“HUMAN RIGHTS LAW AND ITS CONTEMPORARY ISSUES”

ABSTRACT

This article examines the history of International Human rights law, its origin, nature, and contemporary issues related to it. International human rights law is one part of the public international law regime concerned with the rules and regulations that should be followed during an armed conflict. This essay, in a nutshell, decodes how human rights law is concerned with protecting people who are not part of hostilities of war and the warfare mechanism employed by the state who are at war. It also explores how intergovernmental organizations function at each level, emphasizing sovereignty, monism, dualism, and the principle of subsidiarity. This paper discusses the efforts to develop and enforce legally binding human rights standards through the international treaty systems that establish rules and standards for how states should treat people and how people should treat one another. Present-day wartime situations in Ukraine have taken the lives of many and affected the most, making migration the only way to save themselves from wartime hostilities. Attention is paid to the fundamental principles of the so-called “International Bill of Human Rights,” which consist of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1948 and two important UN human rights treaties: the International Treaty on Civil and Political Rights and the International Treaty on Economic, Cultural and Social Rights

Keywords: Rights, International, Human, Law, Treaty, Wartime, People

INTRODUCTION

Who are we? What does it mean to be a human being? These questions struck my mind when I read an article on the Russia-Ukraine war, which was disheartening. Historically, humans have been defined as civilized beings who efficiently use language as a means of communication, people who have established life systems in organized societies. In political science, humans have been described as social or political creatures who devised ways for human societies to function systematically and legally. Humans are the most evolved creatures on earth. We are known as social beings and cannot live without society. Peaceful coexistence is the foundation of our lives, and it is important to respect and protect each other's lives. Now the irony here is. We call ourselves human beings who portray themselves as intelligent and who, by their thinking, try to change this brutal world into a civilized world. Similarly, is the situation among different nations, every nation wants to be a superpower and maintain its dominance in international politics. When their goal to dominate the world by becoming a superpower does not favor them, there is aggression and hatred toward each other. Then why do we call ourselves humans when we are not ready to face the opponent? Human beings may be different in color, gender, caste, size, and even shape, but even after all this, we are still human and have fundamental human rights that must be respected.

HUMAN RIGHTS AND ITS NATURE

The historical context of human rights can be derived from various perspectives. The first approach to human rights traces the deeper origins to ancient religion, justice, charity, individual worth, and respect for all life in Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, and Judaism. The concept of moral code, equitableness, righteousness, and self-respect was also crucial, even in those communities that did not leave written records. Still, the thoughts have been handed down through the generations through oral histories. Precursors of human rights declaration are found in the codes of Hammurabi in Babylon, China, and India, the charter of Cyrus the Great in Persia, and the edicts of Ashoka in India. Second is the tracing of modern human rights which goes back to the emergence of natural law theories and Christian theology of the Middle Ages, culminating in the rebellions in 17th and 18th century Europe. The third trend traces the history of human rights to their inclusion in the United Nations Charter in 1945 as a response to the Holocaust using President Roosevelt's Four Freedoms and the impact of the 1948 universal Declaration of Human Rights on later national constitutions, foreign policy, and international treaties and declarations. The fourth view is the recent historical conduct that considers human rights as peripheral in the aftermath of World War II. World war II was a significant event in the internationalization of human rights. Roosevelt declared the "four freedoms" (freedom of speech, worship, and freedoms from want and fear) while addressing the state of the Union in 1941. In 1945, the Charter of the United Nations established obligations for all Member States to respect and comply with human rights and created a Standing Commission to facilitate their realization. A major human rights text was adopted shortly thereafter. The Genocide Convention and Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948, the Geneva Convention of 1949, followed by the International Covenant on Human Rights, and numerous relevant and regional human rights texts on torture, discrimination against children, minorities and women, rights of persons with disabilities, and establishing investigative and accountability procedures at the international level. Legal experts regard human rights as the result of a formal norm-creating process, where humans formulate a set of rules by which a society (national or international will be governed, while natural rights are derived from natural order or divine order and are inalienable and absolute rights based on the positive law and these rights are recognized through the political and legal process that results in the declaration, treaty, or any other binding law. The definition of natural rights may vary from time to time. Natural rights are the foundations of society's social contract. Examples of natural rights are the right to life preservation, the right to liberty, right to religious freedom.

CONTEMPORARY ISSUES

Human rights have long been defended and promoted as a value in their own right; with the passage of time, global politics has shown that human rights can very well become an issue of 'international security and can threaten the stability of the international system. Despite the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, there are instances of terrorism which is full of human right violations (the Mumbai terror attack of 2008 U.S terror attack of 9/11, which took the lives of more than 175 & 3000 people, respectively). Migration of citizens to different countries due to abusive governments, for example, situations are worse in Myanmar, where the government did a crackdown on Rohingyas, forcing them to flee their home state. Failed states incapable of defending their citizens can easily trigger civil wars and destabilize the region; for example, the civil war in Sri Lanka between the government and LTTE (Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam) took the lives of 100,000 civilians and 50,000 soldiers. Despite the formulation of various treaties and organizations at the international level still, there are violations of human rights. Though the United Nations did a tremendous job in protecting and limiting human rights violations in different parts of the world, what about the worsening situations of Uighur Muslims detained in Xinjiang, China?  The burnt faced by the people of Ukraine is hard to feel for us sitting at home. Rohingyas who walked for days through jungles and undertook dangerous sea routes; now, more than 900,000 people have found safety in the Cox's Bazar region in Bangladesh, which is now home to the world's largest refugee camp. Rohingya, a Muslim minority group, lived predominantly in Myanmar; despite living in Myanmar for generations, the Rohingya are not recognized as citizens of Myanmar, making them the largest stateless population. The United Nations passed a resolution to condemn, and direct Myanmar to act in accordance with the law but still, the situation remains the same.

CONCLUSION

International human rights laws were enacted to preserve humanity in all circumstances, even during conflicts. International organizations have played a crucial role in protecting human rights for decades, imposing the principle of common humanity and calling for dialogue. But somehow, the role the UN plays in the Russia-Ukraine war is weak. Despite various meetings in the general assembly, Russia is only expanding its military, and more aggression is taking place. Another is the case of Rohingyas, where the UN is playing an active role because any country has no self-interest. Still, in the case of the Russia-Ukraine war, which is impacting every country, self-interest and ego are keeping this war on track. The UN needs to consider where this world is heading towards whether a war of self-interest and ego is more crucial than the lives of the people?

AUTHOR - DIVYANSH RANA