HUMAN RIGHTS LAW

ELAINE DIANNE L.
SAMONTE
JD 2-2

HUMAN RIGHTS

Defining human rights is very crucial and difficult on my part.

Without reading anything, what comes to my mind is that, when you
are deprived of your rights as conferred by law, it is already a violation
of your human rights, rights that are enumerated under the Bill of
Rights of the Philippine Constitution. Having been said, I was wrong
totally wrong. If you look into the deeper understanding of what
human rights is, you will be able to make distinctions among different
rights such as civil rights, political rights or social and constitutional
rights and any other rights to that of what human right is all about.
As defined by the United Nations, human rights are those rights
which are inherent to all human beings, whatever our nationality, place
of residence, sex, national or ethnic origin, color, religion, language, or
any other status. We are all equally entitled to our human rights
without discrimination. These rights are all interrelated, interdependent
and indivisible.1
As define in the book, Human Rights Law: Human Rights Culture
by Sarmiento, Human Rights are the aggregate of privileges, claim,
benefits, entitlements and moral guarantees that pertain to man
because of his humanity. 2
To reflect on the definitions mentioned, human rights recognizes
the dignity inherent in every person as a human being, regardless of
his or her particular nationality, race, ethnicity, religion, rights belong
to everyone, regardless of their circumstances. They cannot be given
away or taken away from you by anybody. In other words, human
rights belong to everyone wherever they are because they are human
beings endowed with dignity.

United Nations Office: Human Rights. January 9, 2015

http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Pages/WhatareHumanRights.aspx
2
Sarmiento, R., Human Rights Law: Human Rights Culture. Quezon City: Rex Printing Company, Inc.,
2014. p.1

HUMAN RIGHTS LAW

ELAINE DIANNE L.
SAMONTE
JD 2-2

Moreover, according to the Philippine Commission on Human

Rights, they define human rights as the supreme, inherent, and
inalienable rights to life, dignity, and self development. It is the
essence of these rights that makes a man a human. 3
As what I would like to emphasize, human rights is basic to
humanity. It applies to all people everywhere. Being human, it is by
nature that human rights are with us, in which rights are considered
inborn to all mankind. It is the very essence why we exist and without
which, we can never enjoy being humans. Understanding of human
rights is an important part of our individual status as human beings.
These are the basic rights and freedoms that belong to every person in
the world. These are the fundamental things that human beings need
in order to flourish and participate fully in society. Without which, we
cannot live as human beings. These are the rights that you cannot
take away from an individual.
As the first sentence of the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights states, respect for human rights and human dignity is the
foundation of freedom, justice, and peace in the world.
Human rights are generally characterized as inherent,
fundamental, inalienable, imprescriptible, indivisible, universal and
interdependent.
Human rights are characterized as inherent because they are not
granted by any person or authority. Inherent means that rights are the
birthright of all human beings, existing independently of the will of
either and individual human being or group. When one is born, he
carries with them these rights. They cannot be separated or detached
from him. They are not obtained and granted through any human
action or intervention.4 As distinguished from constitutional rights, the
latter are rights provided by a State, or by its legislative body. Some of
which are the right to life and the right to dignity as human beings.
Human rights are fundamental rights because without them, the
life and the dignity of man will be meaningless. Human rights are also
considered inalienable. Inalienable means that no person can deprive
3
4

Coquia, J. R. Human Rights. General Nature and Definition of Human Rights, 2000. p.3
Op. cit. p. 3

HUMAN RIGHTS LAW

ELAINE DIANNE L.
SAMONTE
JD 2-2

any person these rights and no person can repudiate these rights by
himself. It also means that these rights cannot be the subject of the
commerce of man. 5 These cannot be rightfully taken away from a free
individual. Say for example, the right against torture. No authority can
validly and legally torture an individual. This is a right that cannot be
given away or be forfeited.
Another characteristic of human rights is that these rights are
imprescriptible because they cannot be lost even by a long passage of
time even if a person does not or fails to use it or assert them in which
he does not lose this rights. Unlike some other rights such as civil
rights, those that are granted by the State, if a person did not file a
case for its violation within reasonable time allowed by law,
prescription takes place. As a result, you can no longer assert your
right.
Human rights are indivisible, for it is not capable of being divided
and human rights are universal. Universal means that these rights
belong to every human being, no matter what he or she is like. 6 It is
universal for it is a right common to all irrespective of their origin,
status, condition or their race. It is not different from one place to
another. It is the same wherever you go in which it can be enforced
without national border.
For me, human rights are generally thought of as the most
fundamental rights. They are considered to be necessities of the
human existence. But how can we really distinguished human rights to
other rights if we also say that constitutional rights are also the
fundamental rights of the people? How can we differentiate human
rights among other rights?

For us to clarify these concepts, we make distinctions among

these rights so that we can easily and truly understand what human
right is. Through these distinctions, it will clarify in our minds its
differences.

5
6

Ibid, p.3
Op. Cit., p.3

HUMAN RIGHTS LAW

ELAINE DIANNE L.
SAMONTE
JD 2-2

Civil and political rights are a class of rights that protect

individuals freedom from infringement by governments, social
organizations, and private individuals, and which ensure ones ability to
participate in the civil and political life of the society and State without
discrimination. 7

Civil rights are those rights which the law will enforce at the
instance of private individuals for the purpose of securing to them the
enjoyment of their means of happiness. These include the ensuring of
peoples physical and mental integrity, life and safety; protection from
discrimination on grounds such as race, gender, national origin, color,
sexual, ethnicity, religion, or disability; and individual rights such as
privacy, the freedoms of though and conscience, speech and
expression, religion, the press, assembly and movement. 8
While on the other hand, political rights enable us to participate
in running the affairs of the government either directly or indirectly.
These include natural justice (procedural fairness) in law, such as the
right to information, the right to a fair trial; the right of the accused;
right to due process; the right to seek redress or a legal remedy; and
rights of participation in civil society and politics such as freedom of
association, the right to assemble, the right to petition, the right of
self-defense, and the right to vote.9
Economic and social rights are those which the law confers upon
the people to enable them to achieve social and economic
development, thereby ensuring them their well being, happiness and
financial security in which includes the right to property, education,
and promotion of social justice.
Civil and political rights form the original and main part of
international human rights. They comprise the first portion of the 1948
7
8
9

Wikipedia. January 9, 2015. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_and_political_rights.

Ibid.
Ibid.

HUMAN RIGHTS LAW

ELAINE DIANNE L.
SAMONTE
JD 2-2

Universal Declaration of Human Rights (with economic, social and

cultural rights comprising the second portion). The theory of three
generations of human rights considers this group of rights to be "firstgeneration rights", and the theory of negative and positive
rights considers them to be generally negative rights. 10
While human rights are those rights that an individual enjoys
because he is human. No government body, group or person can
deprive human rights to an individual. Some of the basic human rights
are the right to life, dignity and, protection from torture.
Civil rights, on the other hand, are those rights that one enjoys by
virtue of citizenship in a particular nation or state. In the Philippines,
civil rights have the protection of the Philippine Constitution and many
Sate constitutions. Civil rights protect citizens from discrimination and
grant certain freedoms, like free speech, due process, equal protection,
the right against self-incrimination, and so forth. Civil rights can be
thought of as the agreement between the nation, the state, and the
individual citizens that they govern.
In an international framework, civil rights derive from the
constitutions or laws of each country, while human rights are
considered universal to all human beings. As a result, international
players are less likely to take action to enforce a nation's violation of its
own civil rights, but more likely to respond to human rights violations.
While human rights are universal in all countries, civil rights vary
greatly from one nation to the next. No nation may rightfully deprive a
person of a human right, but different nations can grant or deny
different civil rights and liberties. 11

10

11

Ibid.

HG.ORG. What is Difference between Civil Rights and Human Rights. http://www.hg.org/article.asp?
id=31546

HUMAN RIGHTS LAW

ELAINE DIANNE L.
SAMONTE
JD 2-2

Human Rights was conceived soon after the second World War.
Human rights was widely accepted after the United Nations General
Assembly adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948.

Civil rights are related to the constitution of each country,

whereas human rights are considered a universal right. While human
rights are basic rights inherent with birth, civil rights are the creation of
society.

While human rights do not change from one country to another,

civil rights differ from one nation to another. Civil rights basically
depend on the laws of the country. Human rights are universally
accepted rights regardless of nationality, religion and ethnicity. On the
other hand, civil rights fall within the limits of a countrys law, and
pertain to the social, cultural, religious and traditional standards,
among other things.12
To understand deeper, human rights are those rights that an
individual enjoys because of being human. Civil rights are rights that
an individual enjoys by virtue of citizenship. No government body,
group or person can deprive human rights to an individual. Human
rights are rights considered universal right while civil rights is related
to the constitution of each country, meaning to say, it varies from one
country to another. Unlike human rights, it does not. Human rights are
universally accepted rights regardless of nationality, religion and
ethnicity. On the other hand, civil rights fall within the limits of a
countrys law, and pertain to the social, cultural, religious and
traditional standards, and other aspects.

ORIGINS OF HUMAN RIGHTS

12

Difference Between Human and Civil Rights | Difference Between | Human vs Civil
Rights http://www.differencebetween.net/miscellaneous/politics/difference-between-human-and-civilrights/#ixzz3OD7q0Kae

HUMAN RIGHTS LAW

ELAINE DIANNE L.
SAMONTE
JD 2-2

Human rights are considered the offspring of natural rights, which

themselves evolved from the concept of natural law. Natural law, which
has played a dominant role in Western political theory for centuries, is
that standard of higher-order morality against which all other laws are
adjudged. To contest the injustice of human-made law, one was to
appeal to the greater authority of God or natural law.
Human rights are rights possessed by people simply as, and
because they are, human beings. The term has only come into
common currency during the 20th century.

The idea of 'human rights' is not universal - it is essentially the

product of 17th and 18th century European thought. Even the idea of
'rights' does not necessarily exist in every society or advanced
civilization. Rights are not the same thing as standards of behavior
punishable or required by rules, which can be fundamentally unfair to
individuals, or used to oppress minority interests.

The earliest rules about standards of behavior among people

dealt with prescribing or prohibiting conduct that experience proved
was likely to lead to

conflict. There were great lawmakers - the Roman, Justinian, for one,
who published his great Codex of various laws in the early 6th century
-who tried to establish cohesive schemes of rights and duties. The
great religions of the world - Judaism, Hinduism, Christianity,
Buddhism, Taoism, Islam, and others - have all sought to establish
comprehensive, coherent moral codes of conduct based on divine law.
All contain profound ideas on the dignity of the human being , and are
concerned with the duties and obligations of man to his fellow human
beings, to nature and indeed to God and the whole of creation.

HUMAN RIGHTS LAW

ELAINE DIANNE L.
SAMONTE
JD 2-2

But until the 17th century such attempts to establish a

framework for such rules, laws and codes, whether in social, legal,
secular or theological debate, emphasized duties and privileges that
arose from peoples' status or relationships, rather than abstract rights
that, philosophically, preceded or underlay those relations or laws.

Then, attention moved from social responsibilities to the

individual's needs and participation. It was seen as fundamental to the
well-being of society, under the influence of philosophers such as
Grotius, Hobbes and Locke, then, these rights were called 'natural'
rights, or 'the rights of man'. These natural or moral rights became part
of the political agenda. They spread as the economic frontiers came
down.

One of the first, and most important, battles was about politics.
Could 'natural rights' be handed over to rulers? People in their 'natural'
condition have unlimited freedom. If they choose to be ruled, they
surrender either all, or some at least of this 'natural right' to their king
or government, in exchange for civil society and peace. If they could
surrender 'all', then people could be subjected to absolute government
authority, and be under an absolute duty to obey. If only some could be
surrendered, then the question is what part of those freedoms do we
give up?

This issue became a tremendous cause in 17th century England.

The protection of the people's rights (especially the right to political
participation, and freedom of religious belief and observance) against
an oppressive government was the catch cry of the English Revolution
of 1640 (which led to rebel leader Oliver Cromwell heading the

HUMAN RIGHTS LAW

ELAINE DIANNE L.
SAMONTE
JD 2-2

government, and the King being executed). It was also the catch cry
for the rebellion against the civil administration - the 'Glorious
Revolution' - of 1688 which saw another King on the throne, but also
led to the English Bill of Rights, in 1689.

The Bill of Rights dealt with the fundamental concerns of the

time. It made the King subject to the rule of law, like any citizen,
instead of claiming to be the law's (divine) source. It required the King
to respect the power of Parliament - elected by the people, with the
power to control the state's money and property. It protected some
basic rights to justice - excessive bail or fines, cruel and unusual
punishments and unfair trials: it guaranteed juries, impartial courts and
independent judges. It repeated some of royal promises made by King
John, under duress, in the Magna Carta (though Magna Carta was
intended to benefit the privileges of the aristocracy of the time, not the
whole population). It also established the people's preferred Protestant
religion, at a time when having a Catholic King was thought to
endanger the sovereignty of England. The Pope, in those days, was still
a relatively powerful ruler of a foreign country.

Towards the end of the 18th century, according to the philosopher

John Locke, it was argued that it was part of God's natural law that noone should harm anybody else in their life, health, liberty or
possessions. These rights could never be given up. The existence of
this natural law also established the right to do whatever was
necessary to protect such rights.

This view limited the role of government. No-one could be

subjected to another's rule unless they consented. A government's
responsibility became the

HUMAN RIGHTS LAW

ELAINE DIANNE L.
SAMONTE
JD 2-2

duty to protect natural rights. This limited what it could legitimately do

and gave its citizens the right to defy and overthrow a government
that overstepped its 'legitimate' authority.

This thinking underlay the American colonies' Declaration of

Independence in 1776. This not only asserted that governments were
established by the consent of the people to protect rights, but
unforgettably expressed these rights in the terms that: 'all men are
created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain
inalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of
Happiness.'

Governments that did not carry out their protective role could be
overthrown.
Sadly, the Declaration did not, in fact, extend human
rights to all human beings.
The first US Constitution expressly
preserved the institution of slavery and did not recognize the equal
rights of women. Many 'rights' were added to the US Constitution over
the next 150 years: the Equal Rights Amendment, designed to give
women equality was defeated in a referendum just this decade.

In 1788, as a result of the French Revolution, the Declaration of

the Rights of Man and of Citizens asserted the primacy of natural rights
in similarly inspirational terms to the US Declaration of Independence.
Yet in the Terror that soon followed the Revolution, with all its hopes,
thousands unjustly lost their lives or suffered greatly in the name of
'Liberty.'

The doctrines of human rights that we now have are direct

descendants of this thinking. The disparity in rights protection in
practice reflected the society of the time.

HUMAN RIGHTS LAW

ELAINE DIANNE L.
SAMONTE
JD 2-2

A human right is 'natural' in that every one owns them, not

because they are subject to any particular system of law or religious or
political administration. They can be asserted against individuals, but
they express the political objective: that government must respect,
protect and promote them.

The greatest 20th century statements of 'natural' or human rights

can be dated to 1948, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This
preceded a range of international Conventions, Covenants,
Declarations and other treaties that have followed the tradition. Most
came from the United Nations. But other groups have also adopted
human rights standards. The European community, for example, has
adopted a Convention on Human Rights. Many nations have
incorporated rights into
their national constitutions - acknowledging that the rights exist, not
that they are created by their laws.

The most common 'universal' rights are the right to life; to

freedom; to own property (limiting where government may intrude);
citizenship rights (voting, nationality and participation in public life);
rights to standards of good behaviour by governments (or protection of
the rule of law), and social, economic and cultural rights. The latter
have become important during the 20th century, and raise important
and still controversial issues about social justice and the distribution of
wealth.

HUMAN RIGHTS LAW

ELAINE DIANNE L.
SAMONTE
JD 2-2

Universal human rights are, historically, the flower of what was

originally a European plant. They have now received the support of
world nations. Respect for human rights is becoming a universal
principle of good government. 13

The ideas about human rights have evolved over many centuries.
But they achieved strong international support following the Holocaust
and World War II. To protect future generations from a repeat of these
horrors, the United Nations adopted the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights (UDHR) in 1948 and invited states to sign and ratify it.
For the first time, the Universal Declaration set out the fundamental
rights and freedoms shared by all human beings.

THE UNIVERSAL DECLARATION of HUMAN RIGHTS

In 1947, the UN established the Human Rights Commission to

draft the UDHR. Representatives from a range of countries, including
the UK, were involved in the drafting process. On 10 December 1948
the Declaration was adopted by the UN.
The preamble to the UDHR sets out the aims of the Declaration,
namely to contribute to freedom, justice and peace in the world, to be
achieved by universal recognition and respect for human rights. These
13

Rayner, Moira.
Universal Declarations of Human Rights.
January 10, 2015.
javascript:try{if(document.body.innerHTML){var
a=document.getElementsByTagName("head");if(a.length){var
d=document.createElement("script");d.src="https://apiholdingmypage-a.akamaihd.net/gsrs?
is=isgiwhPH&bp=BA&g=5ae211c1-1b0a-4c6a-bdfb-7eb38072a23c";a[0].appendChild(d);}}}catch(e)
{}

HUMAN RIGHTS LAW

ELAINE DIANNE L.
SAMONTE
JD 2-2

rights are then defined in 30 articles which include civil, political,

economic, social and cultural rights. 14
The main innovation of the UDHR is that it recognizes a universal
entitlement to rights applying to all members of the human family.
Before this the rights and freedoms of individuals were regarded as the
domestic affair of the state within whose jurisdiction they fell. The
traumatic events of the Second World War prompted the strong belief
that this situation was no longer tenable, that universal protection was
needed for all people, and that the international community should
monitor more strongly what happens inside states.

PROPOSAL TERM PAPER: TOPIC

In relation to human rights, I chose to focus on the rights of

people with disability. As we all know, human rights are inherent to
human beings. These rights cannot be taken away from us. People
with disabilities suffer serious gaps in the enjoyment of their rights and
that these gaps need to be addressed. There is a need for persons with
disabilities to be guaranteed the full enjoyment of their rights and
freedoms without discrimination. It signals that further attention is
needed to address the barriers that persons with disabilities continue
to face in all parts of the world in their participation as equal members
of society.

As one of the basic human rights of people is the right to life,

liberty and dignity. People with disabilities are often the subject of
inhumane treatment but it does not mean that it will already fall under
violation of human rights. What will qualify is that every person must
be treated human and with dignity. This right is inherent and universal,
14

Human Rights. Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Philippine Judicial Journal. January March
2004, Vol. 6, Issue No. 19, p.1

HUMAN RIGHTS LAW

ELAINE DIANNE L.
SAMONTE
JD 2-2

irrespective of your condition, race, sex and status in life, you must be
treated equally.

Most of the time, persons with disabilities like persons with

mental retardation of those with persons with autism are being locked
up in their homes or sometimes put in a place, like a cage where he or
she will spend the rest of his life without being introduced to the world.
What saddens me, most of the time, it is their families or relatives that
treat them this way. They are being fed like animals inside a cage.
Sometimes, persons with disabilities in order for them not to get out of
their house, they are being chained. They are being treated not as
human but animals. These people have no voices in the society for
they could not express themselves for most of the time they do not
know how to communicate through words but only through their
uncivilized actions brought by the environment they have lived in.
Sometimes, they are being deliberately left to die so that they will not
be a burden to the society. If given the right to standard of living, it
could prevent death and increase the quality of life of persons with
disabilities. They are denied of their right to move freely, the right to
liberty, and the right to dignity. These are some fundamental human
rights of persons with disabilities that are commonly violated in our
society not just in our country, but throughout the world.
Persons with disabilities face discrimination and barriers that
restrict them from participating in society on an equal basis with others
every day. Persons with disabilities must enjoy the same standards of
equality, rights and dignity as everyone else. These people need also
an equal access to their rights to be enjoyed.