Question

Advocacy speech human rights

Answer 1

$\huge\ \red \star\huge{ \green{\bold {\underline {\underline {\orange {Answer}}}}}} \ \purple \star$

$\huge\ \orange\star\huge{{\bold {\underline \red{Human \: Rights:{ \:\orange {}}}}}} \purple \star$

Speech on Human Rights!

In an ordered society, for the overall development of the human personality, rights play a very significant role. The rights of the individual are the conditions under which Hayek is able to realize his ideals, that is, the individual can realize his cherished goals only when he has the minimum set of rights.

The definition of human rights can be best explained in the words of Laski as ‘Rights, in fact, are those conditions of social life without which no man can seek, in general, to be himself at his best’. In simple terms, rights are the basic conditions of man’s good life, which are recognized as such by the legal code of the state.

In negative terms, ‘Rights are those opportunities the absence of which deprives man of something essential’. According to Laski, ‘state is known by the rights that it maintains’. The realization of rights can only be possible in a democratic state where liberty and equality coexist.

Human rights are international moral and legal 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 engage in political activity.

These rights exist in morality and in law at the national and international levels. They are addressed primar­ily to the governments, requiring compliance and enforcement. The main source of the contemporary conception of human rights is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (United Nations, 1948). The philosophy of human rights addresses questions about the existence, content, nature, universality and justification of human rights.

Evolution of Human Rights:

Rights based on natural law are derived from reason and the notion of human flourishing and are universal in time and space. Even though difference of opinion existed among many natural law theorists on many issues, the central proposition remained clear.

In principle, everyone was subject to natural law and everyone was capable of discerning its contents and standards. Universal moral standards exist upon which the rights that individuals have are founded and there is a general duty to adhere to these standards.

This notion was first embodied in the 1789 French Revolution, which widened its scope with the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the citizen. Later, The US ‘Bill of Rights’ of 1791 further broadened the scope of the Rights of Man. Politics and thought in the revolutionary era of the 1790s also began tentatively to broaden the definition of man by recognizing the rights of women, and, via campaigns against the slave trade.

Political activists such as the Parliamentarians in the English Civil War drew on the rights and privileges they believed to have been granted to their forbearers to sustain their notion of being ‘free-born Englishmen’. Gradually, a synthesis emerged, which can be termed ‘the liberal position on rights’.

This position is made-up of two basic components:

1. Human beings possess the right to life, liberty, the secure possession of property, the exercise of freedom of speech, and so on which are inalienable—cannot be traded away— and unconditional—the only acceptable reason for constraining any one individual is to protect the rights to another.

2. The primary function of government is to protect these rights, political institutions are to be judged on their performance of this function, and political obligation rests on their success in this—in short, political life is based on a kind of implicit or explicit contract between the people and government.

The horrors of World War I (1914-18) stimulated attempts to create a peace system based on a form of international government, and although the League of Nations of 1919 had no explicit human rights provision, the underlying assumption was that its members would be the states governed by the rule of law and respecting individual rights.

The task of drawing up an International Bill of Human Rights defining human rights and freedoms referred to in the Charter, was charged upon the Commission on Human Rights, established in 1945.

Answer 2

Answer:

Human Rights: Speech on Human Rights!

Human Rights: Speech on Human Rights!In an ordered society, for the overall development of the human personality, rights play a very significant role. The rights of the individual are the conditions under which Hayek is able to realize his ideals, that is, the individual can realize his cherished goals only when he has the minimum set of rights.

Human Rights: Speech on Human Rights!In an ordered society, for the overall development of the human personality, rights play a very significant role. The rights of the individual are the conditions under which Hayek is able to realize his ideals, that is, the individual can realize his cherished goals only when he has the minimum set of rights.The definition of human rights can be best explained in the words of Laski as ‘Rights, in fact, are those conditions of social life without which no man can seek, in general, to be himself at his best’. In simple terms, rights are the basic conditions of man’s good life, which are recognized as such by the legal code of the state.

In negative terms, ‘Rights are those opportunities the absence of which deprives man of something essential’. According to Laski, ‘state is known by the rights that it maintains’. The realization of rights can only be possible in a democratic state where liberty and equality coexist.

In negative terms, ‘Rights are those opportunities the absence of which deprives man of something essential’. According to Laski, ‘state is known by the rights that it maintains’. The realization of rights can only be possible in a democratic state where liberty and equality coexist.Without liberty, the rights of the people cannot be safeguarded. In democratic regimes, the periodic elections, alternative party system, free press and inde­pendent judiciary are very vital for implementation of the rights. And the citizens have the power to exercise certain rights, which the state should not ordinarily curtail.

In negative terms, ‘Rights are those opportunities the absence of which deprives man of something essential’. According to Laski, ‘state is known by the rights that it maintains’. The realization of rights can only be possible in a democratic state where liberty and equality coexist.Without liberty, the rights of the people cannot be safeguarded. In democratic regimes, the periodic elections, alternative party system, free press and inde­pendent judiciary are very vital for implementation of the rights. And the citizens have the power to exercise certain rights, which the state should not ordinarily curtail.The state restraints its activities to grant the individual an independent jurisdiction. While the individual in the strictly legal sense, is required to owe his allegiance to the state— he has also the duty of scrutinizing both the motive and characteristics of government acts. In a sense in democratic regimes, the rights of the individual curtail the powers of the state to the extent that it cannot become arbitrary, despotic or tyrannical.

In negative terms, ‘Rights are those opportunities the absence of which deprives man of something essential’. According to Laski, ‘state is known by the rights that it maintains’. The realization of rights can only be possible in a democratic state where liberty and equality coexist.Without liberty, the rights of the people cannot be safeguarded. In democratic regimes, the periodic elections, alternative party system, free press and inde­pendent judiciary are very vital for implementation of the rights. And the citizens have the power to exercise certain rights, which the state should not ordinarily curtail.The state restraints its activities to grant the individual an independent jurisdiction. While the individual in the strictly legal sense, is required to owe his allegiance to the state— he has also the duty of scrutinizing both the motive and characteristics of government acts. In a sense in democratic regimes, the rights of the individual curtail the powers of the state to the extent that it cannot become arbitrary, despotic or tyrannical.Thus, the rights curb the authority of the government and prevent it from exercising unbridled power. To sum up, in a truly democratic state, the rights of the individual are indispens­able. On the contrary, the absence of distinction between the state and government is the defining feature of authoritarian regimes where due to the concentration of power in the hands of the state, the rights of the individual are very nominal. Moreover, ruth­less enforcement of laws and the maintenance of the prevalent social and political order