Human Rights Violations Essay Example for Free

Human Rights Violations Essay Human rights are commonly understood as inalienable fundamental rights to which a person is inherently entitled simply because she or he is a human being.[1] Human rights are thus conceived as universal (applicable everywhere) and egalitarian (the same for everyone). These rights may exist as natural rights or as legal rights, in both national and international law. The doctrine of human rights in international practice, within international law, global and regional institutions, in the policies of states and in the activities of non-governmental organizations, has been a cornerstone of public policy around the world. The idea of human rights states, if the public discourse of peacetime global society can be said to have a common moral language, it is that of human rights. Despite this, the strong claims made by the doctrine of human rights continue to provoke considerable skepticism and debates about the content, nature and justifications of human rights to this day. Indeed, the question of what is meant by a right is itself controversial and the subject of continued philosophical debate. Many of the basic ideas that animated the human rights movement developed in the aftermath of the Second World War and the atrocities of The Holocaust, culminating in the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in Paris by the United Nations General Assembly in 1948. The ancient world did not possess the concept of universal human rights. Ancient societies had elaborate systems of duties conceptions of justice, political legitimacy, and human flourishing that sought to realize human dignity, flourishing, or well-being entirely independent of human rights. The modern concept of human rights developed during the early Modern period, alongside the European secularization of Judeo-Christian ethics. The true forerunner of human rights discourse was the concept of natural rights which appeared as part of the medieval Natural law tradition that became prominent during the Enlightenment with such philosophers as John Locke, Francis Hutcheson, and Jean-Jacques Burlamaqui, and featured prominently in the political discourse of the American Revolution and the French Revolution. From this foundation, the modern human rights arguments emerged over the latter half of the twentieth century. Gelling as social activism and political rhetoric in many nations put it high on the world agenda. 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. History of concept The modern sense of human rights can be traced to Renaissance Europe and the Protestant Reformation, alongside the disappearance of the feudal authoritarianism and religious conservativism that dominated the Middle Ages. Human rights were defined as a result of European scholars attempting to form a secularized version of Judeo-Christian ethics. Although ideas of rights and liberty have existed in some form for much of human history, they do not resemble the modern conception of human rights. According to Jack Donnelly, in the ancient world, traditional societies typically have had elaborate systems of duties conceptions of justice, political legitimacy, and human flourishing that sought to realize human dignity, flourishing, or well-being entirely independent of human rights. These institutions and practices are alternative to, rather than different formulations of, human rights. The most commonly held view is that concept of human rights evolved in the West, and that while earlier cultures had important ethical concepts, they generally lacked a concept of human rights. For example, McIntyre argues there is no word for right in any language before 1400. Medieval charters of liberty such as the English Magna Carta were not charters of human rights, rather they were the foundation and constituted a form of limited political and legal agreement to address specific political circumstances, in the case of Magna Carta later being recognised in the course of early modern debates about rights. One of the oldest records of human rights is the statute of Kalisz (1264), giving privileges to the Jewish minority in the Kingdom of Poland such as protection from discrimination and hate speech. The basis of most modern legal interpretations of human rights can be traced back to recent European history. The Twelve Articles (1525) are considered to be the first record of human rights in Europe. They were part of the peasants demands raised towards the Swabian League in the German Peasants War in Germany. The earliest conceptualization of human rights is credited to ideas about natural rights emanating from natural law. In particular, the issue of universal rights was introduced by the examination of the rights of indigenous peoples by Spanish clerics, such as Francisco de Vitoria and Bartolomà © de Las Casas. In the Valladolid debate, Juan Ginà ©s de Sepà ºlveda, who maintained an Aristotelian view of humanity as divided into classes of different worth, argued with Las Casas, who argued in favor of equal rights to freedom of slavery for all humans regardless of race or religion. In Britain in 1683, the English Bill of Rights (or An Act Declaring the Rights and Liberties of the Subject and Settling the Succession of the Crown) and the Scottish Claim of Right each made illegal a range of oppressive governmental actions. Two major revolutions occurred during the 18th century, in the United States (1776) and in France (1789), leading to the adoption of the United States Declaration of Independence and the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen respectively, both of which established certain legal rights. Additionally, the Virginia Declaration of Rights of 1776 encoded into law a number of fundamental civil rights and civil freedoms. Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen approved by the National Assembly of France, August 26, 1789. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. —United States Declaration of Independence, 1776 These were followed by developments in philosophy of human rights by philosophers such as Thomas Paine, John Stuart Mill and G.W.F. Hegel during the 18th and 19th centuries. The term human rights probably came into use some time between Paines The Rights of Man and William Lloyd Garrisons 1831 writings in The Liberator, in which he stated that he was trying to enlist his readers in the great cause of human rights. In the 19th century, human rights became a central concern over the issue of slavery. A number of reformers, such as William Wilberforce in Britain, worked towards the abolition of slavery. This was achieved in the British Empire by the Slave Trade Act 1807 and the Slavery Abolition Act 1833. In the United States, all the northern states had abolished the institution of slavery between 1777 and 1804, although southern states clung tightly to the peculiar institution. Conflict and debates over the expansion of slavery to new territories constituted one of the reasons for the southern states secession and the American Civil War. During the reconstruction period immediately following the war, several amendments to the United States Constitution were made. These included the 13th amendment, banning slavery, the 14th amendment, assuring full citizenship and civil rights to all people born in the United States, and the 15th amendment, guaranteeing African Americans the right to vote. Many groups and movements have achieved profound social changes over the course of the 20th century in the name of human rights. In Europe and North America, labour unions brought about laws granting workers the right to strike, establishing minimum work conditions and forbidding or regulating child labor. The womens rights movement succeeded in gaining for many women the right to vote. National liberation movements in many countries succeeded in driving out colonial powers. One of the most influential was Mahatma Gandhis movement to free his native India from British rule. Movements by long-oppressed racial and religious minorities succeeded in many parts of the world, among them the African American Civil Rights Movement, and more recent diverse identity politics movements, on behalf of women and minorities in the United States. The establishment of the International Committee of the Red Cross, the 1864 Lieber Code and the first of the Geneva Conventions in 1864 laid the foundations of International humanitarian law, to be further developed following the two World Wars. The World Wars, and the huge losses of life and gross abuses of human rights that took place during them, were a driving force behind the development of modern human rights instruments. The League of Nations was established in 1919 at the negotiations over the Treaty of Versailles following the end of World War I. The Leagues goals included disarmament, preventing war through collective security, settling disputes between countries through negotiation and diplomacy, and improving global welfare. Enshrined in its charter was a mandate to promote many of the rights later included in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. At the 1945 Yalta Conference, the Allied Powers agreed to create a new body to supplant the Leagues role; this was to be the United Nations. The United Nations has played an important role in international human-rights law since its creation. Following the World Wars, the United Nations and its members developed much of the discourse and the bodies of law that now make up international humanitarian law and international human rights law. Philosophy The philosophy of human rights attempts to examine the underlying basis of the concept of human rights and critically looks at its content and justification. Several theoretical approaches have been advanced to explain how and why human rights have become a part of social expectations. One of the oldest Western philosophies of human rights is that they are a product of a natural law, stemming from different philosophical or religious grounds. Other theories hold that human rights codify moral behavior which is a human social product developed by a process of biological and social evolution (associated with Hume). Human rights are also described as a sociological pattern of rule setting (as in the sociological theory of law and the work of Weber). These approaches include the notion that individuals in a society accept rules from legitimate authority in exchange for security and economic advantage (as in Rawls) – a social contract. The two theories that dominate contemporary human rights discussion are the interest theory and the will theory. Interest theory argues that the principal function of human rights is to protect and promote certain essential human interests, while will theory attempts to establish the validity of human rights based on the unique human capacity for freedom. Non-governmental Organizations International non-governmental human rights organizations such as Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, International Service for Human Rights and FIDH monitor what they see as human rights issues around the world and promote their views on the subject. Human rights organizations have been said to translate complex international issues into activities to be undertaken by concerned citizens in their own community Human rights organizations frequently engage in lobbying and advocacy in an effort to convince the United Nations, supranational bodies and national governments to adopt their policies on human rights. Many human-rights organizations have observer status at the various UN bodies tasked with protecting human rights. A new (in 2009) nongovernmental human-rights conference is the Oslo Freedom Forum, a gathering described by The Economist as on its way to becoming a human-rights equivalent of the Davos economic forum. The same article noted that human-rights advocates are more and more divided amongst themselves over how violations of human rights are to be defined, notably as regards the Middle East. There is criticism of human-rights organisations who use their status but allegedly move away from their stated goals. For example, Gerald M. Steinberg, an Israel-based academic, maintains that NGOs take advantage of a halo effect and are given the status of impartial moral watchdogs by governments and the media. Such critics claim that this may be seen at various governmental levels, including when human-rights groups testify before investigation committees. Human rights defenders Main article: Human rights defender A human rights defender is someone who, individually or with others, acts to promote or protect human rights. Human rights defenders are those men and women who act peacefully for the promotion and protection of those rights. Corporations Multinational companies play an increasingly large role in the world, and have been responsible for numerous human rights abuses. Although the legal and moral environment surrounding the actions of governments is reasonably well developed, that surrounding multinational companies is both controversial and ill-defined.[citation needed] Multinational companies primary responsibility is to their shareholders, not to those affected by their actions. Such companies may be larger than the economies of some of the states within which they operate, and can wield significant economic and political power. No international treaties exist to specifically cover the behavior of companies with regard to human rights, and national legislation is very variable. Jean Ziegler, Special Rapporteur of the UN Commission on Human Rights on the right to food stated in a report in 2003: [T]he growing power of transnational corporations and their extension of power through privatization, deregulation and the rolling back of the State also mean that it is now time to develop binding legal norms that hold corporations to human rights standards and circumscribe potential abuses of their position of power. —Jean Ziegler In August 2003 the Human Rights Commissions Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights produced draft Norms on the responsibilities of transnational corporations and other business enterprises with regard to human rights. These were considered by the Human Rights Commission in 2004, but have no binding status on corporations and are not monitored. Human rights violations Human rights violations occur when actions by state (or non-state) actors abuse, ignore, or deny basic human rights (including civil, political, cultural, social, and economic rights). Furthermore, violations of human rights can occur when any state or non-state actor breaches any part of the UDHR treaty or other international human rights or humanitarian law. In regard to human rights violations of United Nations laws, Article 39 of the United Nations Charterdesignates the UN Security Council (or an appointed authority) as the only tribunal that may determine UN human rights violations. Human rights abuses are monitored by United Nations committees, national institutions and governments and by many independent non-governmental organizations, such as Amnesty International, International Federation of Human Rights, Human Rights Watch, World Organisation Against Torture, Freedom House, International Freedom of Expression Exchange and Anti-Slavery International. These organisations collect evidence and documentation of alleged human rights abuses and apply pressure to enforce human rights laws. Wars of aggression, war crimes and crimes against humanity, including genocide, are breaches of International humanitarian law and represent the most serious of human rights violations. In efforts to eliminate violations of human rights, building awareness and protesting inhumane treatment has often led to calls for action and sometimes improved conditions. The UN Security Council has interceded with peace keeping forces, and other states and treaties (NATO) have intervened in situations to protect human rights. Substantive rights Right to life Every human being has the inherent right to life. This right shall be protected by law. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his life. —Article 6.1 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights The right to life is the essential right that a human being has the right not to be killed by another human being. The concept of a right to life is central to debates on the issues of abortion, capital punishment, euthanasia, self defense andwar. According to many human rights activists, the death penalty violates this right. The United Nations has called on states retaining the death penalty to establish a moratorium on capital punishment with a view to its abolition. States which do not do so face considerable moral and political pressure. Freedom from torture Throughout history, torture has been used as a method of political re-education, interrogation, punishment, and coercion. In addition to state-sponsored torture, individuals or groups may be motivated to inflict torture on others for similar reasons to those of a state; however, the motive for torture can also be for the sadistic gratification of the torturer, as in the Moors murders. Torture is prohibited under international law and the domestic laws of most countries in the 21st century. It is considered to be a violation of human rights, and is declared to be unacceptable by Article 5 of the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Signatories of the Third Geneva Convention and Fourth Geneva Convention officially agree not to torture prisoners in armed conflicts. Torture is also prohibited by the United Nations Convention Against Torture, which has been ratified by 147 states. National and international legal prohibitions on torture derive from a consensus that torture and similar ill-treatment are immoral, as well as impractical. Despite these international conventions, organizations that monitor abuses of human rights (e.g. Amnesty International, the International Rehabilitation Council for Torture Victims) report widespread use condoned by states in many regions of the world. Amnesty International estimates that at least 81 world governments currently practice torture, some of them openly. Freedom from slavery Main article: slavery Freedom from slavery is an internationally recognized human right. Article 4 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states: No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms. Despite this, the number of slaves today is higher than at any point in history,[68] remaining as high as 12 million to 27 million, Most are debt slaves, largely in South Asia, who are under debt bondage incurred by lenders, sometimes even for generations. Human trafficking is primarily for prostituting women and children into sex industries. Groups such as the American Anti-Slavery Group, Anti-Slavery International, Free the Slaves, the Anti-Slavery Society, and the Norwegian Anti-Slavery Society continue to campaign to rid the world of slavery. Right to a fair trial Main article: Right to a fair trial 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. The right to a fair trial has been defined in numerous regional and international human rights instruments. It is one of the most extensive human rights and all international human rights instruments enshrine it in more than one article. The right to a fair trial is one of the most litigated human rights and substantial case law has been established on the interpretation of this human right. Despite variations in wording and placement of the various fair trial rights, international human rights instrument define the right to a fair trial in broadly the same terms. The aim of the right is to ensure the proper administration of justice. As a minimum the right to fair trial includes the following fair trial rights in civil and criminal proceedings: the right to be heard by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal the right to a public hearing the right to be heard within a reasonable time the right to counsel the right to interpretation Freedom of speech Main article: Freedom of speech Freedom of speech is the freedom to speak freely without censorship. The term freedom of expression is sometimes used synonymously, but includes any act of seeking, receiving and imparting information or ideas, regardless of the medium used. In practice, the right to freedom of speech is not absolute in any country and the right is commonly subject to limitations, such as on libel, slander, obscenity, incitement to commit a crime, etc. The right to freedom of expression is recognized as a human right under Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and recognized in international human rights law in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). Article 19 of the ICCPR states that [e]veryone shall have the right to hold opinions without interference and everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writin g or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of his choice. Freedom of thought, conscience and religion Main articles: Freedom of thought, Conscience, and Freedom of religion 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. —Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Freedom of thought, conscience and religion are closely related rights that protect the freedom of an individual or community, in public or private, to think and freely hold conscientious beliefs and to manifest religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship, and observance; the concept is generally recognized also to include the freedom to change religion or not to follow any religion. The freedom to leave or discontinue membership in a religion or religious group—in religious terms called apostasy—is also a fundamental part of religious freedom, covered by Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Human rights groups such as Amnesty International organises campaigns to protect those arrested and or incarcerated as a prisoner of conscience because of their conscientious beliefs, particularly concerning intellectual, political and artistic freedom of expression and association. In legislation, a conscience clause is a provision in a statute that excuses a health professional from complying with the law (for example legalising surgical or pharmaceutical abortion) if it is incompatible with religious or conscientious beliefs. Rights debates Events and new possibilities can affect existing rights or require new ones. Advances of technology, medicine, and philosophy constantly challenge the status quo of human rights thinking. Future generations In 1997 UNESCO adopted the Declaration on the Responsibilities of the Present Generation Towards the Future Generation. The Declaration opens with the words: Mindful of the will of the peoples, set out solemnly in the Charter of the United Nations, to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war and to safeguard the values and principles enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and all other relevant instruments of international law. —Declaration on the Responsibilities of the Present Generation Towards the Future Generation Article 1 of the declaration states the present generations have the responsibility of ensuring that the needs and interests of present and future generations are fully safeguarded. The preamble to the declaration states that at this point in history, the very existence of humankind and its environment are threatened and the declaration covers a variety of issues including protection of the environment, the human genome, biodiversity, cultural heritage, peace, development, and education. The preamble recalls that the responsibilities of the present generations towards future generations has been referred to in various international instruments, including the Convention for the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage (UNESCO 1972), the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Convention on Biological Diversity (Rio de Janeiro, 1992), the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development (UN Conference on Environment and Development, 1992), the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action (World Conference on Human Rights, 1993) and a number of UN General Assembly resolutions relating to the protection of the global climate for present and future generations adopted since 1990. Sexual orientation and gender identity See also: LGBT rights by country or territory Sexual orientation and gender identity rights relate to the expression of sexual orientation and gender identity based on the right to respect for private life and the right not to be discriminated against on the ground of other status as defined in various human rights conventions, such as article 17 and 26 in the United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and article 8 and article 14 in the European Convention on Human Rights. Through the way many because of their religious beliefs claim that they support human rights in general while denying that LGBT rights are human rights, LGBT rights stand prominent in the very defense of the universal principle of the human rights. If human rights are understood in a way that makes it possible to exclude the basic rights of certain groups only because of certain religious and cultural prejudices, we find that the principle of universality is taken right out of the human rights, and human rights are transformed to a se t of rules only reflecting certain historically values. Homosexuality is illegal in 76 countries[citation needed], and is punishable by execution in seven countries. The criminalization of private, consensual, adult sexual relations, especially in countries where corporal or capital punishment is involved, is one of the primary concerns of LGBT human rights advocates. Other issues include: government recognition of same-sex relationships, LGBT adoption, sexual orientation and military service, immigration equality, anti-discrimination laws, hate crime laws regarding violence against LGBT people,sodomy laws, anti-lesbianism laws, and equal age of consent for same-sex activity. A global charter for sexual orientation and gender identity rights has been proposed in the form of the Yogyakarta Principles, a set of 29 principles whose authors say they apply International Human Rights Law statutes and precedent to situations relevant to LGBT peoples experience. The principles were presented at a United Nations event in New York on November 7, 2007, co-sponsored by Argentina, Brazil and Uruguay. The principles have been acknowledged with influencing the French proposed UN declaration on sexual orientation and gender identity, which focuses on ending violence, criminalization and capital punishment and does not include dialogue about same-sex marriage or right to start a family.[95][96] The proposal was supported by 67 of the then 192 member countries of the United Nations, including all EU member states and the United States. An alternative statement opposing the proposal was initiated by Syria and signed by 57 member nations, including all 27 nations of the Arab League as well as Iran and North Korea. Trade Although both the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights emphasize the importance of a right to work, neither of these documents explicitly mention trade as a mechanism for ensuring this fundamental right. And yet trade plays a key role in providing jobs. Some experts argue that trade is inherent to human nature and that when governments inhibit international trade they directly inhibit the right to work and the other indirect benefits, like the right to education, that increased work and investment help accrue. Others have argued that the ability to trade does not affect everyone equally—often groups like the rural poor, indigenous groups and women are less likely to access the benefits of increased trade. On the other hand, others think that it is no longer primarily individuals but companies that trade, and therefore it cannot be guaranteed as a human right.[citation needed] Additionally, trying to fit too many concepts under the umbrella of what qualifies as a human right has the potential to dilute their importance. Finally, it is difficult to define a right to trade as either fair or just in that the current trade regime produces winners and losers but its reform is likely to produce (different) winners and losers. See also: The Recognition of Labour Standards within the World Trade Organisation and Investor state dispute settlement Water See also: Water politics and Right to water In November 2002, the United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights issued a non-binding comment affirming that access to water was a human right: the human right to water is indispensable for leading a life in human dignity. It is a prerequisite for the realization of other human rights. —United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights This principle was reaffirmed at the 3rd and 4th World Water Councils in 2003 and 2006. This marks a departure from the conclusions of the 2nd World Water Forum in The Hague in 2000, which stated that water was a commodity to be bought and sold, not a right. There are calls from many NGOs and politicians to enshrine access to water as a binding human right, and not as a commodity. According to the United Nations, nearly 900 million people lack access to clean water and more than 2.6 billion people lack access to basic sanitation. On July 28, 2010, the UN declared water and sanitation as human rights. By declaring safe and clean drinking water and sanitation as a human right, the U.N. General Assembly made a step towards the Millennium Development Goal to ensure environmental sustainability, which in part aims to halve, by 2015, the proportion of the population without sustainable access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation. Reproductive rights Main article: reproductive rights Reproductive rights are rights relating to reproduction and reproductive health. The World Health Organisation defines reproductive rights as follows: Reproductive rights rest on the recognition of the basic right of all couples and individuals to decide freely and responsibly the number, spacing and timing of their children and to have the information and means to do so, and the right to attain the highest standard of sexual and reproductive health. They also include the right of all to make decisions concerning reproduction free of discrimination, coercion and violence. — World Health Organisation Reproductive rights were first established as a subset of human rights at the United Nations 1968 International Conference on Human Rights. The sixteenth article of the resulting Proclamation of Teheran states, Parents have a basic human right to determine freely and responsibly the number and the spacing of their children. Reproductive rights may include some or all of the following rights: the right to legal or safe abortion, the right to control ones reproductive functions, the right to quality reproductive healthcare, and the right to education and access in order to make reproductive choices free from coercion, discrimination, and violence. Reproductive rights may also be understood to include education about contraception and sexually transmitted infections, and freedom from coerced sterilization and contraception, protection from gender-based practices such asfemale genital cutting (FGC) and male genital mutilation (MGM). Information and communication technologies Main articles: Right to Internet access and Digital rights In October 2009, Finlands Ministry of Transport and Communications announced that every person in Finland would have the legal right to Internet access. Since July 2010, the government has legally obligated telecommunications companies to offer broadband Internet access to every permanent residence and office. The connection must be reasonably priced and have a downstream rate of at least 1 Mbit/s. In March 2010, the BBC, having commissioned an opinion poll, reported that almost four in five people around the world believe that access to the internet is a fundamental right. The poll, conducted by the polling companyGlobeScan for the BBC World Service, collated the answers of 27,973 adult citizens across 26 countries to find that 79% of adults either strongly agreed or somewhat agreed with the statement: access to the internet should be a fundamental right of all people. Relationship with other topics Human rights and the environment There are two basic conceptions of environmental human rights in the current human rights system. The first is that the right to a healthy or adequate environment is itself a human right (as seen in both Article 24 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights, and Article 11 of the San Salvador Protocol to the American Convention on Human Rights). The second conception is the idea that environmental human rights can be derived from other human rights, usually – the right to life, the right to health, the right to private family life and the right to property (among many others). This second theory enjoys much more widespread use in human rights courts around the world, as those rights are contained in many human rights documents. The onset of various environmental issues, especially climate change, has created potential conflicts between different human rights. Human rights ultimately require a working ecosystem and healthy environment, but the granting of certain rights to individuals may damage these. Such as the conflict between right to decide number of offspring and the common need for a healthy environment, as noted in the tragedy of the commons. In the area of environmental rights, the responsibilities of multinational corporations, so far relatively unaddressed by human rights legislation, is of paramount consideration.[citation needed] Environmental Rights revolve largely around the idea of a right to a livable environment both for the present and the future generations. National security See also: National security and Anti-terrorism legislation With the exception of non-derogable human rights (international conventions class the right to life, the right to be free from slavery, the right to be free from torture and the right to be free from retroactive application of penal laws as non-derogable),[120] the UN recognises that human rights can be limited or even pushed aside during times of national emergency – although the emergency must be actual, affect the whole population and the threat must be to the very existence of the nation. The declaration of emergency must also be a last resort and a temporary measure. —United Nations. The Resource Rights that cannot be derogated for reasons of national security in any circumstances are known as peremptory norms or jus cogens. Such United Nations Charter obligations are binding on all states and cannot be modified by treaty. Examples of national security being used to justify human rights violations include the Japanese American internment during World War II, Stalins Great Purge, and the modern-day abuses of terror suspects rights by some countries, often in the name of the War on Terror.

My Reading History :: essays research papers

  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  If one were to look at my varied reading habits, they would be struck by the diversity and over all unusualness of my mind’s library. I hardly remember the plot of the first book I read, but it was called Lonesome Dove. It wasn’t the actual first book I read, but I don’t really count the McGregor Readers from kindergarten. I read it in first grade because of my Grandmother’s fascination in the T.V. mini-series that was playing during the time. I wanted to be able to talk to her about it so I went to the public library that weekend and picked up a copy. Well, I actually didn’t pick it up, it was too heavy. It took me over two and a half months to read, but with the help of a dictionary and my grandma, I finally read it from cover to cover. I can’t really say that I understood it, because I don’t recall what it was about. But I do remember that it was quite an ordeal. Since then I have read many books. I enjoy fiction the best, especially those that are based on society, but have a small twist that leads to an interesting story. Some of the stories that I remember best from that early time in my life are Tales from Wayside Elementary School, Hatchet, The Godfather, and The Giver. I think that Hatchet, by Gary Paulsen, is the only book that I’ve read more than once. I liked the situation that Brian was put into, lost in the wilderness, with nothing more to fend for himself with than his mind and a trusty hatchet. The adversity he faces and his undying drive are what fascinated me most. Since that time my reading habits have grown into a different style. I have usually only read what was assigned to me during the school year because that was all I had time to do, but I have always strived to put forth extra effort. For example: last year for English 3 AP we had to read an excerpt from Benjamin Franklin’s Autobiography. Although that we only had to read a small bit, I checked the enti re book from the college library and read it all. Although the way that Franklin rambled on and on about his â€Å"Franklin Planner† was somewhat boring, the way he describe his life was pure poetry.

Aristotle on Gender Essay

The peer discussion held last week had its attention focused on a comparison of Aristotle’s and Plato’s ideas of justice and gender. As previously discussed from our lectures, Plato’s idea of justice was concerned with an internal equality between the members of the classes present within the polis. This focused more on individualism in that one must only be concerned with his/her business and not minding other’s problems. The justice that occurs in their society depends on the class to whom one belongs. However, Aristotle, his student, was more for all-encompassing justice aiming for the ultimate goal of the constitution. Equality, for Aristotle, depends on the constitution in which the society is built upon. For democracy, it promotes equality for those who are equal, but only for those who are equal. Elaborating on this, equality only exists for the majority, who rules in this kind of polis. On the other hand, oligarchy focuses more on the distribution of office, in which there is equality for those who are unequal. (Curtis, 1981) However, this failed to consider the degree of goodness in a citizen. Oligarchs depended more on a wealthy upbringing, giving them superiority over the others who have less riches than them. Democrats was more dependent on free birth, all for equality among every member of the society. Aristotle’s justice was an advocate of excellence over birth. Considering his example of the story of the flutists, Aristotle concluded that justice all ends ups to the contribution of a good citizen to the aim of the society and to the â€Å"end† of state. Aristotle could care less about the social standing of a citizen, instead focusing more on his triumphs instead of what he was born to be. Gender is another topic wherein these two philosophers’ opinions differ. For Plato, equality among women and men existed within the society itself. Women were free to choose what profession they have, provided that they have the proper education to back it up. Aristotle’s idea for gender, however, is a sexist one. He believed that only men were worthy to be citizens, and that was only if he was a holder of office. Women were â€Å"naturally† governed by men, as indicated in his works, specifically identified by the phrase â€Å"mastery of husband over wife†. He gave statements wherein the men were given rights over those of the opposite gender. In spite of their standings as teacher and student, their opinions differ regarding how a society must work in order to achieve peace and harmony within their constitution. However, important points can also be withdrawn from their works, such as the fairer justice referred to in Aristotle’s works, and Plato’s ideas of equality and the manner of governing a society. Not one person is perfect, and we cannot find fault upon one making a mistake that we ourselves may have committed. Group: # 4 – Section: WBYDX.

Different Factors Of Mission Alignment Process Business Essay - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 4 Words: 1056 Downloads: 10 Date added: 2017/06/26 Category Marketing Essay Type Narrative essay Did you like this example? Practice what you preach. Walk your talk. Actions speak louder than words. These are all phrases commonly used to describe the expectation that words should match behaviors. Mission is the foundation upon which decision makers can build corporate strategic planning processes (Pearce and Roth, 1988, p. 39). A mission statement defines the purpose of the organization; it acts as the invisible hand that guides people within the organization so that they can work independently and yet collectively to achieve desired levels of organization performance (Kotler et al., 1996). This suggests that the mission is the basis for internal policies and procedures. According to Bart, Bontis and Taggar (2001) a clearly written mission statements are more likely to be aligned with a firms internal policies and systems, and better alignment is more likely to result in an effective guide for employees. (Bartkus and Glassman, 2008) A firms mission statement is an enduring statement of purpose that distinguishes its business from its peer firms, identifies its scope of operations, embodies its business philosophy and reflects the image it seeks to project (Toftoy and Chatterjee, 2004).The mission statement is expected to guide and direct employees and managers (Campbell, 1997; Ireland and Hitt, 1992).Missions typically include clear references to financial performance, environmental responsibility, employee respect, and excellence in customer service, too often it is only financial performance that gets measured and managed while the other equally important parts of the mission get lost in noble words (Desmidt, Prinzie and Decramer,. 2011). In other words, there is a gap between what the mission says and what people in the organization believe is managements real message. This gap is a result of the lack of alignment among the managerial tools of policies, procedures, and practices with the mission. This lack of alignment confuses everyone about what the missi on really is as they try to implement it. (Crotts el at., 2005). The study by Crotts el at (2005) shows the linkage between organizational mission and financial performance founded that the degree to which an organization aligns its internal structure, policies, and procedures with its mission was positively associated with employee behavior which had the most direct relationship with financial performance. Mission statements are intended to motivate (and in so doing, control) the behavior of organizational members towards common organizational goals (Bart el al., 2001) The Mission Alignment Audit Process Defines the outcomes of the mission in measurable terms it Identify key policies, procedures and practices that cue employee behavior (e.g., job descriptions, annual plans) .It also creates an audit of whether or not the mission is included in each key policy, procedure, and practice of an organization and at the end mission alignment process fix and align any item that is ou t of alignment and compares the audit results against the mission outcome measurement to a firm value of alignment (Crotts el at. 2005). The mission and organizational alignment includes the functional effectiveness of human resource functions, the involvement and alignment of human resource with the firms business strategy the role of the human resource functions in organizations as a business partner, and the leadership style of top management including the success in communication the firm mission(Huselid and Becker, 1997) .Huselid and Baker believes that each of mission alignment step is an integral part of an organizational context that supports and reinforces the returns from a high performance human resource system. Bart and Baetz (1998) were the first researchers to introduce the concept of mission and organizational alignment as potentially important factors to a mission influence over employee behavior. The authors observed that the degree to which an organization al igned its structure, system and procedure with its mission represented one of the most powerful, positive and most pervasive relationships with performance in general, but especially with employee behavior. Al-Anzi (2009) presented the key factors that affect employees productivity and performance fall into two categories. First those factors that are driven by procedures, protocols and management requirements and secondly those factors that arise from premises, office or factory design. Employees have always been a dominant component of mission statements, demonstrating the organizations attitude and commitment to employees development (Strong, 1997). When organizational recruitment, rewards and information systems are aligned with the specific components in a mission statement they serve to reinforce for employees the message in the mission. This is because a high degree of organizational mission alignment tightens the focuses and priorities and makes clear the direction in which an organization is headed (Bart and Baetz, 1998).Strong (1997) stated that 35% of all organizations incorporate this stakeholder group in their mission, thus acknowledging employees as instrumental to the achievement of organization strategic goals. Alavi and Karami (2009) states that there are two principal benefits of having a mission alignment ,first is the better staff motivation towards achieving a common organizational purpose, or sense of mission and second is a more focused/improved allocation of organizational resources. Hall (2002) presents that employee performance is based on the critical knowledge and learning within an organization. To be measured core competencies and skills needed to deliver products and services at high level of quality must be identified by the organizational mission and policies. Employee performance is also recognizes that the real value added to an organization is the employees ability to use knowledge to solve problems related to deliv ery of services and products to the customer. Aligning the organizational mission will help the management to improve their performance as by revisiting the policies related to employees. This will help them in better way to overcome their weaknesses and perform according to the organizational needs and requirements (Hall, 2002). Bart and Bontis (2003) suggest that employees and their boards appear to be relatively aware of their organizations mission. Only a small percentage of employees indicated that there was somewhat aware of the mission and very few stated that there was no awareness at all. Nevertheless, for the most part, there were still a large number of employees who were not highly or fully aware of their Organizations mission. Employees know, understand and remember the mission this is an important and significant contributor to having individuals throughout the organization commit to it. The more aware the employees are of their organizations mission, the greater th eir organizational members commitment to it will be. Moreover, employees awareness of the mission is equivalent in in terms of both managements awareness of the mission and managements involvement with the missions development. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "Different Factors Of Mission Alignment Process Business Essay" essay for you Create order