the international rights were not followed.

The way they were fighting against the denial of the rights took them so long to get the independence, and it is only when they sort the rights universally that their views were heard (Adams, 2002). Culture is brought out as barrier to the rights of individually in the society, the fact that their culture embraced torture made them take long in fighting for their rights.

Sometimes, incidences of violence and suffering are important in adding the dimension of experience to the language of rights. Suffering brings understanding to the people of the accepted human suffering right to the people. The same is expressed in the anthropology theory where we are deemed to imagine ourselves living the lives of other people and enjoy the treatment they enjoy.

Instances of having political violence and atrocity are some of the ways the human rights of people can be denied. According to Humphrey (2002), violence does not only to cause injury, but also destroy the human life. In such a setting where the political violence is in existence, the rights of people are usually not practiced and oppression is high.

After the end of the violence, the only way to ensure that such violation does not occur again is ensuring that there is closure among the affected parties. Achieving closure means that the victims’ rights are observed and those in the violation of the rights are subjected to the justice of the later or international justice (Humphrey, 2002). S

ometimes the rights of the victim are seen as an obstacle to political change. Such a notion should not exist since for justice to be there, it is necessary to have people’s rights being observed.

Observance of the rights laid down is not usually followed especially in scenarios involving politics. Internationally, there have been various incidences of violence and this time through violation and lack of awareness to the general public. Application of rights right down by the United Nation is not always followed.

The right against oppression, which is highlighted in their declaration of human rights is not followed in some countries; Argentina is one of the countries that has faced this problem. Military dictatorship around the1970s denied the people their rights by subjecting them to oppression, torture, and imprisonment.

Through this time, the constitution was not followed and rights against the people were denied. Pressure amounted from the international community that led to formation of human right groups that fought impunity. It is through the meetings between these groups that pushed the authority to stop oppression and embrace transition.

Truth and justice commission emerged at this point, and were campaigned for democracy (Bosco, 2004). Creation of democracy led the government to engage in attempts to set up ways of ensuring that the justice in the country is observed, as well as a frame work of ensuring human rights are followed.

To the local people, some individuals have gone to the extent of putting up memorial landscapes that are historical to the people, reminding them of the time their rights were being violated. Madres de Plaza de Mayo is one of the symbols used in Argentina, that acts as a reminder to the general public of having the rights of the public (Bosco, 2004).

The symbols are reminders of the visitors as well as the public of the past and how oppressive it was to them. Rituals have also been used as a symbol of fighting incidences of lack of issuing of rights. The fact that they are collective can offer a commemoration to all the people of importance of the past as well as the need to observe human rights.

Education to the local public of their rights has been promoted through various methods. Among them has been setting up Truth and Reconciliation bodies. In these bodies, the cause of the violence is determined as well as the reasons that led to the occurrence of the violence.

According to Humphrey (2002), it is not always that these bodies offer justice to the public, as in some instances, for example the incident is South Africa: So that the truth can be determined, the violators of these rights were given amnesty to unreveal the truth that would set closure to the general public. Humphrey highlights that the testimony has more importance than meeting the individuals’ physiological needs.

Giving these testimonies also involved transformation and creation of a culture of having human rights being observed. Humphreys is also keen to note that the international court can be used to offer justice to the individuals who have been involved in massive denial of rights (Humphrey, 2002).

Through this system, the public rights can be fought against as well as ensure that justice is practiced. Having trial is one of the steps that can be taken to ensure that the general population has recovered from the violence times. Morality is also instilled by this move. However, this is not always enough, working with the memory of the past is important in ensuring that the political reality is created in the country.

Human rights are important among individuals in any society. They enhance the spirit of living in harmony among the individuals in the society. There are many theories that explain the need to have practice of right. Among them is the anthropology theory that stresses on the need of collective fight for peoples’ rights (Wilson, 2006).

There is no need to just highlight the rights that people have without ever ensuring that the rights are given to the people. Justice is also an important element in offering the rights of the people; individuals involved in violence against other people, whether political or not, should be accountable for their actions.

There is also the need to have a truth and justice commission to bring healing to a country that has suffered great violence, and also trials to individuals involved. To a country involved in violence, there is need to set a reminder to the future generation where the country has come from, to ensure that it does not happen again. Setting out symbols can be one of the solutions that remind the locals of where they have come from.

List of References

Adams, V. (2002) Suffering the Winds of Lhasa: Politicized Bodies, Human Rights, Cultural difference, and Humanism in Tibet, in The Anthropology of Globalization . Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.

Bosco, F. J. (2004) Human rights Politics and scaled performances of memory: conflicts among the Madres De Plaza De Mayo in Argentina. Social & Cultural Geography.

Gutman, A. (2001) Introduction. In Michael Ignatieff Human Rights: As Politics and Idolatry . Princeton University Press: Princeton and Oxford.

Humphrey, M. (2002) The Politics of Atrocity and Reconciliation: From terror to trauma . London: Routledge.

Wilson, R. (2006) Afterward to “Anthropology and Human Rights in a New Key”: The Social Life of Rights . American Anthropologist.

Torture Is Not Morally Permissible
Use of Torture Against Terror Suspects
The Efficiency of Torture as an Interrogation Tool
The Origin of the Human Rights Concept
Privacy in the Digital Age
Gun politics in the United States
Demonstrations and Protests
What Are Human Rights?
Chicago (A-D)
Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2019, May 1). The UN Human Rights System. https://ivypanda.com/essays/human-rights-system-essay/

"The UN Human Rights System." IvyPanda , 1 May 2019, ivypanda.com/essays/human-rights-system-essay/.

IvyPanda . (2019) 'The UN Human Rights System'. 1 May.

IvyPanda . 2019. "The UN Human Rights System." May 1, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/human-rights-system-essay/.

1. IvyPanda . "The UN Human Rights System." May 1, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/human-rights-system-essay/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "The UN Human Rights System." May 1, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/human-rights-system-essay/.

IMAGES

Human Rights Essay
Essay On Human Rights
Human Rights Social Responsibility Essay Example
Human Rights Essay Plans
Universal declaration of human rights essay
Improving State Foundations for Human Rights Progress Free Essay Example

VIDEO

10 lines speech on human rights day ||speech on human rights day ||human rights day speech|Reena
Imagine a World Where Human Rights are a Reality for Everyone
10 lines essay on human rights day in English| Human rights day essay| Human rights| #humanrights
English Essay about Human Rights| Essay on Human Rights
मानव अधिकार पर निबंध
The World We Want

COMMENTS

PDF Human Rights: A Brief Introduction
the concept of human rights, this essay will examine the tensions between human rights and state sovereignty, the challenges to the universality of human rights, the enumeration of rights recognized by the international community, and the means available to translate the high aspirations of human rights into practice. II.
Essay on Human Rights: Samples in 500 and 1500
Here is a 200-word short sample essay on basic Human Rights. Human rights are a set of rights given to every human being regardless of their gender, caste, creed, religion, nation, location or economic status. These are said to be moral principles that illustrate certain standards of human behaviour.
Human rights
The conception of human rights as natural rights (as opposed to a classical natural order of obligation) was made possible by certain basic societal changes, which took place gradually beginning with the decline of European feudalism from about the 13th century and continuing through the Renaissance to the Peace of Westphalia (1648). During this period, resistance to religious intolerance and ...
240 Human Rights Essay Topics & Samples
240 Human Rights Essay Topics & Examples. Updated: Feb 29th, 2024. 26 min. Whether you're interested in exploring enduring issues, social justice, or democracy, see the ideas below. Along with human rights topics for essays and other papers, our experts have prepared writing tips for you. Table of Contents.
PDF Human Rights: A Brief Introduction
the concept of human rights, this essay will examine the tensions between human rights and state sovereignty, the challenges to the universality of human rights, the enumeration of rights recognized by the international community, and the means available to translate the high aspirations of human rights into practice. II.
What are human rights?
Equal and non-discriminatory. Article 1 of the UDHR states: "All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.". Freedom from discrimination, set out in Article 2, is what ensures this equality. Non-discrimination cuts across all international human rights law. This principle is present in all major human rights treaties.
Human Rights
In Human Rights: Essays on Justification and Application (1982), Gewirth argued that human rights are indispensable conditions of a life as an agent who survives and acts. Abstractly described, the conditions of such a life are basic freedom and well-being. A prudent rational agent who must have freedom and well-being will assert a ...
The global politics of human rights: From human rights to human dignity
Human dignity, in this essay, embraces all types of human rights claims, ranging from political rights to socio-economic rights, among many others. The essay proposes a three-pronged reform of international human rights: (1) a shift from Western human rights to the more inclusive and pluralist notion of human dignity; (2) the promotion of ...
Inspiring human rights essays everybody should know
King's letter is a reminder for all human rights professionals that the road to human rights practice is not easy and is not always black and white. As an essay addressing one of the most fundamental and long-standing human rights issues, racial inequality, this letter is an inspiring and historical reminder for all human rights professionals.
Universal Declaration of Human Rights
Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is a milestone document in the history of human rights. Drafted by representatives with different legal and ...
The Universality of Human Rights Essay (Critical Writing)
Human's Rights as the Attribute of Society. In contrast to the other institutions that suggest a single form of the notion existing in the given society, the area of human rights allows to switch the shapes of the very notion of human rights according to the sphere it is applied to. In spite of the fact that the core idea of the human rights ...
Human Rights Essay for Students and Children
500+ Words Essay on Human Rights. Human rights are a set of rights which every human is entitled to. Every human being is inherited with these rights no matter what caste, creed, gender, the economic status they belong to. Human rights are very important for making sure that all humans get treated equally. They are in fact essential for a good ...
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights Essay
As it is widely known, this act was adopted in 1948. According to this document, every person (or it would be better to say human beings) must be entitled to certain rights, which cannot take away from him or her (Weiss, 14). Get a custom essay on The Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 183 writers online.
"Why Human Rights?": Reflection by Eleni Christou
Human rights are rights that every person has from the moment they are born to the moment they die. They are things that everyone is entitled to, such as life, liberty, freedom of expression, and the right to education, just by virtue of being human. People can never lose these rights on the basis of age, sex, nationality, race, or disability.
10 Tips for Writing a Human Rights Essay
To excel at writing human rights essays, follow these 10 tips: 1. Choose a topic you are passionate about. First and foremost, you need to find a topic you are truly passionate about. Human rights are such a broad field of study and can be linked to nearly any other subject - from history and anthropology to technology and medicine.
Human Rights Essay
Human rights are the internal and external privileges which all humans are considered given including freedom to live, liberty, equality, and a fair trial, freedom from slavery and torture, and freedom of thought and expression. But, even the privileges that our countries and life itself give us can be violated or even taken away.
Human Rights Essay: 10 Reasons why human rights are important
First and foremost, they protect the basic dignity of each and every human being. Everyone has the right to life, liberty, and security of person, as well as freedom from torture, slavery, and arbitrary arrest or detention. These rights are essential in order for people to live with dignity and respect. Secondly, human rights promote peace and ...
Human Rights Free Essay Examples And Topic Ideas
481 essay samples found. Human Rights are the basic rights and freedoms to which all humans are entitled, often held to include the right to life, freedom of thought, freedom from slavery, and others. Essays on Human Rights could explore the evolution of human rights, their international recognition, enforcement, and the various challenges ...
Human Rights Essay
200 Word Essay on Human Rights. Human rights are considered a set of rights which is given to every human being regardless of gender, caste, creed, religion, nation, location or economic status. These rights are said to be moral principles that illustrate certain standards of human behaviour. Protected by law, human rights are applicable ...
5 Human Rights Topics For Your Human Rights Essay
Here are five topics that have been getting attention (or aren't getting enough attention) in recent years. These are all important; choosing one just comes down to what speaks to you most powerfully: Police brutality in the United States. Violence by American police is a major issue in the human rights arena these days and data indicates it ...
The concept of Human Rights
Introduction. Normally, the conventional comprehension of human rights is the absolute basic rights to which an individual is naturally entitled because he or she is a human being. Therefore, human rights are considered universal (valid the world over) and egalitarian (no different for everybody). Get a custom Essay on The concept of Human Rights.
Jacques Maritain's Essay Points a Path to True Freedom
On the contrary, according to Maritain, human beings are born with an innate quest for genuine freedom that must be earned: "…he becomes free, by warring upon himself and thanks to many ...
Human Rights Essay in english for Children and Students
Human Rights Essay 3 (400 words) Human rights are those rights that every person on this earth is entitled to merely on account of being a human being. These rights are universal and are protected by law. The idea of human rights and liberty has existed since centuries. However, it has evolved over the period of time.
Understanding Cruel and Unusual Punishment in Modern Legal Context
Essay Example: Cruel and unusual punishment declares, that a foundational concept deeply built to the ideal of justice and human rights within the limits of legal frames globally. Then marks punishments, what is considered superfluously strict or barbarian in relation to nature of crime. Constitutions
Protection
At UNHCR, we seek to uphold the basic human rights of uprooted or stateless people in their countries of asylum or habitual residence, ensuring that refugees will not be returned involuntarily to a country where they could face persecution. Longer term, we also help refugees find solutions, by repatriating voluntarily to their homeland, integrating in countries of asylum or resettling in third ...
PDF Human Rights: A Brief Introduction
The ethical basis of human rights has been defined using concepts such as human flourishing, dignity, duties to family and society, natural rights, individual freedom, and social justice against exploitation based on sex, class or caste. All of these moral arguments for human rights are part of ethical discourse.
2023 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices
Acts of Congress mandate the annual submission of the Country Reports on Human Rights Practices. The Country Reports cover internationally recognized human rights, including those set forth in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other human rights instruments, as well as worker rights. These include its prohibition on torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment ...
Shaping a rights-oriented digital transformation
This report explores how human rights are exercised, protected and promoted in the digital age. By examining this topic from three perspectives - rights, technological developments, and policy developments - the paper supports policy makers in shaping digital transformation so that it puts people at the centre.
The UN Human Rights System
The UN Human Rights System Essay. Exclusively available on IvyPanda®. The human right system as defined by the United Nation Human Rights System is a system whereby, the fundamental rights of humans are observed as well as character and worth of all the persons. Included in this system is the application of equal rights and system to all persons.
Human Rights Council Starts Interactive Dialogue on the Independence of
The Human Rights Council this morning started an interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers. It also concluded its interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on the right to education. Margaret Satterthwaite, Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, presented her report ...

45,000+ students realised their study abroad dream with us. Take the first step today

Essay on Human Rights: Samples in 500 and 1500

This Blog Includes:

8 Universities with higher ROI than IITs and IIMs

Connect With Us

Need help with?

Country Preference

Which English test are you planning to take?

When are you planning to take the exam?

Which Degree do you wish to pursue?

What is your budget to study abroad?

Origins in ancient Greece and Rome

human rights

Recent News

Historical development

Bibliography

Human Rights

1. The General Idea of Human Rights

2 The Existence and Grounds of Human Rights

2.2.1 Agency and Autonomy

2.2.2 Dignity

3. Which Rights are Human Rights?

Acknowledgments

Support SEP

Search the United Nations

Main Bodies

Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)

2023: UDHR turns 75

UN digital ambassador Elyx animates the UDHR

UDHR Illustrated

UDHR in 80+ languages

Women Who Shaped the Declaration

Departments / Offices

Resources / Services

Key Documents

News and Media

Issues / Campaigns

Human Rights Essay for Students and Children

Human Rights Categories

Importance of Human Rights

Customize your course in 30 seconds

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Download the App

"Why Human Rights?": Reflection by Eleni Christou

Related Articles

Human Rights Essay: 10 Reasons why human rights are important

1. Keeps population density under control

3. Reduces poverty

6. You are a human and your rights matter

9. Our stance on human rights affects our relationships with even our allies

Top Schools

Products & Resources

Colleges & Courses

Predictors & E-Books

Predictors & Articles

Top Courses & Careers

Quick Links

Diploma Colleges

Upcoming Events

Other Exams

Top Countries

Student Visas

Engineering Preparation

Medical Preparation

Online Courses

Top Streams

Specializations

Top Providers

Human Rights Essay - 100, 200, 500 Words

200 Word Essay on Human Rights

Need For Human Rights

Some of the reasons why we need human rights include:

Applications for Admissions are open.

Aakash iACST Scholarship Test 2024

JEE Main Important Physics formulas

JEE Main Important Chemistry formulas

TOEFL ® Registrations 2024

PTE Exam 2024 Registrations

JEE Main high scoring chapters and topics

Download Careers360 App's