Human Security—Protecting and Empowering the People

Facing Global Environmental Change

This article explores a controversial claim by the Commonwealth Attorney-General that counter-terrorism legislation is justified by reference to the obligations of governments to ensure their citizens' human security, which, in tum, is suggested to flow from article 3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR).I As the title suggests, the article focuses upon and analyses the views of the Attorney-General (the one Australian) and two Canadians influential in the field of human security, as the Attorney-General's particular assertions regarding human security and human rights have been articulated and advanced by citing the writings of these two Canadians, Irwin Cotler and Louise Arbour.

The urgency of the study is stipulated by the necessity to cover the process of project preparation and adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which will allow a comprehensive study of the nature of human rights, to understand their universal nature. The choice of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as an object of the study is determined by the special nature of this international soft law act. It is emphasized that the process of adopting this international act remains somewhat unclear among lawyers. The preparation and adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is hardly covered in the legal literature, which does not contribute to a comprehensive understanding of the Western human rights concept and relativism in the interpretation of human rights as a phenomenon within various legal cultures. Some aspects of project preparation and adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights are described. The activities of the Human Rights Commission, which consisted of 18 members representing various political, cultural and religious groups, are noted. It is emphesized that starting with Art.1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights from the words “All people are born free and equal…”, the developers of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights reproduced the idea of the universality of human rights, their global nature, that is not limited to a state or even a region. It is summed up that representatives of various groups of the population were involved in the work on the text of the document, creating an international act that was to consolidate human rights, to embody the ideas of equality of human rights, and their universal character. However, while adopting the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, not all states voted in its favor. Eight states have refrained from supporting it which is stipulated by a number of religious and political factors. At the same time, different interpretations of human rights by various states do not deny their universal nature. Covering the issue of human rights, it is advisable to disclose the process of preparation and adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which will allow systematically and clearly understand the nature of human rights, differences in the activities of various states concerning human rights ensuring.

Pakistan is susceptible to climate variations such as floods, droughts, heat waves, and the glaciers melting have all had devastating effects on human security. Furthermore, people are forced to leave their homes due to continuous floods, making them more vulnerable to disease and economic collapse. The international cooperation needs to adopt policy responses and adaptation plans to develop resilience and reduce vulnerability to the effects of climate change. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Paris Agreement, adopted under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change are two landmark international legal instruments when it comes to addressing the human security implications of climate change. Despite these legal frameworks, climate change implications on human security are not being adequately addressed. Effectively human security crisis needs meaningful participation of affected communities that prioritize the most vulnerable populations and promotes the protection and fulfilment of human needs.

Human security and human rights are universal phenomena, poor to rich and individual to all people in the universe. Human security and human rights are harmonious to inharmonious natures. Human security is state to people-centered notion, whereas human rights are human-centered more. Security and rights advocate individual freedom from fear, freedom from want, freedom to live in dignity, freedom to take action on one’s own behalf, freedom to inherit peace, and freedom to protect nature (environment). Human security is a derogation of certain human rights belonging to civil, political, economic, social, and cultural rights. Human security underscores as inherent, inalienable, interdependent, multidimensional, and non-derogatory rights and freedoms whereas human rights are the core of them. Human security is exclusion of slavery, apartheid, injustice, inequality, indignity, insecurity, and inhibition similar to human rights. Human security puts security agenda at the top that strengthens humanitarian laws and their actions, respect human rights, disarm armed group, prevent or transform conflict, and defense citizen. Whereas human rights leave a significant impact for protection, promotion, and fulfillment of humanitarian action and such action realizes rights translating into practices, building up institutional capacity for its implementation. Human rights are guided by international treaties, legal instruments, and humanitarian laws whereas human security does not have any such definite parameters. Human security is a neologism, but integrated concept, however human rights have been a long history. Security protects human's basic needs and capabilities, whereas rights act to respect or preserve them. Security assists to reduce differences of rights implementation while State suppresses some rights in the name to maintain law and order. Human security tries to ensure safety to all including asylum seekers, whereas rights demand to implement international and national legal measures. There is a contesting (many cases) and reciprocate (some cases) relationship between human security and rights to advocate its spirit: survival, liberty, life, and dignity of person. Human security has three generations: Civil-Political Rights, Socio-Economic Rights, and Collective Rights similar to human rights. Human security follows four additional generations: Right to Peace, Right to Dignity, Right to Sovereignty, and Right to Shared Responsibility.Keywords: Human security, human rights, harmony, inharmony and generations.

Interrogational Torture as a Human Rights Issue: A Brief Further Reflection on the Morality of Human Rights

South Africa’s democracy turned 30 years old in 2024. At the same time, its constitutional order and jurisprudence marked three decades since the Interim Constitution and its successor, the 1996 Constitution, came into operation. Coincidentally, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) turned 75 years old in the previous year, 2023. The confluence of these facts is quite poignant in the context of a constitutional text that is often lauded for its commitment to the protection of human rights and the eradication of the injustices of the past, which were firmly entrenched by the segregationist policies of the apartheid regime. At the centre of this hype about South African constitutional jurisprudence is the centrality of international law to the interpretation of the Bill of Rights as well as the development of the common law, customary law, and statutory law. With the UDHR being such a central pillar in the human rights sector, this study set out to determine the extent to which the Constitutional Court of South Africa relied on the UDHR and other international instruments in carrying out the mandate set out above. The study analysed cases delivered by the Court in two separate years, spaced ten years apart. The study did not necessarily attempt to determine a correlation, but simply to use descriptive statistics to determine how often, in those two years, the Court relied on international law in general, and on the UDHR in particular, in its interpretive and legal development mandate.

It is a truism that the protection of human rights is vital for human security. The pursuit of the right to development and its consequent benefits are anchored to the protection of fundamental human rights. Jeremy Philips and Alison Firth have noted that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) would appear to depend on intellectual property for the realization of some of its objectives and call attention to the right to privacy, to property and to making a living.

Acknowledgments Introduction: Visions and Visionaries 1. My Brother's and Sister's Keeper: Visions and the Origins of Human Rights Religious Visions Philosophical Visions Traditional Practices and Ideas of a Very Different Sort Visions-and Reality 2. To Protect Humanity and Defend Justice: Early International Efforts To Free the Enslaved To Assist the Exploited To Care for the Wounded To Protect the Persecuted 3. Entering the Twentieth Century: Visions, War, Revolutions, and Peacemaking Modernization, Internationalization, and Visions of Rights War, Revolutions, and Rights Peacemaking and Human Rights The Covenant: Rights Proclaimed and Rights Rejected 4. Opportunities and Challenges: Visions and Rights Between the Wars A Flourishing of Visions Opportunities for New Departures Persistent Problems and Challenges The Gathering Storm 5. A People's War: The Crusade of World War II War, Genocide, and Self-Reflections Crusaders, Visions, and Proposals Human Rights Versus National Sovereignty in Postwar Planning Opposition from the Great Powers 6. A People's Peace: Peace and a Charter with Human Rights Insisting on a Peace with Rights Politics and Diplomacy at the San Francisco Conference The Charter of the United Nations Differing Reactions and Assessments 7. Proclaiming a Vision: The Universal Declaration of Human Rights The Revolution Begins Challenging Questions of Philosophy Difficult Problems of Politics The Universal Declaration of Human Rights 8. Transforming Visions into Reality: The First Fifty Years of the Universal Declaration Extending Rights and Setting Standards Protecting Rights Through Implementation Promoting Rights Expanding Activities and Enhancing Rights 9. The Continuing Evolution International Law, the Responsibility to Protect, and Challenges to Sovereignty Globalization, Development, Terrorism-and Torture New Human Rights Institutions and Organizations Technology and Political Will 10. Toward the Future The Nature and Power of Visions People of Vision and Action Forces and Events of Consequence Process, Politics, and Perspective The Universal Declaration of Human Rights Notes Selected Bibliography Index About the Author

About a month before the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), the United States elected its first African-American president, Barack Obama. This historic event, a fitting milestone, brings to life that declaration, which human rights activists and legal scholars regard as the sacred text.1 Obama’s election fulfills a dream of the U.S. civil rights movement, a struggle that relied as much on the UDHR as on the courage of the men and women who for decades fought to make the United States a 'more perfect union.' For human rights defenders around the world, its significance cannot be overstated. Despite this singular achievement, the mood in the secular temple of human rights these days is generally somber and introspective. Obama’s election comes after eight years of declining U.S. leadership in human rights and international law. In nearly two dozen interviews conducted from September to November 2008 with activists, scholars, and critics of the human rights movement, several contended that the UDHR in 2008 would never have been adopted by 48 states as it was in 1948. Many lamented its still-aspirational quality and the continued marginality of human rights.

2008, sixty years from Universal Declaration of Human Rights, UN announced, series celebration activities host around the world. Basically, human right is a concrete presentation of moral and ethics. The right to social security has been fully recognized as a basic human right by Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, (ICESCR). This article begins with the overview of ”Social Security Rights” exploring relevant principles from Universal Declaration of Human Rights, (UDHR) and International Covenant on Economic, Social and Culture Rights, (ICESCR). Then, further discuss the development of International Labor Convention No. 102, the role of implementing Social Security Rights, other impacts, coming challenges and new trend. Finally, examine the implement of Social Security Rights in Taiwanese security system to generate reflection and new strategy toward coming future.

The connection between human rights, peace and security highlights the stakes attached to the respect and enforcement of the principle of universality. Yet the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and all subsequent international conventions have been questioned by States and communities: they are believed to be reflective of euro-centric values. This is why cultural relativism has emerged as an alternative to the principle of universality of human rights. This raises security questions: if a state questions universality of human rights, does it undermine the whole UN peace and security system? Is cultural relativism a threat to universality, leading to fragmentation and insecurity? The book chapter seeks to address such issues while looking at transcending the dichotomy between universalism and relativism. Scholars’ views and strategies to overcome the tensions and ensure the respect of human rights while promoting peace and security are consequently examined.KeywordsUniversalityHuman RightsSecurityRelativism

Frontier technologies such as Big Data and Artificial Intelligence (AI) are hailed to improve decision-making by reducing and even mitigating human biases. The emergence and rapid adoption of these technologies, particularly in optimization of services and provision of key analytics and insights was justified by the widespread benefits of AI to democratize intelligent software for all. Yet, recent studies have brought to light cases where AI has perpetuated existing biases and deepened inequalities, contributing to the further marginalization of specific groups in society. Despite the opportunities that AI offers, it also poses new threats to human freedom, fairness, non-discrimination, privacy, and security; leaving questions regarding the human rights implications of AI unaddressed. This paper proposes the use of international legal frameworks such as the International Bill of International Human Rights (including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights) to assess the human rights impacts of AI system. To ground the discussion, we present a case study to assess the human rights implications of Apprise, a multi-lingual expert system for screening potential victims of human trafficking and forced labor, piloted in Thailand. Drawing on amplification theory, we highlight that AI systems are not deployed in neutral systems, and that pre-existing inequalities and “unfreedoms” can be aggravated if not addressed. We argue for a balanced view of the potential of AI systems, cognizant of both the positive and negative intentions of users of such technologies.

This article looks into the meanings of 'human rights' and 'democracy' which are supposed to be 'essentially contested.' In this connection, it revisits the history of Western political ideas in which the political thoughts of John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau on human rights and democracy are reviewed and contrasted. The ultimate purpose of this exercise is to elucidate the theoretical basis of contemporary debates on North Korean human rights within South Korea. For these debates seem to have to do with the multifarious meanings of 'human rights' and 'democracy.' While most people tend to support the concepts of both 'human rights' and 'democracy' with positive outlook, they do not seem to make an adequate differentiation of these terms. This phenomenon is not helpful in addressing the real problems of human rights in some sector of the world. In this sesne, a contrasted comparison between Locke and Rousseau regarding human rights and democracy can shed light on the contempoary debate in this field. Locke provided a comparatively thorough discussion on 'natural rights' in 17th century Europe and, in turn, the theoretical basis of contemporary liberal democracy. He emphasized that human beings were born with the natural rights of life, liberty, and property before the civil government had been established. Furthermore, he argued that the purpose of establishment of civil government was to preserve the natural rights of human beings. This means that Locke's view on natural rights underlies the 'civil and political rights' of contemporary international human rights norms. On the other hand, Rousseau, while paying keen attention to the same question of human liberty, provided a different methodology to achieve this goal in the 18th century. In other words, he advocated comparatively equal level of property among human beings for guaranteeing freedom of the people. In this sense, he placed priority on the equality over the liberty in reality of human life. In turn, he seemed clear that he had provided the theoretical basis for the 'economic and social rights' of the contemporary international human rights norms. At the same time, this article points out that whether Rousseau intended it or not, he contributed to the rise of social democracy or communism as put forward by Karl Marx and Vladimir Lenin. In particular, his thesis of 'general will' in political community embraces a crucial theoretical strand of totalitarianism as pointed out by scholars. While this interpretation of Rousseau is not common in contemporary debates on democracy, this article posits that such approach helps to clarify the contemporary debates and even confusion in the field of human rights protection. Seen in this way, the discourses of both human rights and democracy are both sides of the same coin. The 'civil and political rights' form the basis of liberal democracy while 'economic and social rights' social democracy or totalitarian communism. These two contrasted discourses have dominated modern political history, in particular, during the Cold War period. This is why the International Covenants on human rights were divided into two separate documents while the Universal Declaration of Human Rights represented a simple juxtaposition of these two ideological positions on human rights. The contrasted and even confrontational situations between the two theoretical positions were remarkably weakened with the collapse of the Berlin Wall as a proof of failed Eastern bloc. Nevertheless, the same contrasted discourse of human rights and democracy continues by way of now the concept of human security meaning both 'freedom from fear' and 'freedom from want.' The two political regimes on the Korean peninsula emerged as a byproduct of the two competitive visions of human rights and democracy.

Reviewed by: The Universal Declaration of Human Rights: A Commentary Johannes Morsink The Universal Declaration of Human Rights: A Commentary, Asbjørn Eide, Gudmundur Alfredsson, Goran Melander, Lars Adam Rehof and Allan Rosas, eds. with collaboration of Theresa Swinehart, Scandinavian University Press and Oxford University Press. This volume is a collection of thirty-one essays by almost as many different authors, roughly one for each of the thirty-one articles of the Declaration. All the contributors are from Scandinavia and all are involved in human rights work in their own countries either as law professors, members of research institutes, advisors to their governments or they work on the European and United Nations level of the movement. The editors asked their contributors to include at least three things in their commentaries: (1) to bring in the historical background of “their” article and describe the contexts in which the right might previously have been promulgated; (2) to discuss the drafting history of the article within the UN hierarchy, commonly referred as the travaux preparatoires; and (3) to relate subsequent normative developments having to do with standard setting and implementation activities that have grown out of the Declaration. As is to be expected, different commentators had different strengths in each of these three areas and their commentaries reflect this fact. Similarly, this reviewer’s expertise in just one of these areas (the drafting history) has shaped this review. The uniqueness of this commentary lies in the fact that it is the first book in English that seeks to bring together these three aspects of the Declaration which are often treated separately in the human rights literature. Robinson 1 and Verdoodt 2 have mostly reported on how the various articles of the Declaration moved through the drafting stages within the United Nations and on which delegates said what, and when. In the second half of his 1976 study, Philippe De La Chapelle 3 gave the same kinds of summaries of the minutes as did Robinson and Verdoodt, except that in the first half of his study he focused on Western intellectual history, often through Catholic pieces, but with plenty of information for anyone interested in the intellectual roots of the Declaration. A much narrower focus can be found in a 1966 Muslim commentary on the Declaration. 4 All four of these books are commentaries on the text of the Declaration, with the De La Chapelle giving us the most by way of historical precedents. [End Page 398] However, to really understand the Declaration, the reader needs to go to books or essays in international law that treat the subject of the particular right or rights in question. No one volume for this sort of thing exists. The editors sought to fill this gap, but unfortunately their contributors on the whole ignored this part of their assignment and De La Chappelle’s pioneering work is nowhere mentioned or used, let alone improved upon. However, the reader will find helpful historical comments on the abolition of slavery (Article 3) and on the development of the right to work (Article 23). We can evaluate the contributors’ acquittal of their second task in terms of how deeply each of them researched the UN archives. From conception to proclamation the Declaration passed through at least eight stages within the UN hierarchy. The commentators on Articles 13, 14, 16, 19, 20, and 27 made almost no reference to any aspects of the drafting history of their article. Others relied on Robinson and Verdoodt to give the reader a sense of why and how the article was written. Verdoodt’s book, for instance, is the main source for the comments on the drafting history of articles 8, 10, 16 (Robinson too), 23, 24, and 29. Because Verdoodt was an accurate commentator and because his study was done in French and is out of print now, the present volume serves the useful function of making Verdoodt’s results available again and in English. The drawback is that we do not gain in depth of understanding and in at least one instance are set on a wrong path. After correctly reporting on what Verdoodt said on the drafting history of Article 29 (which...