Abstract: No state can be progressive and prosperous in which a large number of people is deprived of their basic economic rights and freedoms. In the contemporary world of globalization, the right to development has gained a momentum force in the domain of International Development Law (IDL) and has integrated into the National Legal System (NLS) of the major developed states. The international experts on human rights argued that the right to development (RTD) is called a third-generation human right which tends to enhance the welfare and prosperity of individuals, and thus, it is a right to a process whose outcomes are human rights despite the controversy on the implications of RTD. In the Pakistan legal system, the RTD has not been expressly stated in the constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973. However, there are some implied constitutional provisions which reflect the concept of RTD. The jurisprudence on RTD is still an evolving paradigm in the contextual perspective of Pakistan, and the superior court of diverse jurisdiction acts as a catalyst regarding the protection and enforcement of RTD in the interest of the public at large. However, the case law explores the positive inclination of the courts in Pakistan on RTD be incorporated as an express provision in the chapters of fundamental rights; in this scenario, the high court’s of Pakistan under Article 199 and the supreme court of Pakistan under Article 184(3) have exercised jurisdiction on the enforcement of RTD. This paper inter-alia examines the national dimensions of RTD from the standpoint of state practice in Pakistan and it analyzes the experience of judiciary in the protection and enforcement of RTD. Moreover, the paper highlights the social and cultural challenges to Pakistan in the implementation of RTD and possible solution to improve the conditions of human rights in Pakistan. This paper will also highlight the steps taken by Pakistan regarding the awareness, incorporation, and propagation of RTD at the national level.
Abstract: International human rights treaties ensure basic rights to all people, regardless of nationality. These treaties have developed in a predominantly Western environment, and their implementation into non-western contexts often raises questions of the transfer-ability of value systems and governance structures. International human rights treaties also postulate the right to the full enjoyment and expression of one’s own culture, known as cultural rights. Many cultural practices and traditions in South Sudan serve as an obstacle to the adaptation of human rights and internationally agreed-upon standards, specifically those pertaining to women’s rights and gender equality. This paper analyzes the specific social, political, and economic conflicts between women’s rights and cultural rights within the context of South Sudan’s evolution into a sovereign nation. It comprehensively evaluates the legal status of South Sudanese women and –based on the empirical evidence- assesses gender equality in four key areas: Marriage, Education, Violence against Women, and Inheritance. This work includes an exploration into how South Sudanese culture influences, and indeed is intertwined with, social, political, and economic spheres, and how it limits gender equality and impedes the full implementation of international human rights treaties. Furthermore, any negative effects which systemic gender inequality and cultural practices that are oppressive to women have on South Sudan as a developing nation are explored. Finally, those areas of conflict between South Sudanese cultural rights and international women’s rights are outlined which can be mitigated or resolved in favor of elevating gender equality without imperializing or destroying South Sudanese culture.
Abstract: This article provides a conceptual framework of the freedom of media and its correlation with democracy. In a democracy, media should serve the publics’ right to know and reflect human rights violations and offer options for meaningful political choices and effective participation in civic affairs. On that point, the 2013 events at Gezi Park in Turkey are a good empirical example to be discussed. During the events, when self-censorship was broadly employed by mainstream Turkish media, social media filled the important role of providing information to the public. New technologies have made information into a fundamental tool for change and growth, and as a consequence, societies worldwide have merged into a single, interdependent, and autonomous organism. For this reason, violations of human rights can no longer be considered domestic issues, but rather global ones. Only global political action is an adequate response. Democracy depends on people shaping the society they live in, and in order to accomplish this, they need to express themselves. Freedom of expression is therefore necessary in order to understand diversity and differing perspectives, which in turn are necessary to resolve conflicts among people. Moreover, freedom of information is integral to freedom of expression. In this context, the international rules and laws regarding freedom of expression and freedom of information – indispensable for a free and independent media – are examined. These were put in place by international institutions such as the United Nations, UNESCO, the Council of Europe, and the European Union, which have aimed to build a free, democratic, and pluralist world committed to human rights and the rule of law. The methods of international human rights institutions depend on effective and frequent employment of mass media to relay human rights violations to the public. Therefore, in this study, the relationship between mass media and democracy, the process of how mass media forms public opinion, the problems of mass media, the neo-liberal theory of mass media, and the use of mass media by NGOs will be evaluated.
Abstract: Many states are now committed to implementing
international human rights standards domestically. In terms of
practical governance, how might effectiveness be measured? A facevalue
answer can be found in domestic laws and institutions relating
to human rights. However, this article provides two further tools to
help states assess their status on the spectrum of robust to fragile
human rights governance. The first recognises that each state has its
own 'human rights history' and the ideal end stage is robust human
rights governance, and the second is developing criteria to assess
robustness. Although a New Zealand case study is used to illustrate
these tools, the widespread adoption of human rights standards by
many states inevitably means that the issues are relevant to other
countries. This is even though there will always be varying degrees of
similarity-difference in constitutional background and developed or
emerging human rights systems.