The matter of RIGHTS has been integral to all civilizations. In fact it could be claimed that the discourse on ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ is dominated to some extent, by the concept of ‘RIGHTS’. Therefore, philosophy, religion, ethics, jurisprudence, commerce, psychology have all been contemplating the different dimensions of RIGHTS in human society.

Today, there are two streams of discourse on Rights. One is ‘civilisational’ – in that the concepts of rights are integral (but distinct) to each civilization, rooted in tradition / practices / values etc. The other (for want of a suitable term) may be termed “ the human rights movement” as we know it today.

The rapid rise during the 18^th and 19^th centuries in the wealth and welfare status of the ‘western nations’ was countered by the increasingly horrific wars fought - in Europe specifically - as well as elsewhere. Inspired by thinkers and activists alike, the trend grew in these countries to question state violation of rights or norms and to make the state more accountable. As the world globalised, this led to the international ‘human rights’ movement. 

Thus the list of rights in the ‘Universal Declaration of Human Rights’, is endorsed by all nations.  However, there is a lack of consensus on the philosophy and justifications of the many expressions of human rights. 

Further, the ‘rights based approach’ is now increasingly being applied to developmental issues everywhere. Such an approach has kept pace with the advancement of technology, democratic politics and rapid globalization over the past 100 years or so. It applies various principles of struggle and assertion to ensuring that rights of individuals and groups are granted.

Under the rights based approach, issues such as Women rights, Dalit rights, traditional rights, democratic rights (‘right to dissent’) are clubbed with related concept of ‘Freedoms’ ( media freedom, thought freedom, freedom to practice etc) and the former is sought to be attained through advocacy, struggles, assertions and other activities.

In the developing and emerging economies, while there is increasing acceptance of the activities related to the ‘rights based approach’, there is no clarity or widespread debate on the rationale and philosophical underpinning of such an approach. As a result, initiatives that have a strong ‘activity component’ gain salience …till they are overtaken by other such initiatives! The social landscape is marked by a large number of such (competing?) initiatives without a common, coherent basis.

As important as the on-ground activities are, the gains of such initiatives tend to be frittered away in the absence of a common, coherent basis… leaving the public with the feeling “jiski lathi, uski bhains”

The rationale for the ‘rights based approach’ in the Western society is based on the historical evolution of the debate in the West on ‘State’ vs ‘human enterprise’ vs ‘church’ vs ‘individual’.

Some of the salient elements of the debate over Rights in the West relate to:

• Are rights ‘natural rights’ or are they ‘instrumental’ (to achieving some other good)
• Are rights ‘fundamental norms’? Some British, French and American thinkers held so (eg. Thomas Jefferson’s Declaration of Independence: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.")

Karl Marx attacked this view as an artificial isolation fraught with contradictions.

He felt that these ‘rights’ derive from a false conception of the human individual as unrelated to others, as having interests that can be defined without reference to others, and as always potentially in conflict with others. Eg. The right of property, Marx asserted, exemplifies the isolating and anti-social character of these alleged rights of man.

Similarly, Marx held that the much-celebrated individual right to liberty is based upon, and reinforces, selfishness.

The acceptance of the ‘language of rights’ in human discourse (e.g. The Declaration of Universal Human Rights) has led to important developments towards group rights also, such as:, the Convention against Genocide, the Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural rights etc.

However, modern thinkers are now saying that the universalisation of the language of rights heightens conflict, prohibits consensus, negates duties and obligations, promotes insularity and shuts out self-correcting learning, and promotes mere assertion over reason-giving. Eg. America, "the land of rights," is also the land of litigation.

In India – and other developing / emerging economies – the nascent debate on the matter of Rights has centred on the following:

1. While human rights are vital, what are the nature and source of authority of human rights ?  Ultimately, without a legal status, rights cannot be enforced. (Munmun Jha)
2. Are rights entitlements ? Are they normative, or are they positive ?
3. What is the wisdom regarding Individual vs Group rights ? What happens when ‘traditional’ or ‘community rights’ conflict with ‘individual rights’?
4. Rights are not claims recognized by the state but political affirmations pursued through struggles.  This is to assert that even if rights do not have the state sanction they are rights because they are accepted by the current stage of the human civilization as basic conditions deserved for every human being.  The struggle for rights seeks state recognition but pursues it in society and culture to further realize it in practice.   (Mohanty)
5. Are rights absolute ? What about responsibilities ?

We need to take this discussion further. Do you have a point to make on this issue? If you do have something relevant to contribute to the public domain, don’t hesitate. Just write to: editor@d-sector.org.

What you write may relate to India; or to a different country or region. All writings are welcome that are relevant to a) All Development Practitioners b) Those interested in rights issues and philosophy c) The informed general public.

Please keep your contribution specific to contemporary developments and avoid making it a very micro-focussed article. If your content is highly technical, make the effort to simplify it to the intelligent lay reader.

NB. 1. Editorial prerogative will be exercised by d-sector.org. However, all content contributions will be treated with equal respect. At d-sector.org we shall strive to maintain high standards of ethics and objectivity. Contributors are expected to align with this by following professional ethics with regard to: Credits / reference to source / acknowledgements / integrity of contents.

NB.2. All institutions engaged in original or secondary exercises in Rights (and related) Studies are invited to send us profiles / details of themselves to editor@d-sector.org. We would be very happy to present these profiles to our worldwide viewership.

NB. 3. All individuals engaged in any such studies – as a whole time profession or as a serious interest – are also invited to send in their brief bio to editor@d-sector.org. We would be happy to encourage interactions and exchanges of such individuals on professional aspects.