Research Viewpoint: The Right to Starlight as a Third-Generation Human Right

The right to starlight (RtS) is finding a place in the discourse on human rights. As an emanating right against inaccessibility to starlight due to anthropogenic causes, such as light and atmospheric pollution, the global demand for institutional recognition of this right is on the rise. Given this, the article seeks to locate RtS in Vašák’s third-generation rights. The article also conceptualizes starlight as a global commons. It further builds a theoretical defense for RtS as an astro-environmental and astro-ecological right by evaluating the existing political and legal dimensions. The RtS is also framed as a terrestrial, amphibious, triphibious, and extraterrestrial right. The idea of starlight is problematized through the potential prism of starlight justice and equity to demonstrate the astropolitical patterns and directions in the growth of this right. The article also navigates through the astropolitical challenges, with a special focus on the “astrosubalterns,” defined as groups in need of starlight, in accommodating RtS in the discourse on human rights.

1. Purpose The purpose of the article is to confirm the relevance of isolation of the third-generation human rights and to indicate the need for action at international level in order to enforce such rights of a collective nature. Analysing the selected third-generation human rights the author draws attention to the fact that some of the third-generation rights are violated in practice and hence indispensable are measures of an international nature that aim at reinforcement of protection of these rights. 2. Introduction The third-generation human rights were isolated in the 70’s of the XX century by a French scientist of Czech origin Karel Vašak. They are collective in nature and contrary to the first- and second-generation rights (which are related to liberty and equality) serve entire human communities. Protection of the third-generation human rights makes sense if the overall objective of the ensuring is not a human but a group of people. Hence, the most significant third-generation human rights house in particular the right to peace, to democratic state based on the rule of law, to self-determination of nations, to security, to a healthy environment, to development, to humanitarian aid, to participation in human heritage. It is important to realise that enforcement of the first- and second-generation human rights (to liberty and equality) is associated with a sufficient guaranteeing the third-generation human rights. Unfortunately, the third-generation rights are often violated nowadays (by numerous wars, impossibility of self-determination for some nations, lack of broad international environmental protection measures and cherishing the common human heritage). That is why it is vital to create awareness and take actions in favour of protection of the third-generation human rights. 3. Methodology The author isolates and describes the third-generation human rights using primarily the method of critical review of the literature. In the alternative, he deals with the dogmatic-legal method analysing texts of international law. In order to illustrate cases of the third-generation human rights abuses and to give legitimacy to taking action at international level the author also uses the case study method. 4. Conclusions The author justifies the need to isolate the third-generation human rights and proves that contemporarily these rights are prejudiced on many aspects. He indicates that violation of the third-generation human rights legitimizes the need to strengthen their protection at international level. The respect for the third-generation human rights guarantees the exercise of liberties and equality laws, i.e. the first- and second-generation human rights

Teaching and Learning Guide for: Sociology and Human Rights in the Post Development Era

Re-Appraising the Significance of 'Third-Generation' Rights in a Globalized World

Aim: To relate the International Court of Justice with sustainability. To highlight the importance of fulfilling the Economic, Social and Cultural rights and the Rights of Third Generation for all human beings.Methodology: The paper contains the definition of sustainability and doctrine about the International Court of Justice and human rights. To conduct the research, the methodological technique of documental investigation is applied. Furthermore, there is a deep analysis of the case of the ICJ about Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay of Argentina V. Uruguay, where the concepts mentioned before come together and relate between each other.Findings: It was revised how the definition of sustainability is related with the decision taken by the International Court of Justice in the case Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay Argentina V. Uruguay. The question about how the ICJ relates to sustainability in this case study, can be answered by discovering if the economic, cultural and social rights are considered, as well as the Rights of Third Generation, when the Court decides in the case example. In the judgment of Argentina V. Uruguay, the Court did not have enough proof from the environmental report to check if there was contamination and if the plants were harming the environment.Value: It is important to determine how the juridical organ of the United Nations substantiates the importance of sustainability, Rights of Third generation and economic, social and cultural rights. Moreover, this is relevant in a world that it so contaminated and with the big alarm of global warming threatening humanity.

How are constitutional rights protected or undermined in free trade agreements (FTAs) involving the European Union (EU)? Such rights include the traditional firstgeneration civil and political rights; the secondgeneration social, economic and cultural rights, as well as thirdgeneration rights that include the environment. Over the past decade, there has been a clear increase in the number of FTAs entered into by the EU. In the majority of these agreements, respect for human rights is often presented as an essential element. From the EU’s perspective, focus has always been on using these agreements to foster its normative standing. This entailed a promotion of its core values on human rights and good governance. The critical factor has always been to use these agreements to check excesses of repressive regimes. But given that human rights are regarded as indivisible, there is also a strong desire from critics that greater attention is equally placed on socioeconomic rights. This argument is further stretched in those countries with constitutions that clearly stipulate the pro tection of second and thirdgeneration rights. There are many reasons why rights have been included in EU FTAs. From the EU’s perspective, not only are its normative values extended farther afield through such clauses, but it also signals that commercial policy cannot be conducted in isolation. Rather it is part of a package of tools in foreign affairs that the Union can use. From the perspective of partner countries, embracing such rights may actually be a strategy with which to sell a more burnished image that is attractive to foreign investors and visitors. What is more, some of these countries also embrace the clauses mindful of the salience accorded to human rights in their own national constitutions. The EU is not alone in using such provisions in its FTAs. The United States has also been keen to integrate human rights and soft political provisions in its trade deals as well as preferential schemes such as the one sanctioned under the African Growth and Opportunity Act. The approach used by the EU since the 1990s has been that of carrots and sticks: providing perks to good performers and forfeiting the same to renegades.

The chapter offers a new concept of the right of humanity to peace presented through its co-dependence with human rights and sustainable development. Peace is an important factor for humanity’s survival, which explains the necessity of its discussion through the lens of human rights discourse. Following the traditional division of human rights into three generation, and its development into the rights of humanity, peace is argued to be one of three rights of humanity (others are: right to healthy environment and sustainable development). Humanity – unlike an individual or group – is an inclusive subject, meaning that it unites all human beings. The theoretical utility of introducing the rights of humanity is based on its global nature, making it relevant in the increasingly interdependent world. It also solves the ambiguity in understanding of the subjects of the human rights of third generation. The chapter provides broad analysis of the international documents, which had changed the legal definition of peace recognizing it as a human right. The chapter is designed to argue in favor for recognition of humanity as the subject of the right to peace, along with its connection with the sustainable development. The interdependence between the human rights, peace, and development helps better understanding of future implementation of the possible mechanisms of protection and promotion of these values.

ABSTRACTIn the contemporary political world order that continues to be structured by the principle of national sovereignty, the fate of human rights ultimately depends on states as the main guarantors and transgressors of rights. The analysis of the conditions and processes of their effective institutionalisation therefore requires a focus on the state level without losing sight of human rights’ universalistic potential. This article develops the ideal type of the human rights state as a sociological framework for the systematic qualitative study and assessment of human rights institutionalisation. To this end, it reconceptualises Benjamin Gregg’s normative political theory of the human rights state as an analytical yardstick that refers to the necessary conditions for the effective implementation of human rights as locally valid, state-based norms of universalistic scope. Based on the extrapolation of human rights’ core traits and their synthesis into a unified, coherent concept, the ideal type of the human rights state provides guidance for the empirical study of factual processes of human rights institutionalisation within states both as an analytical grid and benchmark for their critical evaluation. By integrating the divergent perspectives on legal, political and wider societal dimensions of human rights institutionalisation, this article contributes to the multidisciplinary field of human rights research as well as to the developing field of human rights sociology.

The analysis of contemporary challenges, such as the rights of indigenous peoples, the right to development, and the rights of future generations, confirms the need to revise the traditional classification and develop a more comprehensive approach to the implementation of human rights in the 21st century. This also highlights the relevance of the research topic. The purpose of this article is to analyze the generations of human rights and their implementation in modern legal systems. The research methodology includes methods such as legal policy analysis, comparative analysis, and empirical research. The article examines the concept of human rights generations and the specifics of their implementation in contemporary legal systems. It analyzes the historical development of human rights from the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen and the Bill of Rights to modern international documents, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the UN International Covenants, and the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Particular attention is given to the critique of the three-generation theory of human rights and its adaptation to modern challenges, specifically through the expansion of the concept of humanity’s rights as third-generation rights. The study explores legal mechanisms for ensuring human rights in international and national contexts, including the European Union, the United Nations, and regional agreements. As a result of the study, it is concluded that there is a need to revise the traditional classification of human rights generations, taking into account contemporary challenges and globalization processes. The article analyzes the mechanisms for implementing human rights in the legal systems of different countries and proposes ways to improve international legal norms to ensure sustainable development and social justice.

There can be no doubt that the internet is at once a development issue and a human rights issue. As a developmental issue, it brings to the fore the global and local socio-economic divides. As a human rights issue, it implicates the full range of rights, including socio-economic rights, civil and political rights and third-generation rights. On the one hand, access to the internet is key to facilitating development and the realisation and protection of human rights. On the other hand, the internet can be used to commit human rights violations such as cyberviolence and crime, political and socio-economic domination and many other forms of exploitation. It follows that addressing in full the challenges the internet raises for human rights and development is critical to unlocking the full potential of the internet. This book has shown that while African states have acknowledged the link between the internet, development and human rights and have taken a wide range of measures, collectively and individually, to harness this link for the benefit of Africans, much more could be done. The spectrum of issues the internet raises for development and human rights is plainly vast. This calls for more research on this fast-emerging research field.

We encounter human rights at every step, whether it’s about their recognition and guarantee, about the means to ensure their realization, or about the violation of those rights. It is a legal institute of both national and international law, but it is also a phenomenon that has many other faces. In this regard, after giving a short presentation on the term and concept of human rights, the paper points out that, depending on the context, human rights mean different matters, such as a special «concept» (the idea that there are certain human rights, which are inalienable and independent of the will of the state); basic legally protected human rights; specific legal solutions; situation in practice; clearly defining the human rights of certain beneficiaries; human rights law as a branch of law, especially international law; etc. Noting that human rights can be understood in various ways, the author gives their narrow definition, according to which it is a set of certain entitlements and privileges that are recognized to each human being or members of a certain category of people (a group and its members) that as such enjoy special legal protection. After considering various dimensions of human rights (philosophical, ideological, political, economic, etc.), the author emphasizes that the most important is the legal dimension, because human rights are inseparable from law as a social phenomenon, i.e. a normative order (objective law) while at the same time they represent legally protected interests of individuals and groups (subjective law). Taking a closer look, law defines: what are human rights, which rights are legally protected and what is their content, who are the enjoyers of certain rights, who are the bearers of legal obligations, what are the mechanisms for realizing the guaranteed rights, which are the mechanisms of supervision over how established solutions are implemented, and other issues, such as the procedure and method of correction of established violations of human rights, punishment for violation of human rights, etc. Seen from another angle, the role of law is reflected in: 1) norming (legal regulation); 2) creation of conditions and mechanisms for the realization of human rights; 3) supervision over the implementation of established solutions and, if necessary, making the necessary corrections; 4) ensuring satisfaction in the sense of creating conditions for compensation of material and moral damage and realization of those solutions and 5) punishment for violation of human rights. An integral part of the legal dimension should also be the undertaking of normative, organizational and functional efforts to prevent the abuse of human rights.

Group Rights and the Muslim Diaspora 1 William Barbieri (bio) I. Introduction The fifty years following the promulgation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights have witnessed a signal achievement: the establishment of a moral lingua franca for global politics. In statements by visiting heads of state, in the efforts of international organizations, in the pleas of grassroots associations and nongovernmental organizations, in the declarations of religious bodies, and in the accusations of rebel movements alike, talk of justice—and, more immediately, injustice—is conducted in the parlance of human rights. Even the cynical and blatantly manipulative invocations of human rights issued by oppressors and tyrants provide a sort of backhanded testimony to the moral force of the idea. As Michael Walzer remarked in connection with the ethics of war, “Wherever we find hypocrisy, we also find moral knowledge.” 2 It is part and parcel of their promotion to present human rights as fixed and obvious verities of human experience. This image masks, however, deep ambiguities, if not paradoxes, in the nature of human rights. Thus, the normative authority of human rights claims stands against a widely shared confusion regarding the relationship between the moral and legal dimensions [End Page 907] of human rights. Thus, a remarkable measure of practical agreement on international human rights standards stands against widespread disagreement on their theoretical underpinnings. Thus, the historicity characterizing the emergence of human rights norms stands against the timelessness they claim for themselves. Thus, the universality suggested by the very notion of human rights stands against the impact of the particularity of each context in which they are invoked. One should think of these antinomies as constituting a framework of creative tensions within which human rights are dialectically articulated and promoted. Human rights discourse, in this view, is best understood as the practice of collectively interpreting the implications and requirements of the idea of human rights, always in light of the experience garnered in attempts to realize human rights in practice. One of many theaters in the ongoing project of interpreting human rights is Islamic Western Europe. This is the Europe marked by the promi-nent mosque on the banks of the Alster in Hamburg, by the students wearing head scarves in state-run lycées in Paris, and by the public calls to prayer in Birmingham. It is a Europe that has emerged from the aftermath of colonial-ism and the wake of the worker recruitment programs of the fifties and sixties that constitutes a forum for the politics of identity, difference, and recognition. 3 At the heart of this Europe, sharpened by the conjuncture of divergent world-views, lies a set of questions bearing on fundamental notions of human rights. What consequences does this new social constellation bring for our understanding of the tension between the individual rights of liberal tradition and the group rights championed by the multiculturalists? What, in this context, is the meaning of equality? Also, what are the implications of Islamic Europe with regard to how we should think about religious freedom? In taking up this rather daunting cavalcade of questions, the intent of this article is, in the first place, simply to shed some light on their ethical complexities. Illumination of the structure of moral problems is the primary task of applied ethics; to this, the constructive normative argument must take a back seat. Accordingly, what this article will offer in the way of answers will be, at best, tentative and highly provisional. All the same, some attention will be devoted to proposing guidelines that might assist in resolving conflicting claims of human rights. [End Page 908] II. The Issues The Islamic presence in Western Europe is marked by a good deal of diversity; France’s Algerians, Germany’s Turks, and the United Kingdom’s Pakistanis are only the most prominent of the predominantly Muslim immigrant populations that have established themselves as minorities in recent decades, in some cases, joining small groups of indigenous Muslims. 4 Equally variegated have been the receptions accorded this influx in the respective countries of destination, with respect to both the legal incorporation of the newcomers and their social and economic integration. 5 All the same, the encounter between...

The accountability for human rights violations by multinational corporations (“MNCs”) has been one of the most debated human rights issues of the last decade. Nongovernmental organisations, industry groups, governments and even businesses themselves have generated a plethora of recommendations on how best to respond to the negative human rights impacts created by MNCs that operate in States that are unable or unwilling to protect their citizens’ human rights. While there is broad agreement among these different stakeholders about the need for an effective regulatory regime, there is less agreement about the form that this should take. The landmark ‘Protect, Respect and Remedy’ framework proposed in 2008 by John Ruggie, the former Special Representative of the United Nations (“UN”) Secretary-General on the issue of business and human rights, followed in 2011 by its ‘Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights’ (together, the “UN Framework”), has been hailed as the most significant and progressive instrument to date in the business and human rights domain. But, can the UN Framework be considered a game-changer in that it guarantees that victims of MNC human rights abuses are able to obtain effective remedy? This thesis will explore the causes, challenges and possible future remedies of MNC human rights accountability in three distinct ways. First, it will canvass the possible ways in which businesses affect the human rights of individuals and posit a theory of corporate accountability embedded in the fundamental value of human dignity. Secondly, it will evaluate major policy frameworks that purport to regulate MNC human rights responsibilities, including the newly launched UN Framework, with a view to exposing their (in)adequacy in addressing MNC human rights violations. Finally, it will suggest necessary reforms or alternative enforcement mechanisms, which could be used to enhance MNCs human rights accountability at the international realm with both voluntary and legal dimensions.

Human Rights Education (HRE) involves more than knowledge of rights and wrongs. It developed to enable individuals to act in an informed way to protect human rights or to prevent human rights viola-tions. HRE is therefore both empowering and restraining in order to protect human dignity. Freedom from torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading practices is central to human dignity. This article starts from the universal and absolute prohibition of torture under international human rights law. While considering the contradictive relationship between war and torture the article focuses on the war against terror as defined by the US administration as new type of warfare requires a new think-ing in the law of war. From this point of departure the article elaborates the challenges to human rights education developing from the debate on the legalization of torture. While comparing the dis-cussion and application of law in Germany and U.S.A. the author argues for a more coherent interna-tional human rights protection system and for the establishment of a comprehensive accountability mechanism within international human rights law. Particular attention will be paid to artificial loopholes in international law which facilitate a lack of accountability. The article also focuses on the arguments for legalizing and legitimating torture so as to highlight how HRE can be employed to foster the norma-tive understanding of human rights such as the right to freedom from torture. By highlighting the moral, political, legal and social dimensions to human rights standards, it will be shown that HRE can help to close loopholes in international law and counteract arguments against the absolute prohibition of tor-ture.

Background: Human rights violations such as torture are associated with a high risk of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The judgements of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) include a normative perspective on PTSD and address central ethical questions. Objective: To help bridge the gap between the psycho-medical and the legal discourse on human rights violations and to illustrate their medico-ethical implications by systematically assessing and categorizing all judgements by the ECtHR dealing with PTSD. Method: The ECtHR database was searched for ‘post-traumatic stress disorder’. A descriptive statistic was performed on the Articles of the European Convention on Human Rights involved and violations to these articles. In a qualitative analysis, the judgements were thematically grouped. Results: The search yielded n = 103 judgements, of which n = 90 were included. There were mostly violations of Article 3 (prohibition of torture), Article 8 (Right to respect for private and family life) and Article 6 (Right to a fair trial). PTSD in these judgements is normatively discussed with regards to ethical, social and political themes such as inadequate access to healthcare, especially in prison, matters of asylum, expulsion and extradition, protection of minorities and minors, as well as rights and duties of traumatized witnesses. Conclusion: PTSD plays a central role in a large number of ECtHR judgements. Our results show that PTSD as a medical diagnosis also encompasses legal, ethical, social, and political dimensions. This knowledge is essential for healthcare professionals working with traumatized persons, but can also be relevant for political decision-makers.