Human rights: Law, language and the bare human being

Meeting the Need for Special Education Teacher Education: Universities Can Make It Difficult

“…"Let's face it Phil. Disability's not sexy" [22]. This was the comment made by a highly respected special school principal during a PASS meeting.…”

Strengthening the Human Right to Sanitation as an Instrument for Inclusive Development

“…The debate over the meaning of HR predates codification (Sen, 2004) and is traceable to a lack of a unified foundation (Mooney, 2012). This is not purely a theoretical question, but one that requires a consideration of the political processes for HR implementation as well (Flynn, 2012).…”

“…The legal literature also distinguishes between legal rights derived de jure from the formal rules of law that are dependent on the relationship between the individual and the state, and non-legal rights or the bare HR which are those de facto conditions that make human existence possible and are therefore fundamental to the individual's existence, irrespective of the relationship with the state (Mooney, 2012;Parekh, 2007;van Boven, 1982). The distinction highlights the inherent limitations of a purely legalistic (and narrow) definition of HR, and the paradox that arises where it is the vocal ‗rightsholders' who are able to demand enforcement of their rights and become the main beneficiaries, rather than the marginalized ‗rightsholders' who require HR protections more (Douzinas, 2000;Gearty, 2006;Mooney, 2012 Mooney, 2012;Parekh, 2007;van Boven (1982) Universal, unchanging and applicable to all humans Human rights are a given and integral to human existence; perspective of natural law scholars Rogers & Kitzinger (1986); Dembour (2006) Human rights are to be discussed; perspective of deliberative scholars Rogers & Kitzinger (1986); Dembour (2006); Stenner (2010) Remarkably, philosophy scholars define HR broadly as the rights to which all human beings are entitled literally because they are human, and there can be no justification for violation under any circumstances (Donnelly, 2013;Wiseberg, 1996). A mosaic of discourses support the broad definition of HR, including: grounded universals; radical activist politics; sociopolitical construction; rights and responsibilities; and rights and democracy (Rogers & Kitzinger, 1986;Stenner, 2010).…”

“…Different theoretical perspectives and disciplinary approaches are therefore necessary.‖ This is because HR are the result of multiple discourses, practices, institutions and campaigns (Douzinas, 2013;Mooney, 2012). The lack of consensus on meaning makes it difficult to find consistency in the implementation of HR at the level of individuals.…”

“…At the national and sub-national levels, HR can: (a) counter significant power imbalances (Sinden, 2005; (Limon, 2010); (d) prioritise human protection in development policies (White, 2011); and (e) lend a sense of urgency to human development challenges such as the lack of sanitation (Qerimi, 2012). However, these outcomes are mostly achievable where HR are broadly defined to include both rights de jure, as contained in the formal sources of international law (see 4.2.1), and de facto, in recognition of emerging categories of HR like third generation solidarity rights (Alston, 2009), the fourth generation right to biotechnology (Gupta, 2014), and by extending HR to all persons without discrimination (Mooney, 2012).…”