Respect, Protect: HUMAN RIGHTS as active verbs for all, forever

Today is 

Human Rights Day

Editing by Carolyn Bennett

“The very essence of human rights is the equal dignity for everyone,” says United Nations Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions Christof Heyns.

T

he future of human rights lies in our hands. We must all act when human rights are violated. States as well as individuals must take responsibility for the realization and effective protection of human rights.

Iraq

Refugee CampsForced Homelessness

In marking the 20th year since a Vienna Declaration laid the ground for the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Commissioner Navi Pillay lays out the state of human rights. “Women,” she says, “continue to suffer discrimination, violence and persecution; as do ethnic, racial and religious minorities and migrants”; and people of varieties of sexual orientations. “This shows how far we still have to go,” she says.

Internal conflicts continue to produce horrendous and widespread human rights abuses. Peaceful protests by people exercising, and calling for, their legitimate rights are being ruthlessly crushed by authorities virtually on a daily basis.

Syrian
Internal, external
Struggle

Changing and shifting populations − fueled by rising poverty, refugee movements and volatile global economics − make countering ‘fear of the other’ a priority.

  Human rights defenders who enter Tweets or Facebook posts can land in jail.

Armed drones are being deployed without due legal process for the remote targeting of individuals.

Killer USA drones
against world 

So-called ‘Killer robots’ – autonomous weapons systems that can select and hit a target without human intervention – are no longer science fiction, but a reality.  Their likely future deployment poses deeply troubling ethical and legal questions.

“Continued vigilance is needed to ensure that new technologies advance rather than destroy human rights. No matter the scale of these changes, existing international human rights law and international humanitarian law governing the conduct of armed conflict remain applicable.”

Homeless in Britain

INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS LAW

I

nternational human rights law lays down obligations which States are bound to respect. By becoming parties to international treaties, States assume obligations and duties under international law to respect, to protect and to fulfill human rights. 

Poverty
Africa

Homeless in USA

The obligation to respect means that States must refrain from interfering with or curtailing the enjoyment of human rights. 

The obligation to protect requires States to protect individuals and groups against human rights abuses. The obligation to fulfill means that States must take positive action to facilitate the enjoyment of basic human rights. 

Through ratification of international human rights treaties, Governments undertake to put into place domestic measures and legislation compatible with their treaty obligations and duties. Where domestic legal proceedings fail to address human rights abuses, mechanisms and procedures for individual complaints or communications are available at the regional and international levels to help ensure that international human rights standards are indeed respected, implemented, and enforced at the local level.

HUMAN RIGHTS DAY

H

uman Rights Day is observed annually on this 10th day of December and commemorates the United Nations General Assembly’s adoption in 1948 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Today the UDHR turns 65.

When the General Assembly adopted the Declaration, with 48 states in favor and eight abstentions, it was proclaimed as a ‘common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations,’ toward which individuals and societies should ‘strive by progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance.’

Although the Declaration with its broad range of political, civil, social, cultural and economic rights is not a binding document, it inspired more than 60 human rights instruments which together constitute an international standard of human rights.

Drafted in
aftermath of
World War II

Today the general consent of all United Nations Member States on the basic Human Rights laid down in the Declaration makes it even stronger and emphasizes the relevance of Human Rights in our daily lives. [UN High Commissioner for Human Rights]

UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS:Preamble

Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,

Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of [hu]mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people,

Whereas it is essential, if [people are] not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law,

U.S. diplomat and UDHR
Eleanor Roosevelt
1948

Whereas it is essential to promote the development of friendly relations between nations,

Whereas the peoples of the United Nations have in the Charter reaffirmed their faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and women and have determined to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,

Whereas Member States have pledged themselves to achieve, in cooperation with the United Nations, the promotion of universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms,

Whereas a common understanding of these rights and freedoms is of the greatest importance for the full realization of this pledge,

Now, Therefore THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY proclaims THIS UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society, keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance, both among the peoples of Member States themselves and among the peoples of territories under their jurisdiction [End Preamble]

E

nding her Human Rights Day remarks, Commissioner Pillay says (and I agree wholeheartedly)

We can – and we must – do better [they we are doing]. The vision and goals formulated 20 years ago in Vienna are still valid. They are still worth fighting for now – over the next 20 years – and beyond.

Sources and notes

“A 20-20 Human Rights Vision Statement by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay for Human Rights Day, 10 December 2013, Media centre, Check the Universal Human Rights Index: http://uhri.ohchr.org/en

http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/media.aspx?IsMediaPage=true

The High Commissioner for Human Rights, as the main United Nations rights official, and her Office play a major role in coordinating efforts for the yearly observation of Human Rights Day.

Human Rights Day is observed by the international community every year on 10 December. It commemorates the day in 1948 the United Nations General Assembly adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

The formal inception of Human Rights Day dates from 1950, after the Assembly passed resolution 423 (V) inviting all States and interested organizations to adopt 10 December of each year as Human Rights Day. http://www.ohchr.org/EN/AboutUs/Pages/HumanRightsDay.aspx

International Human Rights Law: The international human rights movement was strengthened when the United Nations General Assembly adopted of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) on 10 December 1948, http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/InternationalLaw.aspx

At the 50th year mark, published by the United Nations Department of Public Information

DPI/1937/A--December 1997; Human Rights Page UN Home Page: Prepared for posting by the Information Technology Section (ITS) of the Department of Public Information, © United Nations 1997, http://www.un.org/rights/50/carta.htm

UDHR TEXT

Together with its Preamble, 30 Articles comprise the Universal Declaration of Human Rights http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml

______________________________________________

Bennett's books are available in New York State independent bookstores: Lift Bridge Bookshop: www.liftbridgebooks.com [Brockport, NY]; Sundance Books: http://www.sundancebooks.com/main.html [Geneseo, NY]; Mood Makers Books: www.moodmakersbooks.com [City of Rochester, NY]; Dog Ears Bookstore and Literary Arts Center: www.enlightenthedog.org/ [Buffalo, NY]; Burlingham Books – ‘Your Local Chapter’: http://burlinghambooks.com/ [Perry, NY 14530]; The Bookworm: http://www.eabookworm.com/ [East Aurora, NY] • See also: World Pulse: Global Issues through the eyes of Women: http://www.worldpulse.com/ http://www.worldpulse.com/pulsewire http://www.facebook.com/#!/bennetts2ndstudy

______________________________________________

Murderous foreign relations paradigm carelessly coddled by U.S. Left, Right

Anti-U.S. demonstration
Middle East

Unchecked power is global threat ─ no matter who or what holds it; and it may soon be checked

‘In questions of power … let no more be heard of confidence in man;

‘Bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution.’ [Greenwald quotes Jefferson]

Re-reporting, editing by Carolyn Bennett

C

ensored and ignored

Human costs suffered by Fallujans (Iraq) Ross Caputi at yesterday’s Guardian UK

U.S. war on Iraq

“One of the most severe public health crises in history, for which the U.S. military may be to blame, receives no attention in the United States.

Four new studies on the health crisis in Fallujah have been published in the last three months. Ever since two major U.S.-led assaults destroyed the Iraqi city of Fallujah in 2004, Fallujans have witnessed dramatic increases in rates of cancers, birth defects and infant mortality in their city.

The latest study by Dr Chris Busby “is not abstract,” Ross Caputi writes. “It is not merely an intellectual or medical issue.” The modern means of warfare may be inherently indiscriminate. This has real world importance.

Quoting Dr. Busby, author and co-author of two studies on the Fallujah heath crisis, Caputi says Busby calls this “‘the highest rate of genetic damage in any population ever studied.’”

But those who do not want to hear the costs of war dismiss or reject Busby’s studies. 

Many naysayers have dismissed the authors’ hypotheses as speculative (hypotheses by definition are always speculative to a degree: informed yet their claims intended to be verified or falsified) “because they do not like their moral and political implications.” In their dismissal, they offer no further studies ─ “many of these naysayers have not responded to these studies by calling for more research and investigation to test the hypotheses of Dr. Busby or Dr. Williams” [studies by Dr. Dai Williams suggest that there is a new generation of weapons being used, possibly by the U.S. and Israeli militaries, which could have serious indiscriminate health effects on the populations living near bombing targets].  Rather they have expressed “a great deal of antipathy for the scientific method and the pursuit of truth”; and even “more importantly, they dismiss the suffering of the people of Fallujah, and all people affected by these issues.”

Ross Caputi concludes the obvious that to help the people of Fallujah, more studies must be done to figure out what is harming the children then steps must be taken to ensure that this never happens again; but, first, he says, “we must find a way to overcome the stifling silence of governments.”

Pakistanis protest
U. S. assassination drones

U.S. Left to Right, Right to Left

Coddling a murderous paradigm 

I

f it’s not their children, and lacks immediacy in that perception, then they just don’t care. Slaughter other people’s children: kill them, let them die, let them suffer and when the bomblets explode, let them suffer well into the future when war has been pronounced ended.

Glenn Greenwald had a piece at the Guardian online this week on “journalist” at large MSNBCer Joe Klein’s latest pledge of allegiance to drones to kill other people’s children and his good-guy versus his bad-guy orders to kill other people’s children.

In the article “Joe Klein’s sociopathic defense of drone killings of children,” Greenwald quotes Klein’s drone advocacy when he says: they take “‘out a lot of bad people and sav[e] Americans’ lives … because our troops don’t have to do this . . . You don’t need pilots anymore because you do it with a joystick in California.’”

However “‘… there is a major possibility of abuse,’” Klein says, “‘if you have the wrong people running the government. But the bottom line is: whose 4-year-olds get killed?’”

Not mine, he seems to say.

What we're doing is limiting the possibility that 4-year-olds here [in the United States] will get killed by indiscriminate acts of terror. 

Greenwald responds that “the only difference between the Joe Kleins of the world and Osama bin Laden” ─ in justifying the slaughter of civilians ─ “is that they are on different sides.

U.S. drones attack Somalis

“To the extent one wanted to distinguish” these men, Greenwald says, “one could say that the violence and aggression brought by the U.S. to the Muslim world vastly exceeds ─ vastly exceeds ─ the violence and aggression brought by the Muslim world to the United States.” That’s fact, nor opinion.

Greenwald continues.

“Leaving aside the sociopathic, morally grotesque defense of killing 4-year-olds with a ‘joystick from California,’ Klein’s claims are completely false on pragmatic grounds.

Slaughtering Muslim children does not protect American children from terrorism. The opposite is true.… 

The reason American 4-year-olds are in danger from terrorism ─ to the very limited extent they are ─ is precisely because those empowered in U.S. government and media circles think like Joe Klein does …. 

Soulless cheerleaders for indiscriminate killing.…

Leaving aside the authoritarian willingness to trust certain leaders with unchecked power,” Greenwald observes, quoting a warning of America’s third president, Thomas Jefferson:

‘In questions of power … let no more be heard of confidence in man;

Bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution.’

  

“Once a power is legitimized and institutionalized, it is then vested in all presidents, current and future, Democratic and Republican [and] those who cheer for the unchecked power to assassinate in secret because it is Obama who currently wields that power ─ will be the ones fully responsible when some leader they do not trust exercises it, abuses it in the future.”

Peril of unchecked superpower: its own undoing

Seumas Milne writes this week at the Guardian

“Whoever runs Washington heads a global empire” … and “whatever the personal views of the politician at the top, the U.S. empire is a system ─ not a policy ─ underpinned by corporate and military interests,” he writes.

“Romney would very likely be a more dangerous leader. But almost every U.S. president has sanctioned military action. And the risk of war with Iran or growing intervention in Syria would remain under a second Obama term.”

However, the overreach in the “war on terror,” paid in blood and treasure by Americans and other peoples of the world, has hastened the decline of the imperial system. The United States has troops stationed in a majority of countries; its military spending exceeds the combined spending of the next 20 powers combined. And though American politics affects people’s lives in every part of the world ─ often as a matter of life or death ─ the rest of the world wants the United States “off its back.”

W

United Natons
General Assembly
193 nations

ill the United Nations succeed in checking unchecked U.S. global killing project? Legal affairs correspondent Owen Bowcott reports for the Guardian

UN special rapporteurs seem to be trying to rein in U.S. reign of assassination drone terror on peoples of the world.

United Nations at Geneva is reportedly establishing an investigations unit “to examine the legality of drone attacks in cases where civilians are killed in ‘targeted’ counter-terrorism operations.”

 

Special rapporteur Ben Emmerson (QC) this past summer called for  effective investigations into drone attacks and this week he announced during a speech at Harvard law school that he and his colleague Christof Heyns, the UN special rapporteur on extra-judicial killings, will launch “an investigation unit within the special procedures of the [UN] Human Rights Council to inquire into individual drone attacks.”

Emmerson monitors counter-terrorism for the UN and has said that some U.S. drone strikes in Pakistan “may amount to war crimes.”

 Challenge impunity

Universal Declaration of
Human Rights
1947

Emmerson maintains that the United States’ position “that it can conduct counter-terrorism operations against al-Qaeda or other groups anywhere in the world because it is deemed to be an international conflict was indefensible.”

The global war paradigm has done immense damage to a previously shared international consensus on the legal framework underlying both international human rights law and international humanitarian law.

The global war paradigm has also given a spurious justification to a range of serious human rights and humanitarian law violations.

The global war paradigm was always based on the flimsiest of reasoning, and was not supported even by close allies of the United States.

Sources and notes

“The victims of Fallujah's health crisis are stifled by western silence ─ To research a possible link between US bombardment and rates of birth defects and pediatric cancer in Iraq is a moral imperative” (Ross Caputi, guardian.co.uk), October 25, 2012, http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/oct/25/fallujah-iraq-health-crisis-silence

Busby is not the only researcher who takes ‘controversial’ positions.

His findings are complimented by the work of Dr Dai Williams, an independent weapons researcher. Williams has been investigating what he calls ‘third generation uranium weapons’.

He has found patents for weapon systems that could use un-depleted uranium, or slightly enriched uranium, interchangeably with tungsten, either as a dense metal or as a reactive metal.

Un-depleted and slightly enriched uranium have also been found on other battlefields (Afghanistan and Lebanon).

These findings lead researchers like Dr Williams to believe that there is a new generation of weapons being used, possibly by the U.S. and Israeli militaries, which could have serious indiscriminate health effects on the populations living near bombing targets.

“Joe Klein’s sociopathic defense of drone killings of children ─ Reflecting the Obama legacy and U.S. culture, the Time columnist says: ‘the bottom line is: whose 4-year-olds get killed?’” (Glenn Greenwald, The Guardian), October 23, 2012, http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/oct/23/klein-drones-morning-joe

“Americans would also gain from scaling back the empire ─ The presidential foreign policy debate showed how close the candidates were – and how far from their own public opinion”

(Seumas Milne, The Guardian), October 23, 2012, http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/oct/23/better-us-scale-back-global-empire

http://www.stopwar.org.uk/index.php/usa-war-on-terror/1977-the-world-has-voted-in-the-us-presidential-election-get-america-off-our-back

  

“UN to investigate civilian deaths from U.S. drone strikes ─ Special rapporteur on counter-terror operations condemns Barack Obama’s failure to establish effective monitoring process” (Owen Bowcott, legal affairs correspondent, guardian.co.uk) October 25, 2012, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/oct/25/un-inquiry-us-drone-strikes

Joe Klein is a regular blogger on time.com’s Swampland blog. In November 2007, Salon columnist Glenn Greenwald wrote about factual errors in a Klein story about the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). Klein reported that the Democratic version of the FISA bill ‘would require the surveillance of every foreign-terrorist target’s calls to be approved by the FISA court’ and that it therefore ‘would give terrorists the same legal protections as Americans.’

Time later published a comment: ‘In the original version of this story, Joe Klein wrote that the House Democratic version of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) would allow a court review of individual foreign surveillance targets. Republicans believe the bill can be interpreted that way, but Democrats don’t.’

Greenwald noted that the text of the legislation does not require court review of individual targets, and that Time’s response disregards this fact. Klein’s response was: ‘I have neither the time nor legal background to figure out who’s right.’

Later, Greenwald reported that Time ‘refused the requests of two sitting members of Congress ... to correct Klein’s false statements in Time itself.’ Greenwald has reported that Senator Russ Feingold has been informed by Time that his letter rebutting Klein will be published in a forthcoming issue.

Klein was later drawn attention to by Greenwald for revealing on MSNBC’s Morning Joe program his advocacy of U.S. drone strikes resulting in the death and mutilation of young children. Klein stated that the bottom line in the end was to ask 

‘whose 4-year-olds get killed? What we’re doing is limiting the possibility that 4-year-olds here will get killed by indiscriminate acts of terror.’ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Klein

_____________________________________

Bennett's books are available in New York State independent bookstores: Lift Bridge Bookshop: www.liftbridgebooks.com [Brockport, NY]; Sundance Books: http://www.sundancebooks.com/main.html [Geneseo, NY]; Mood Makers Books: www.moodmakersbooks.com [City of Rochester, NY]; Dog Ears Bookstore and Literary Arts Center: www.enlightenthedog.org/ [Buffalo, NY]; Burlingham Books – ‘Your Local Chapter’: http://burlinghambooks.com/ [Perry, NY 14530]; The Bookworm: http://www.eabookworm.com/ [East Aurora, NY] • See also: World Pulse: Global Issues through the eyes of Women: http://www.worldpulse.com/ http://www.worldpulse.com/pulsewire http://www.facebook.com/#!/bennetts2ndstudy

_____________________________________