Three generations of human rights
Rights |
---|
Theoretical distinctions |
Human rights |
Rights by beneficiary |
Other groups of rights |
The division of
In a speech two years later, his divisions follow the three watchwords of the French Revolution: Liberty, Equality, Fraternity.[2] The three generations are reflected in some of the rubrics of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.[citation needed] While the Universal Declaration of Human Rights lists first- and second-generation rights, the document itself does not specifically order them in accordance with Vasak's framework.
First-generation human rights
First-generation human rights, sometimes called "blue rights", deal essentially with liberty and participation in political life. They are fundamentally
They were enshrined at the global level and given status in international law first by Articles 3 to 21 of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and later in the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. In Europe, they were enshrined in the European Convention on Human Rights in 1953.
Second-generation human rights
Second-generation human rights are related to equality and began to be recognized by governments after
In the
Some
.These rights are sometimes referred to as "red" rights. They impose upon the government the duty to respect and promote and fulfill them, but this depends on the availability of resources. The duty is imposed on the state because it controls its own resources. No one has the direct right to housing and right to education. (In South Africa, for instance, the right is not, per se, to housing, but rather "to have access to adequate housing",[7] realised on a progressive basis.[8])
The duty of government is in the realization of these positive rights.
Third-generation human rights
Third-generation human rights are those rights that go beyond the mere civil and social, as expressed in many progressive documents of
Also known as Solidarity human rights, they are rights that try to go beyond the framework of individual rights to focus on collective concepts, such as community or people. However, the term remains largely unofficial,[9][10][11][12][13][14][15] just as the also-used moniker of "green" rights, and thus houses an extremely broad spectrum of rights, including:
- collective rights
- Right to self-determination
- Right to economic and social development
- Right to a healthy environment
- Right to natural resources
- Right to communication rights
- Right to participation in cultural heritage
- Rights to intergenerational equity and sustainability
The
Some international organizations have offices for safeguarding such rights. An example is the High Commissioner on National Minorities of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe. The Directorate-General for the Environment of the European Commission has as its mission "protecting, preserving and improving the environment for present and future generations, and promoting sustainable development".
A few jurisdictions have enacted provisions for
Fourth generation
Several analysts claim that a fourth generation of human rights is emerging, which would include rights that cannot be included in the third generation, future claims of first and second generation rights and new rights, especially in relation to technological development and information and communication technologies and cyberspace.[20]
However, the content of it is not clear, and these analysts do not present a unique proposal. They normally take some rights from the third generation and include them in the fourth, such as the right to a healthy environment or aspects related to bioethics. Some of those analysts believe that the fourth generation is given by human rights in relation to new technologies,[20] while others prefer to talk about digital rights,[21] where a new range of rights would be found, such as:
- The right to equally access computing and digital
- The right to digital self-determination
- The right to digital security
- The right to access one's own digital data (habeas data)[22]
Others point out that the differentiating element would be that, while the first three generations refer to the human being as a member of society, the rights of the fourth would refer to the human being as a species.
Commentary
Maurice Cranston argued that scarcity means that supposed second-generation and third-generation rights are not really rights at all.[23] If one person has a right, others have a duty to respect that right, but governments lack the resources necessary to fulfill the duties implied by citizens' supposed second- and third-generation rights.
19th century philosopher
M. de Lamartine wrote me one day: "Your doctrine is only the half of my program; you have stopped at liberty; I go on to fraternity." I answered him: "The second half of your program will destroy the first half." And, in fact, it is quite impossible for me to separate the word "fraternity" from the word "voluntary". It is quite impossible for me to conceive of fraternity as legally enforced, without liberty being legally destroyed, and justice being legally trampled underfoot.[26]
Economist Friedrich Hayek has argued that the second generation concept of "social justice" cannot have any practical political meaning:
No state of affairs as such is just or unjust: it is only when we assume that somebody is responsible for having brought it about ... In the same sense, a spontaneously working market, where prices act as guides to action, cannot take account of what people in any sense need or deserve, because it creates a distribution which nobody has designed, and something which has not been designed, a mere state of affairs as such, cannot be just or unjust. And the idea that things ought to be designed in a "just" manner means, in effect, that we must abandon the market and turn to a planned economy in which somebody decides how much each ought to have, and that means, of course, that we can only have it at the price of the complete abolition of personal liberty.[27]
New York University School of Law professor of law Jeremy Waldron has written in response to critics of the second-generation rights:
In any case, the argument from first-generation to second-generation rights was never supposed to be a matter of conceptual analysis. It was rather this: if one is really concerned to secure civil or political liberty for a person, that commitment should be accompanied by a further concern about the conditions of the person's life that make it possible for him to enjoy and exercise that liberty. Why on earth would it be worth fighting for this person's liberty (say, his liberty to choose between A and B) if he were left in a situation in which the choice between A and B meant nothing to him, or in which his choosing one rather than the other would have no impact on his life?"[28]
The World Conference on Human Rights in 1993 opposed the distinction between civil and political rights (negative rights) and economic, social and cultural rights (positive rights) that resulted in the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action proclaiming that "all human rights are universal, indivisible, interdependent and interrelated".[30]
See also
- Human security
- "Two Concepts of Liberty", a lecture by Isaiah Berlin which distinguished between positive and negative liberty
Notes
- ^ Vašák, Karel. "A 30-year struggle; the sustained efforts to give force of law to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights". UNESDOC. Retrieved 2021-09-20.
- ^ Etudes et essais sur le droit international humanitaire et sur les principes de la Croix-Rouge en l'honneur de Jean Pictet, red. by Christophe Swinarski, Comité Internat. de la Croix-Rouge ; Nijhoff, 1984
- ^ N.Y. Const. ART. XI, § 1, found at New York State Assembly website. Retrieved February 23, 2012.
- ^ Campaign for Fiscal Equity, Inc. v. State, 86 N.Y.2d 307 (1995). Case brief found at [1] Cornell Law School website. Retrieved February 23, 2012.
- ^ N.Y. Const. ART. I, § 17, found at New York State Assembly website. Retrieved February 23, 2012.
- ^ N.Y. Const. ART. I, § 18, found at New York State Assembly website. Retrieved February 23, 2012.
- ^ Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996, s 26(1).
- ^ s s 26(2).
- ^ "Los Derechos Humanos de solidaridad". Isipedia (in Spanish). Retrieved May 12, 2020.
- ^ "¿Cuáles son los derechos humanos de tercera generación?" (in Spanish). Spanish committee of ACNUR. April 2017. Retrieved May 12, 2020.
- ^ "Los derechos de tercera generación" (in Spanish). Amnesty International Catalonia. Retrieved May 12, 2020.
- ^ "Three Generations of Human Rights". Globalization 101. Levin Institute - State University of New York. Retrieved May 12, 2020.
- ^ Jensen, Steven. "Putting to rest the Three Generations Theory of human rights". Open Global Rights. Retrieved May 12, 2020.
- .
- ^ Cornescu, Adrian (2009). "The generations of human's rights" (PDF). Retrieved May 12, 2020.
- ^ African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights, Article 20, 21, 22 and 24
- ^ Notes: Hungarian Parliamentary Commissioner for Future Generations
- ^ N.Y. Const. ART XIV, § 1. Found at New York State Assembly website. Retrieved February 23, 2012.
- ^ N.Y. Const. ART XIV, § 5. Found at New York State Assembly website. Retrieved February 23, 2012.
- ^ a b Bustamante, Javier (September 2001). "Hacia la cuarta generación de Derechos Humanos: repensando la condición humana en la sociedad tecnológica". Revista Iberoamericana de Ciencia, Tecnología, Sociedad e Innovación (in Spanish). Madrid: Organization of Ibero-American States. Retrieved May 12, 2020.
- ^ Riofrío, Juan Carlos (2014). "La cuarta ola de derechos humanos: los derechos digitales". Revista Latinoamericana de Derechos Humanos (in Spanish). 25 (1): 15–45. Retrieved May 12, 2020.
- ^ "Los derechos humanos de tercera y cuarta generación". Encuentro Jurídico (in Spanish). January 2013. Retrieved May 12, 2020.
- ^ Cranston, Maurice. "Human Rights: Real and Supposed," in Political Theory and the Rights of Man, edited by D. D. Raphael (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1967), pp. 43-51.
- ^ "Charles Kesler on the Grand Liberal Project". Uncommon Knowledge. May 28, 2009. Archived from the original on July 15, 2009. Retrieved January 5, 2010.
- ^ "Soft Despotism with Paul Rahe". Uncommon Knowledge. November 19, 2009. Archived from the original on January 4, 2010. Retrieved January 5, 2010.
- ^ Bastiat, Frédéric (1850). "The Law". Selected Essays on Political Economy. Irvington-on-Hudson, NY: The Foundation for Economic Education, Inc.
- Reason. Retrieved January 4, 2010.
- ISBN 0-521-43617-6
- ISBN 978-0-8070-5643-1.
- ^ Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action, Part I para 5