THE AUTHORITY, THE SOCIETY AND HUMAN RIGHTS

Gela Nikolaishvili

Human rights belong to the category of moral rights, though they differ from other moral rights. Moral rights may belong to an individual according to his part and place in public activities. As for human rights, they are universal: these rights are the property of everyone in any situation despite their social status. Some moral rights are considered to be acquired, while human rights are the property of everyone from their birth. If some moral rights may be voluntarily limited, transferred to others or liquidated, human rights are inalienable. It is impossible to take them away or even relinquish them voluntarily. Moreover, if the presence of some moral rights should be substantiated sometimes, human rights do not need it, as far as they belong to a person only because he is a person.

One of the most important aspects of human rights is to require. A free man always demands what he has the right to have. To demand is one of the important factors of human dignity, and one of the main functions of human rights is to protect this dignity. Other functions are in close connection with dignity and freedom.

In comparison with other moral and legal rights, human rights are expressed by means of demands of an individual against the state. An individual never has equal rights with respect to the state. The state can impose its will on an individual and use force to fulfill its decisions. In other words, the state possesses a sword by means of which it can abuse its power. Thus, citizens need a shield to protect themselves from the unfair stabs of this sword. Only human rights can protect citizens from the state violence and safeguard their security.

Human rights not only differ from other values, but also contradict them. Though everyone has the right to become a member of the government, still human rights can not be considered synonymous to democracy. On the contrary, human rights often limit democratic decisions by protecting the rights of minority and individuals. In future human rights may become a hindering factor for economic progress. Despite the fact that human rights represent a basis of legal rules, they are not identical to legality, sometimes they contradict the legality, if the latter becomes a source of human rights violations. Despite the fact that a person has the right to social well being, human rights can not be considered synonymous to social equality. The question is, that such values as economic progress, universal well-being, equality and social justice, as a rule, depend on political processes in the parliament. Many aspects depend on political decisions, for example, whether the society will live under conditions of unemployment or inflation, whether it will have high or low salary, whether public health will be in the hands of the state or the private mechanisms of insurance will be developed. Each society includes means for the protection of collective activities and public interests, while human rights do not represent collective rights.

Human rights belong to those values, which stand above political processes. When human rights contradict other values or interests, they trample them and become a trump card in this struggle. This is one of the moments, which defines " the fundamental " character of human rights. Though human rights are " fundamental ", it does not mean, that they are absolute. Sometimes they can be limited by other values. For example, prohibition of racism propaganda or call-ups to armed conflicts limit the freedom of human self-expression; sometimes by their actions policemen or investigators betray the private secrets. The main thing here is that interference in private tights is strictly regulated by law and does not depend on the wish of any official.

The Constitution describes all the cases of human rights violations in detail. It determines, which rights can be limited by the legislation, to what extent and in which cases they can be limited to protect the violated interests of citizens. The Constitution takes into account a great deal of specific situations and procedures when some rights can be ceased for extreme reasons. The fundamental character of human rights means that any ceasing of these rights by authorities must be legally substantiated and must have a Constitutional basis. But even in this case we should remember that the human rights concept consists of three aspects: 1. Any authority has definite limits and it is not absolute; 2. Any person has his autonomous sphere and no force can break in it; 3. Any person can make a serious statement against the state in order to protect his rights.

The main thing here is that under the present conditions of market mechanisms in economy, the greatest part of the society considers it impossible to achieve rule of law and form a civil society without creating new ideology, which should combine revival of our national ideals with the universal democratic values. Just human rights and freedoms represent the main values and fundamental elements of rule of law.

The strategic line of modern civilization's spiritual development is to consider human rights and freedoms the supreme value and bring up the society to respect and protect human rights. There is no alternative: a humane idea of equality among all persons contradicts the fascist, nationalist and communist ideology, which is based on discrimination. The society, which is based on violence, hostility and hatred, lacks vitality, it has no prospects. History has confirmed the ephemeral character of fascist, nationalist and communist countries.

Since the adoption of the World Declaration on Human Rights in 1948 UN and UNESCO constantly appeal to the governments of different countries to give more information about human rights to the society, spread various international documents in primary and secondary educational institutions. Non-governmental organizations are involved in this affair too. Just this is the main objective of our bulletin.



[ Return to Home Page ]
Web Space Provided by:
Steele Communications