CHAPTER FOUR

CONSTITUTION, DEMOCRACY AND HUMAN RIGHTS

4.1 Constitution
4.1.1 Meaning of Constitution
State is the political organization which is administered by the group of
person known as the government. When we say the government of a state, it
means basically the executive, the legislative and the judiciary. But this
government cannot run the state according to the sudden, passing, and
often fanciful idea. There has to be certain rules and principles on the basis
and under the authority of which the government can run the state. This set
of principle is called the Constitution. It is the fundamental law of a nation or
state that establishes the institution and system of government, defines the
scope of governmental sovereign powers, and guarantees individual civil
rights and civil liberties.

Constitution can be defined as: a frame of political society, organized

through and by law, that is to say one in which law has established
permanent institutions with recognized functions and definite rights. Again, a
constitution possibly said to be a collection of principles according to which
the powers of the government, the rights of the governed, and the relations
between the two are adjusted.

Constitution is the aggregate of laws and customs under which the life of the
state goes on. Government without a Constitution is a power without a right.
Historically, before the evolution of modern-style, codified national
constitutions, the term constitution could be applied to any important law
that governed the functioning of a government. In this case we can say that
constitution is a state book of fundamental political principles, and
establishing the structure, procedures, powers and duties, of a government,
which help the government to guide the nation/state.

To be brief, we know that State, like any other organization, requires a set of
laws to govern itself. Thus, a constitution is a body of laws that determines
the nature of the State. It is a fundamental document according to which the
government of the State functions. A constitution is, therefore, the basic law
which defines and delimits the powers of various organs of the government
and it also enumerates the basic rights of the citizens.

But whatever its form, a true constitution will have the following facts: first,
how the various agencies are organized; secondly, what power is entrusted

Page 1 of 18
to those agencies; and thirdly, in what manner such power is to be
exercised. Like a human body, constitutions have organs which work
harmoniously. In order to function well a state, or body politic, is said to have
a constitution in which its organs and their functions are definitely arranged
and are not subject to the some dictators.

Constitution consists of a set of rules or norms creating, structuring and

defining the limits of, government power or authority. Understood in this
way, all states have constitutions and all states are constitutional states.
Anything recognizable as a state must have some acknowledged means of
constituting and specifying the limits placed upon the three basic forms of
government power: legislative power, executive power and judicial power.
Constitutionalism is thus, the idea that government can and should be legally
limited in its powers, and that its authority depends on its observing these
limitations.

There is a close connection between constitutionalism and the rule of law.

Both are premised on the importance of limits on the power of the state
and its institutions, with law as the principal means of defining and
ensuring the limits. In all its successive phases, constitutionalism has one
essential quality: it is a legal limitation on government; it is the anti-thesis
of arbitrary rule; its opposite is dictatorial government, the government of
will instead of law. Both constitution and rule of law were concerned about
the limits on state power, but unlike the origins of the rule of law,
constitutionalism also emphasized the political mandate and
accountability of the government, which placed a greater importance on
the legislature.

Constitutionalism is based on the notion of a supreme law which governs

the jurisdiction and powers of state institutions and determines the limits
and mode of their exercise. The role of the constitution has been to
establish institutions of the state and to define their jurisdiction. There is
an assumption that due to underlying cultural understandings and a
common history, there is substantial agreement on values, aspirations and
identity. It is indeed these understandings (and joint commitment to live
together) which makes it possible for the people to form a state.

When scholars talk of constitutionalism, they mean not only that there are
rules creating legislative, executive and judicial powers, but that these rules
impose limits on those powers. Often these limitations are in the form of
individual or group rights against government, rights to things like free

Page 2 of 18
expression, association, equality and due process of law. But constitutional
limits come in a variety of forms. They can concern such things as the
scope of authority (e.g., in a federal system, provincial or state
governments may have authority over health care and education while the
federal government's jurisdiction extends to national defense and
transportation); the mechanisms used in exercising the relevant power
(e.g., procedural requirements governing the form and manner of
legislation); and of course civil rights.

Furthermore, constitutionalism is a system of political arrangements in

which there is a constitution, in which all (particularly the entire system of
government) is governed by the constitution, in which only the people's will
can change the constitution, in which changes can only be made rarely due
to the difficulty of acquiring the necessary popular support, and in which
there are separation of power, checks and balances and an independent
judiciary dedicated to legal reasoning to safeguard the supremacy of the
constitution. Thus, constitutionalism need two things: first and for most
there should be democratic constitution and then this democratic
constitution must be implemented.

Some scholars argued that, unless a constitution is supreme, it is difficult to

talk of the existence of constitutionalism. That is, the constitutional
constraints on various branches of government should not be unilaterally
changed by the departments themselves. Constitutionalism is a necessary
foundation of rule of law. It is the limitation of government by law.
Constitutionalism implies also a balance between the power of the
government on the one hand and the rights of individuals on the other.

In sum, constitutionalism is the doctrine that governmental power should be

constrained by individual rights and a system of checks and balances, codified
in a formal constitution. The constitution should, moreover, be considered
superior to other laws and be enforced within a legal system with
independent courts. At the core of this idea is the view that a well-
functioning political system needs a clear division of power.

4.1.2 Major Characteristic Features of a Constitution

A constitution has distinctive features that distinguish it from any other laws.
The following are some of the features of a constitution.

A. Generality: a constitution provides the general principle of a state

and carry on foundation and sets out general framework of the law and

Page 3 of 18
 the government. Other laws provide the details of the subject for which
they are created. Constitutional principles are a guideline for others
laws. Any law that contradicts the constitutional provision will be null
and void. In this case, constitution only states the general principles.
Thus, this makes constitution different from other laws that may found
in a given country.
B. Permanency: unlike laws constitution is made for undefined period of
time. That means constitution serve for a long lap of ages. It is
purposely made to be stable and permanent. One of the mechanisms
to ensure this permanency is through constitutional amendment.
Judicial interpretation is also another ways of making a given
constitution adaptability. In short, amendment is necessary to offer
stability in a country. Thus, constitutional stability is one of the factors
for creating a durable peace in a society. Unstable constitutional
environment mostly indicates a socio-political instability.
C. Supremacy: a constitution is a supreme law of the land. As a mother
of law, it is original law by which the system of government is created,
and to which the branches of government must look for all their
powers and authority. It is original because it is directly made by the
people as the direct expression of the will of the people.
To ensure this supremacy, the constitution needs to have the following:
First and for most, the constitution must have a supremacy clause. All
written constitutions have this clause. This provision commands that
individuals, government institutions, and private institutions must observe
the constitution. The second way of adjustment of a constitution with a
changing need of the people is via interpretation. But that must be in
accordance with the procedures established by the constitution. Otherwise
the constitution is at the state of risk. In majority of states, this task is given
to the Supreme Court or a specialized constitutional court. Thus, judicial
review should be to ensure the supremacy of the constitution. Finally, in
order to make constitution a fundamental law of the country we need special
amending procedures. If the constitution is amended by those in power,
might be a state of crisis. Thus, the constitutions must state the amendment
procedure clearly; this promotes its supremacy.

4.1.3 Purposes of Constitution

Among the usually recognized purposes of constitutions the following are the
major:
A constitution is charter of government: Government derives its whole
authority from the governed. The constitution sets out the form of the

Page 4 of 18
government, creates the branches of government and determines their
powers and authorities. It specifies the purpose of the government, the
power of each department of the government, the state-society relationship,
the relationship between various governmental institutions, and the limits of
the government.

The constitution is a job description: In a democratic state, the people

as a whole hire some officials to administer the government for public good,
and the constitution is the employment contract and job description.
Although many other laws are also job descriptions for the government, the
constitution is the highest. The constitution is a guide for legislation and for
the interpretation of legislation.

Put limits on the powers of government and rights protection

function: Constitutional provision could be enforcing or empowering whose
objective is giving powers to government. But there must also be ‘Negative
Clause’ or ‘No Clause’, so that a constitution could be a guardian of
fundamental rights. Negative clauses, by putting specifically what
governments must not do, will limiting and tie the hands of those who
exercise powers. Otherwise, the people will certainly be exposed to various
kinds of abuses of power.

The constitution is a commitment device: In a democratic state, the

constitution binds not only the government, but also the people. Through the
constitution, the people collectively commit to certain institutional procedure
for managing public affairs and resolving social conflicts. Thus, the
constitution not only limits the arbitrary power of the government, it also
prevents public administration from being poisoned by people's short-term
temper and passions. Through the constitution, the people collectively
commit to be abide by the terms of constitution.

The constitution as covenant, symbol, and aspiration: In so far as a

constitution is a covenant by which a group of people agree to transform
themselves in to a nation, it may function for the founding generation like a
marriage concluded through the pledging partners’ positive and active
consent to remain a nation for better or worse, through prosperity and
poverty, in peace and war. A constitution may serve as a binding statement
of a people’s aspirations for themselves as a nation. In short, a constitutional
text may guide as well as express a people’s hopes for themselves as a
society. The ideals the words enshrine, the processes they describe, and the

Page 5 of 18
actions they legitimize must either help to change the citizenry or at least
reflect their current values. Otherwise, it will quickly fade. This is why we see
differences among constitutions.

4.1.4 Modern Classification of Constitutions

The basis of our constitutional classification, therefore, should be found,
under the following heads: the nature of the state to which the constitution
applies i.e. whether unitary or federal; the nature of the constitution whether
written or unwritten and flexible or rigid; the nature of the legislature; the
nature of the executive; and the nature of judiciary. Accordingly, in this
section we will try to see the characteristic features of written or unwritten,
flexible or rigid and finally unitary or federal constitutions.

A. Written or Unwritten
A constitution is a set of rules, generally in written form, which identify and
regulate the major institutions of the state and govern the relationship
between the state and the individual citizen. In most countries the written
constitution is the ultimate source of legal authority; all actions of
government and the law-making body (the legislature) must conform to the
constitution. In order to uphold and interpret the constitution there will be a
Supreme Court. As the constitution is the ultimate authority, any action which
contravenes the rules of the constitution will be both unconstitutional and
unlawful. Written constitutions also contain procedural rules for the
amendment of the constitution.

Simply, written and unwritten is a distinction between those rules regulating

a government, mostly rule of law-which are written down either in a
constitution or in some act of parliament or other legal documents, and other
rules, mainly the customs and conventions and usages regulating the
government, which have usually not been precisely formulated and put in
writing. Constitutions, whether written or unwritten, will share common
features. They will identify the principal institutions of the state – the
executive, the legislature and the judiciary. In relation to each of these, the
constitution will specify their functions and powers. In addition the
constitution will identify the rights and freedoms of citizens, through a Bill of
Rights which operates both to protect citizens and to restrict the power of
the state.

A constitution may be written or unwritten. A written constitution is always

enacted while an unwritten Constitution is evolved. A written constitution is

Page 6 of 18
one which is framed at a given time and comes into practice on a fixed date.
An unwritten constitution on the other hand is a result of evolution it is given
by history. It is never framed by any Constituent Assembly. It is based on
conventions, customs and statutes that grow over the centuries. The British
Constitution is the best example of an evolved and unwritten constitution.

The strength of a written or enacted constitution is that it is clear and

definite. When the constitution is in the form of a document, people have a
clear understanding about the powers of the government. In a written
constitution the rights of the people are secure. In a federal State like
Ethiopia, there are two sets of governments: Federal Government and State
Governments. The written constitution mentions clearly the division of powers
between those levels of government.

The weakness of a written constitution is that it fails to adapt itself to

changing conditions easily. Generally, the process of amending or changing a
written constitution is comparatively complex. It is generally said that written
constitution is helpful in providing solid government, but this viewpoint can
also be disputed. For example, England is a well administered country though
its constitution is unwritten.

A written constitution has three important advantages: the first is that a

single text contains the sum of what state authority consists of, how it is
constituted, how it can be used, and what non-violent methods of
addressing disputes are to be adopted. This gives clarity.

The second argument is that such a text can be made available to all
inhabitants (and visitors). The basis of the political system is therefore
comprehensible to all, instead of in the hands of a spe cialized guardian
classes. This is vital when there are to be dealings between individuals
and the State.

The third argument is that because the limits of state power are so clear,
it is necessary to invoke an amendment process, in order to change even
a small component of the constitution.

On the other hand, the disadvantage of written Constitution may be the

following: the first is that, the implementation of a written constitution
usually involves interpretation. In some instances such interpretation leads
to dispute between branches of the government. It is also not possible to

Page 7 of 18
absolutely define the extent of devolution of power among different levels of
governance in a country. Further, written constitution is not easily adaptable
to changing circumstances to make this real, written constitutions need to be
continuously amended or modified.

In contrast, one of the major advantage of unwritten constitution is,

relatively speaking it is more flexible. However, it is disadvantageous
because there is no single document that clearly states the fundamental
rights and duties of citizens and of governments. In this case, it would be
difficult to quickly determine which aspects of the constitution is violated and
when. Since there is no legal restraint and because it is not accessible to
public, it can easily be distorted or even changed without the consent of the
people. As a result there may arise difference in society regarding which
conventions or custom is acceptable and which is not, since there could exist
different conventions and customs in a country. Because of its inaccessibility,
it is nearly impossible to create awareness through education on the
fundamental constitutional rights and freedoms, duties, and obligations of
citizens.

To sum up, a constitution generally called written is one in the form of a

document which has special sanctity. A constitution generally called
unwritten is one which has grown up on the basis of custom rather than of
written law. But sometimes the so-called written constitution is a very
complete instrument in which the framers of the constitutions have
attempted to arrange for every conceivable contingency in its operation. In
other cases, the written constitution is found in a number of fundamental
laws which the constitution makers have either framed or adopted with a
view for giving as wide a scope as possible to the process of ordinary
legislation for the development of the constitution within the framework thus
set. It is, of course, necessary to distinguish between written and the
unwritten constitution and, we shall refer to the former as a documentary
and to the latter as a non-documentary constitution.

B. Rigid or Flexible
Constitutions may also be classified as rigid or flexible. A rigid constitution is
one in which amendment is very difficult, requiring special procedures to be
employed before any changes can be made. Where constitutions were devised
by their founders as a complete statement of arrangements for the future, it
will generally be difficult to amend them. For this reason it is particularly
difficult to amend a written constitution: it is ‘rigid’, rather than ‘flexible’ in

Page 8 of 18
nature. The Constitutions of, the United States of America, Switzerland and
Australia are considered as rigid constitutions. On the contrary, a flexible
constitution is one which can be amended easily by an ordinary legislative
process. It can be amended without any special procedure. For example; the
Constitution of England is flexible because any provision can be changed by
an act of Parliament.

The strength of a rigid constitution is that it is a guarantee against quick

changes. It is stable, whereas a flexible constitution is unstable. Moreover, the
fundamental rights of the people and the interests of the minorities are more
secure under a rigid constitution. A flexible constitution, however, is
considered progressive in nature and helpful in the development of the nation
as it changes easily and adapts to the changing circumstances. A rigid
constitution, on the other hand, may not be easily changed according to the
changing conditions.

C. Unitary or Federal
Every modern constitution state belongs to one of two great classes: Unitary
or Federal and this introduces of difference of the very first importance. A
unitary state is one organized under a single central government; that is to
say, whatever powers are possessed by the various districts within the area
administered as a whole by the central government, are held at the
discretion of that government, and the central power is supreme over the
whole without any restrictions imposed by any law granting social powers to
its parts. Unitarianism in the political sense was the habitual exercise of
supreme legislative authority by one central power. The best example of
unitary state is the United Kingdom. Of course, in the case of the United
Kingdom, local government is strong, but the central government can take
all those powers of the local government at any time.

A federal constitution will state either the rights that are to be retained by
the federating units or the rights that the federal authority takes over. In
either case it stands to reason that neither the ordinary legislature of the
individual states nor the legislature of the union can have the power to alter
the constitution without some special means being adopted for discovering
the views of the constituent members. These means in federal country, the
constitution will define which powers are exercisable by the central/federal
government, and which powers are exercisable by the constituent parts of the
federation, usually known as states. In a federal state power is diffused rather
than concentrated in any one body. The constitution has overriding force and

Page 9 of 18
any conflicts between the federal government and state governments will be
determined according to the constitution. Clearly, in federal countries the
constitution is seen as a covenant. Thus, the constitution is serving as the
fundamental laws of a country. This is one of the essential characteristics
features of a federal state.

4.2 Democracy
4.2.1 Defining Democracy
Democracy is not an exclusive property of developed countries or Western
societies. Democratic norms and principles are universal, but the institutions
which inform democracy and concrete forms of its political practices may
vary in time and space (i.e. through historical era and from country to
country). Thus, as a universal form of rule with specific manifestations in
time and space, democracy is a political concept founded on three
underlining ideas, namely, democracy as a value, a process and a practice.

Strictly speaking, there are conceptual and methodological difficulties in

understanding and defining democracy. In this case, one difficulty in defining
democracy arises from the fact that political systems are in a continual state
of evolution. As ideas change, so the content of the word democracy
changes in people’s minds. A consequence of this change of attitude has
been that the term is now used to describe so many different forms of
government. It is this very popularity of the term that makes democracy a
difficult concept to understand. When a term means anything to anyone, it is
in danger of becoming entirely meaningless.

It is evident that the term democracy is used to cover wide ranges of political
systems; some of which are old and experienced, while others relatively new
and inexperienced. Their rate of advance towards their political, social and
economic goals varies widely. Despite these facts, scholars, politicians and
others attempted to define democracy in various ways. To this end, the
following are some of the possible definitions of the term democracy.

The word democracy is a term that comes from Greek and it is made up with
two words demos, which means people and kratos, to mean to govern, to
rule. “Democracy” can then be literally translated by the following terms:
Government of the People or Government of the Majority. Convincingly it can
be also said that Democracy is a people centered system, where the people
are the heart, the root and also the fruits. The fruits of democracy are

Page 10 of 18
prosperity, good quality of life and wellbeing, human security, human dignity
and participation of the people in all decisions affecting their lives.

The dictionary definition of the term entails that democracy is a state of

government in which people hold the ruling power either directly or indirectly
through their elected representatives. Accordingly, democracy embraces the
principles of equality, individual freedom and opportunity for the common
people, as those who actually wield political power.

From the perspective of participation, democracy can be explained as, the

mobilization of constituent groups around the issues and problems of
common concern, the organization of forums for the expression of
alternative views on the issues, and the implementation of decision-making
procedures based on majority rule. According to this definition, since the
practical establishment of democracy depends on individual citizens’
participation, in the absence it is difficult to influence government decisions
or policies for just and fair public welfare.

To be brief, you may have already heard about the most common definition
of democracy: "…government of the people, by the people and for the
people" (i.e. the former US president, Abraham Lincoln). To put it another
way we can say that a government comes from the people; it is exercised
by the people, and for the purpose of the people’s own interests. This
description is only a very broad one, to start with, but the pages that follow
will explain to you in a more concise way the different facets of democracy.

4.2.2 Democratization
Democracy is a variable not a fixed phenomenon; it changes and develops
over time, so that what was regarded as good democratic practice a hundred
years ago may not be now. Democracy does not automatically arise out of
“primal mud” but needs to be planted and nourished by years of practice
and experience through various levels of democratization process.
Democratization is the process of transitions from nondemocratic to
democratic regimes that occur within a specified period of time and that
significantly outnumber transitions in the opposite direction during that
period. It is not a simple process and will taken an extend period of time to
complete, if it wishes to be prosperous. There are three main elements in
democratization such as the removal of the authoritarian regime, installation
of a democratic regime, and the consolidation, or long-term sustainability of
the democratic regime.

Page 11 of 18
By democratization simply we refer to the institutionalization and
routinization of democratic ideals and principles and their effective
functioning. Moreover, democratization is a conclusive and extended
process, which involves the emergence or presence of the formal elements
of a democratic political system such as the recognition of basic civil and
political rights, multiparty system, electoral system and etc. Democratization
in this sense, involves the full-scale transition from authoritarian regime and
its replacement by democratically elected regime. It involves the rupturing
all the links and connections of authoritarian leaders, party or army to the
state apparatus. In this sense, democratization represents a true rapture and
a political transformation.

[Link] Actors of Democratization

A. Political Parties
The centrality of political parties for modern democracy is generally
accepted both by contemporary scholars and by policy-makers charged with
fostering the development of newly emerging democracies or with improving
the quality of democracy in established democratic politics. Despite their
relatively recent appearance on the political stage, parties have put such a
strong mark on contemporary politics and democracy that twentieth century
democracy could be best described as party democracy.

It has been argued that parties are ―endemic to democracy, an unavoidable

part of democracy. In a democratic system, political parties provide the
proper mode of functioning for the government so that the majority party or
a combination of parties controls the government, while other parties serve
as the opposition and attempt to check the abuses of power by the ruling
party. Citizens extend their desires, needs, and problems to the government
through the political parties. In fact, political parties represent an essential
and important tool that acts as a bridge between a society and its
government. The existence of a strong and viable opposition keeps the ruling
party alert. It is also the duty of political parties to promote policies that will
educate the people about how a democratic system functions and offer
different policy packages to the electorates.

B. Media
Mass Media and Democracy are always related to each other. Media is a
mirror of the society and how democratic a society is, can be represented
through media. Opinion leaders influence the public opinion regarding
political leaders and political system of any country. Hence, media has an
influential role in strengthening democracy. Hence, media and democracy

Page 12 of 18
have strong association. Countries which are strong democracies always
have strong and free media. Studies show that a free and democratic society
is not possible without an independent, free and responsible media and
active civil society.

Saeed (2009) argues that the maturing of mass democracy in most societies
has gone hand-in-hand with development of mass communication as an
important player in the organization of public life and opinion formation on
issues significant to the masses. To better understand how free press
enhance democracy, we need to look at various and distinct role of media,
namely, media as source of information, media as a watchdog, media as a
civic forum and media as an agenda setter. Norris (2006) measures how
press freedom affects democracy, good governance and human
development and concludes that there is a strong relation between the
critical role of the free press, as one of the major components of democracy
and good governance. Media in all countries serves as a watchdog, as a
source of information, a civic forum and an agenda setter.

Theoretically, the role of free media in processes of democratization is

straightforward. The free media serve as watchdogs, monitoring those in
power and provide citizens with the information they need to be free and
self-governing and to hold governments accountable for their actions.
Therefore, freedom of the media is often included in the measures developed
to assess and compare the quality of democracy across countries.

C. Civic Societies
Civil society is the set of civil rights, including primarily everyone’s right to
participate in public life. Civil society forms the backbone of democracy.
Larry Diamond (1999: 220-221) defines civil society as “the realm of
organized social life that is open, voluntary, bound by a legal order or set of
shared rules”. Diamond stated that civil society encompasses “private
citizens acting collectively to make demands to the state or to express in the
public sphere their interests, preferences and ideas or to check the authority
of the state and make it accountable” (ibid: 221). Following Diamond’s
definition, civil society may contain a wide range of establishments
concerned with public matters. Civil society may comprise civic, issue-
oriented, religious, and educational interest groups and associations.

In large multicultural developing countries like Ethiopia, there are numerous

gaps left by the government in the development and democratization
process. Civil societies have a potential of playing numerous momentous

Page 13 of 18
roles for democratic development and consolidation. To mention some:
limiting the power of the state more generally, including challenging the
abuses of authority; monitoring human rights and strengthening the rule of
law; monitoring elections and enhancing the overall quality and credibility of
the democratic process; educating citizens about their rights and
responsibilities; building a culture of tolerance and civic involvement;
incorporating marginal groups into the political process and enhancing the
latter's responsiveness to societal interest and need; providing alternative
means, outside the state, for communities to raise their level of material
development; opening and pluralizing the flows of information; and building
a constituency for economic as well as political reforms.

4.3 Human Right

4.3.1 Meaning of Human Rights
Dear learner, much lip service is paid nowadays to the notion of human
rights. At the same time, these human rights are being violated all over the
world. Human rights are a matter of law, but they have increasingly become
a matter of politics as well. Lawyers, politicians, governments, non-
government organizations and individual are involved in the protection as
well as violation of human rights.

Conceptually, Human rights are internationally agreed values, standards or

rules regulating the conduct of states towards their own citizens and non-
citizens. According to the preamble of the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights (UDHR) Human rights are ‘a common standard of achievement for all
peoples and all nations’. These rules, which states have imposed upon
themselves, serve to restrict the authority of states to act towards their
entire population i.e. citizens as well as non-citizens. This situation is
different from the past, when states, or rather their princes, were absolute
sovereign who could treat their subjects in any way they wanted. Nowadays,
human beings have rights: human rights.

Human rights also refer to the "basic rights and freedoms to which all
humans are entitled." Examples of rights and freedoms which have come to
be commonly thought of as human rights include civil and political rights as
well as economic, social and cultural rights.

Page 14 of 18
A more common definition of human right is that they are universal legal
guarantees protecting individuals and groups against actions by
governments, which interfere with fundamental freedoms and human
dignity. Human rights law obliges governments to do something better, and
prevents them from doing wrongs. They are also universal moral rights that
belong equally to all people simply because they are human beings. In other
words, they are inherent. Human rights are also often described as generally
accepted principles of fairness and justice.

4.3.2 Basic Features of Human Rights

Dear learner, knowing the major features/characteristics of human rights will
help you to understand more about human rights and distinguish them from
other rights. Human rights have the following three basic features. These
are: Human rights are universal, natural and inalienable and interrelated,
interdependent and indivisible.
A. Human rights are universal. They are rights to which every human
being is entitled irrespective of their difference in their sex, race, religion,
nationality, social origin, color etc. We have these rights by virtue of being a
human. The universality character calls for their respect and protection at all
places and times. However, there are some challenges to the universality of
human rights. Because of the existence of various cultures across the world,
proponents of cultural relativism argue that human rights are relative to
culture of a given society and cannot be universal. Concerning to this
controversy, the 1993 Vienna Convention on Human Rights asserts that
‘human rights and fundamental freedoms are the birth rights of all human
beings, and the universal nature of the rights and freedoms is beyond
question’. Therefore, the universality of human rights has been generally
accepted.
B. Human rights are natural and inalienable. As they are derived from
inherent dignity of human beings, human rights exist by nature. They are
neither given nor deprived. By inalienability, we mean that nobody can
deprive anybody of these rights and nobody can renounce them by
him/herself. Therefore, what a political society does not to grant these rights
to human beings rather to recognize them and guarantee their respect and
enforcement through its laws and institutions.
C. Human rights are interrelated, interdependent and indivisible.
The respect for human dignity requires the recognition and respect of the
civil, political, economic, social, cultural and other demands. All these
demands of human beings deserve due attention. The recognition and
realization of economic and social rights is necessary for the realization of

Page 15 of 18
civil and political rights and vice versa. As a result, the recognition and
realization of one right cannot be separated from the other. Therefore, all
different sets of human rights shall be recognized, respected and protected.
D) Human rights are eternal. As far as human society exists, human
rights continue to exist. In addition, any change in government and any
change in social, political/economic outlooks do not have any impact on
human rights. This feature can be subsumed in the universal character of
human rights mentioned above.
E) Human rights contain the principles of equality and non-
discrimination. There are no human beings who are more than others.
They have all equal dignity. Therefore, equal dignity requires equal respect
and treatment. Human rights are rights all human beings have and any form
of discrimination is not acceptable. Differential treatments are justified if and
only if there are well-grounded reasons (For example, well debated case of
affirmative action).

F) Human rights are not absolute. Rights are subjected to

limitations/restrictions whenever it is necessary to protect some legitimate
public or individual interest. For instance, the right to freedom of expression
can be restricted to protect national security, public order, public morals, or
the reputations/rights of others.

4.3.3 Classification of Human Rights

Dear students, the classification of human rights facilitate our understanding
of the contents of human rights. However, there is no complete agreement
on the classification of human rights .This is because the difference on the
grounds for and the purposes for classifications. For instance, based on the
type of the right holder human rights can be classified into; individual rights
and group rights. Human rights can also be classified based on the type of
state obligation as negative rights and positive rights.

However, the most-widely classification is the idea of three-generation rights

proposed by the French jurist Karel Vakas. This is a classification of rights
based on their evolution/generation in human history. He was inspired by the
three themes of French Revolution; Liberty, Equality and Solidarity.
According to Vakas’s classification, human rights are classified into three
generations of rights.

1) First generation rights

2) Second generation rights
3) Third generation rights

Page 16 of 18
However, some scholars assert that the term ‘generation’ is somewhat
inappropriate. It suggests a succession of phenomena, whereby a new
generation takes the place of the previous one. That is, however, not the
case with the three ‘generations’ of human rights. On the contrary, the idea
is rather that the three ‘generations’ exist and be respected simultaneously.
To that effect, the word ‘generations’ should have been replaced by
‘categories’.
1) First-Generation Rights
First generation rights include civil and political rights. They are primarily the
result of the 17th and 18th century reformist theories associated with the
English, American and French Revolution. They are the result of liberal
political philosophy of [Link] and political rights are considered
to be expressed in a very precise language, imposing merely negative
obligations on states and they do not require so much resources for their
implementation, and which, therefore, can be applied immediately.
However, civil and political rights cannot be realized by mere non-
interference. For example, the right to security and the right to fair and
public trial necessarily require positive state action.
The rights contained under Article 2-22 of the UDHR and most of the rights
contained in the ICCPR may be classified as first-generation rights. First-
generation rights (Core rights) are rights that are indispensable for an
existence in human dignity and therefore need absolute protection. They
include;
 The right to life
 The right to liberty and security
 The right to equality
 Freedom from racial and other forms of discrimination
 Freedom from slavery or involuntary servitude
 Freedom from torture and from cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or
punishment
 Freedom from arbitrary arrest, detention or exile
 The right to fair and public trial
 The right to privacy
 Freedom of movement
 Freedom of opinion and expression
 Freedom of peaceful assembly and association
2) Second Generation rights
The second generation rights are related to equality that including economic,
social and cultural rights. The origin of this generation of rights is associated
with the socialist movements of the 19 th century and the 1917 Bolshevik
Revolution. They are considered to be expressed in vague terms, imposing

Page 17 of 18
only positive obligations that are conditional on the existence of available
resources and therefore involving a progressive realization. However, the
right to equality and the principles of non-discrimination has to be
implemented immediately. So, the state has not only positive obligation, but
also negative obligation, i.e. the obligation to refrain from violating these
rights, particularly from taking what are called retrogressive measures.
The rights contained under Article 22-27 of the UDHR and most of the rights
contained in the ICESCR may be classified as second-generation rights.
These include
 The right to work and the ‘right in work’
 The right to form/join trade unions
 The right to education
 The right to social security
 The right to health
 The right to adequate standard of living
 The right to participate in cultural life
Moreover, cultural rights include the right to participate in the cultural life of
one’s community, to share in scientific advancement and the right to the
protection of the moral and material interests resulting from one’s scientific,
literary or artistic production.
3) Third-Generation rights
These include collective or group rights. Some of these rights are associated
with the emergence of Third World nationalism and its demand for global
redistribution of power, wealth and other values. The third-generation rights
include, but not limited to, the following;
 The right to self-determination (political, economic, social and cultural self-
determination)
 The right to development
 The right to participate in and benefit from the ‘common heritage of mankind’
 The right to peace
 The right to healthy and balanced environment
 The right to humanitarian disaster relief
 The right to one’s own natural resources

Page 18 of 18