**6. Understanding human nature and behaviour within the moral and legal framework of human rights**

The disputed concept of human nature can be explained as incorporating a grouping of genetic and cultural factors decisive to human ethics, feelings, and behaviour [17]. It is due to the generic or biological factors inherent in humans that man has the capacity to develop ethics, namely, to anticipate consequences of behaviour, adopt societal standards, feel empathy, and make moral choices. Cultural factors, on the other side, emanate from society itself in which the actual morals, ethics, and norms applicable in a specific society naturally follow from the development of culture within such a society [17].

Although it is obvious that tension may arise between the genetic (individual egoism) and cultural (group identity) elements that guide human nature, thus influencing human behaviour, scientists have rarely linked these factors to human rights [17]. It is, however, argued that human rights cannot be studied in isolation—they unavoidably embrace unique human developmental opportunities, interpersonal and domestic elements, as well as broader institutional and societal issues prevalent in different social contexts [55]. Societal concerns, in turn, affect human attitudes, behaviour, and even the extent to which men are willing to adopt a social identity and are prepared to recognise and support human rights [48].

Seeing that human behaviour is subjective to an individual's unique personal philosophy, political opinions, and goals, humans tend to choose the rights they are willing to support [26]. The adherence to human rights and, thus, the success of an idealistic human rights culture are depended upon a better insight into the genuine attitudes of and behaviour towards human rights in general [26]. It must, therefore, be acknowledged that individual, self-contained values such as social justice, equality, loyalty, and care [4, 55] as well as the social conditions in which humans live **predict** their behaviour [25]. This, consecutively, poses challenges for the realisation of universal human rights aiming at regulating human behaviour across national borders, underscoring a more globalised application [24]. In this regard, Moghaddam and Vuksanovic [26], however, opine that the attitudes and behaviour of humans towards the human rights of others should be consistent and should not change as a function of who they are and where they live.

Although humans have a natural tendency to follow morally grounded rules of behaviour even in the absence of formal legal principles, the adoption of a legal system assists in giving recognition to rights which can be claimed when humans behave unjustly and infringing on the rights of others. It can, therefore, be argued that there can be no society without rights regulating human behaviour whether being part of government or on a personal level [3, 15, 19, 56]. It is, however, important to identify and understand the main features guiding humans to commit and subject their own behaviour to legally entrenched human rights even when it is not totally favourable to themselves.

The Declaration of Human Rights [49], alongside, recognised that every individual and each societal institution should strife at educating themselves and others in respect of human rights and freedoms. Since then, numerous authors have stressed the importance of human rights education and education in general for influencing

*Education, Human Rights and Peace in Sustainable Development*

consequently have equal dignity; it is a heritage of humanity [47].

other, the normative effect of human rights necessitates clarification.

**5. What are the normative implications of human rights claims?**

Heard [2] argues that the leading rhetorical advantage of human rights is that they should triumph over all other legitimate claims within a society due to their basic and fundamental value for human existence. The recognition of a human rights culture in South Africa, for example, abruptly brought an end to the adverse effects resulting from the historical apartheid era which made it impossible for instilling democratic principles that could guarantee an equitable and thriving

Empowering humans with legal entitlements to have their human rights respected, fulfilled, and promoted, however, reflects only one side of a coin. Since communities consist of a combination of affect-laden interactions amongst their diverse members, cognisance must be taken of the degree to which such members and government are willing to commit themselves to a uniform set of norms, values, and cultures pertaining to a shared history and common identity [52]. In this sense, commitment entails a deeply rooted dedication and not merely a shallow confirmation of the value of human rights [53]. Humans need to be tolerant towards differences, requiring of them to respect, accept, and appraise human differences positively [54] if they want to live together peacefully [48]. In this regard, Staerkle et al. [28] caution that democracy, allowing for a government by the people for the people, must not be viewed as a natural or automatic consequence of the recognition of the worth of every community member but rather as a result of a combination of historical, cultural, social, and economic factors present in communities gradually leading to the acceptance of some form of democracy. Heard [2], alongside, opines that there may remain a need to safeguard humans from utilitarian decision-making even amongst governments that are sincerely committed to moral

others [45].

a dynamic society whilst influencing their own physical, mental, and emotional well-being, their economic status, knowledge wealth, access to basic services, and social security which, in turn, positively impacts on their general behaviour towards

Intrinsically, every human being must be regarded as an end in itself and as the subject of their own lives [30]. This view is embedded in the widely accepted ethical notion that human autonomy is grounded upon universal dignity representing a philosophical belief which suggests an objective moral principle, on the one side, and the recognition of equal human rights, on the other side [46]. All humans

The attachment of responsibilities to human rights is necessary to allow for a moral, ethical, and balanced justification thereof, especially due to the individualistic nature of human rights. It serves as a reminder to all that individual freedom necessitates restriction and that human beings are not mere right-holders but also duty-bearers in order to harmonically co-exist with others. Each human being is, thus, not only a beneficiary of human rights but also confined by duties towards family and society members, the State, as well as the international community [48]. In this regard, the United Nation's Declaration of Human Rights ([49], article 1) recognises that all human beings are gifted with reason and conscience and obliged to adopt a spirit of brotherhood towards one another during their interactions. Individuals or specific groups of humans can, thus, not be excluded from access to human rights [14]. They play a key normative role in human existence within a broader society [50], requiring a dynamic understanding of diverse human needs that must be met. In recognising that diverse human needs may conflict with each

**174**

society [45, 51].

human behaviour. Kramers-Olen [55], for example, in researching the violation of the human rights of people with intellectual disabilities, found that the meaningful realisation of human rights inevitably intersects with the educational level of humans. It was concluded that such humans are often the victims of human rights abuses purely due to their lower intellectual functioning. As a direct result, the same author underlines the importance of obtaining loyalty amongst all societal members and institutions towards respecting human rights. In researching the violation of humans living with albinism, Mswela [29], similarly, found that such humans are marginalised and even killed due to misconceptions held by community members regarding them as being a curse on community or considering their body parts as being beneficial used as a muti.

It is in view hereof this respect, that the importance of human rights **education** in increasing knowledge, skills, understanding, attitude and mindfulness; all essential for preserving, endorsing and promoting fundamental rights and freedoms [37] and obtaining peace, cooperation, tolerance as well as democracy; is stressed [16]. The positive effect of education on changing humans' attitudes regarding their behaviour towards protecting human rights in general and even for future generations is highlighted [37]. Mkabela [31], conversely, cautions that human rights education should not negate traditional and indigenous values but rather be receptive to unique community perspectives in order to close the gap between the conceptualisation and practice of human rights by members belonging to different cultural groups. Mkabela's research results displayed the negative consequences of education taking a too globalised approach. It led parents to start relinquishing their roles of inculcating values to their children and to blame the education system for presenting human rights education in schools which encourages unacceptable behaviour in their communities. Human rights education should, according to Cohrs et al. [33], include more general anti-authoritarian and democratic or egalitarian values and attitudes for them to become more dominant and give rise to more positive orientations towards human rights.

Ercan et al. [16] advocate the starting of appropriate human rights education at primary schools to positively affect learner behaviour through knowledge and socialisation. They highlight the fact that learners at this developmental level are more open to adopting lifelong tolerance, awareness, and the ability to compromise, obtain overall positive attitudes towards human rights, and assume self-reported behaviour, thus being less inclined to violate such rights. Ongoing civic education or education for democracy as part of school reform is, nevertheless, encouraged.

From an interdisciplinary point of view, Kirchschlaeger [14] opines that both the law and education can establish an ethical foundation upon which legal systems can be changed in order to make provision for morally laden human rights. In this regard, he points out that the realisation of human rights cannot be automatically achieved; they necessitate a suitable ethos that ensures their enforcement. They need to be truly lived by, by both humans and governments; they are not a gift but a human task. Humans must be educated on how to behave in ways that compliment human rights, they need to be prepared to take action on behalf of fellow human beings, and they must be taught to have sympathy for others and remain committed to obtaining social justice and peace [14]. The eminence of human rights education is underscored by the fact that gross human rights abuses continue to take place globally.

#### **7. Persistent human rights violations**

Although political leaders globally vowed in 2000 to do all within their power to endorse and respect internationally recognised human rights, more than 800

**177**

human rights [36].

*Humans: The Biggest Barrier to Realising Human Rights - A South African Perspective*

million people around the globe still live under very poor and inhumane conditions [30]. Albeit being different in degree, all countries experience human rights problems hampering the respect such rights are entitled to in practice [57]. All modern societies consist of groups enjoying more power, social status, and wealth than subordinated groups, replicated by forms of discrimination such as sexism and racism, being justified as so-called hierarchy-augmenting legitimising myths [33]. In Islamic countries, for instance, women are still not viewed as equals, religious rebels are victimised, and political participation is only partially recognised. Political dominance is also central in countries such as Russia, Turkey, Hungary, and Venezuela. Xenophobia is flourishing in Europe and South Africa, whilst slavery still continues in some countries [23]. There are still more than 150 countries (out of 193 belonging to the United Nations) engaging in human anguish, and the amount of authoritarian governments is increasing. As such, reality shows that human

The ability of human rights to emancipate and dominate, protect, and control can, however, not be ignored. They have become a means for regulating human life and, thus, became tools of public power (the authority to withhold, revoke, or violate protection, provision, or participatory rights [48]). They are used as justification for a new configuration of political, economic, and military power [36]. Human rights, as colonialism in the guise of moralism, are often employed as a political alibi by governments tolerating and ignoring persistent inequities and unashamed injustices [58]. The rise of mass democracies around the globe during the twentieth century has given way to the protection of some humans whilst neglecting the needs of others comprising the poor and those struggling to live adequately and to find employment, thus leaving them to squad in illegal settlements, making illegal use of water and electricity, and even to commit immoral behaviour such as stealing, cheating, intimidating, abusing, and even murder just to survive [21]. Forced to behave outside the parameters of the law, such humans tend to want to be excluded from rights if rights are the law in order to escape, at least, a small part of the totalising system of governmentality that is served by the common purchase on human rights. As such, human rights have become a myth for those who suffer constant violations by, ironically, those who underscore the victory of

The constitutional rights of so-called loyal citizens are protected, whilst others are denied access to such safeguards [59]. Human rights are selectively misused to justify violations at the cost of many humans. They are camouflaged by states, identified as the main violators of human rights, as a form of justice-seeking [60]. Gearty [36] blames the incorporation of human rights into law as it imprisons and restricts human rights to the sphere of the law. To avoid this, Wolfgang [30] advocates the following of, as opposed to a totalitarian approach, a pluralistic ethical approach based on the principle that everyone matters equally and that all have access to rights by virtue of their humanity, not only as citizens but also as non-

The practical realisation of human rights, nevertheless, necessitates some form of legal protection. Crimes against humanity, in essence committed by humans themselves, being it through governments or on an individual level, can only be corrected if such crimes are indeed legally punished [27]. Whilst some States are not able to protect human rights, others simply do not want to [57]. It is often contended that giving effect to human rights, especially socio-economic rights, is just too costly. Ferreira [61] criticises such an argument by pointing out that human rights are more complex than such a contentment allows for, as human rights cannot merely be interpreted as entitlements to some good. The inability of States to provide for the necessary infrastructure within which the human rights of all regarding

citizens, in order to avoid the exclusion of certain humans.

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.88912*

rights law has failed to achieve its goals.

#### *Humans: The Biggest Barrier to Realising Human Rights - A South African Perspective DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.88912*

million people around the globe still live under very poor and inhumane conditions [30]. Albeit being different in degree, all countries experience human rights problems hampering the respect such rights are entitled to in practice [57]. All modern societies consist of groups enjoying more power, social status, and wealth than subordinated groups, replicated by forms of discrimination such as sexism and racism, being justified as so-called hierarchy-augmenting legitimising myths [33].

In Islamic countries, for instance, women are still not viewed as equals, religious rebels are victimised, and political participation is only partially recognised. Political dominance is also central in countries such as Russia, Turkey, Hungary, and Venezuela. Xenophobia is flourishing in Europe and South Africa, whilst slavery still continues in some countries [23]. There are still more than 150 countries (out of 193 belonging to the United Nations) engaging in human anguish, and the amount of authoritarian governments is increasing. As such, reality shows that human rights law has failed to achieve its goals.

The ability of human rights to emancipate and dominate, protect, and control can, however, not be ignored. They have become a means for regulating human life and, thus, became tools of public power (the authority to withhold, revoke, or violate protection, provision, or participatory rights [48]). They are used as justification for a new configuration of political, economic, and military power [36]. Human rights, as colonialism in the guise of moralism, are often employed as a political alibi by governments tolerating and ignoring persistent inequities and unashamed injustices [58]. The rise of mass democracies around the globe during the twentieth century has given way to the protection of some humans whilst neglecting the needs of others comprising the poor and those struggling to live adequately and to find employment, thus leaving them to squad in illegal settlements, making illegal use of water and electricity, and even to commit immoral behaviour such as stealing, cheating, intimidating, abusing, and even murder just to survive [21]. Forced to behave outside the parameters of the law, such humans tend to want to be excluded from rights if rights are the law in order to escape, at least, a small part of the totalising system of governmentality that is served by the common purchase on human rights. As such, human rights have become a myth for those who suffer constant violations by, ironically, those who underscore the victory of human rights [36].

The constitutional rights of so-called loyal citizens are protected, whilst others are denied access to such safeguards [59]. Human rights are selectively misused to justify violations at the cost of many humans. They are camouflaged by states, identified as the main violators of human rights, as a form of justice-seeking [60]. Gearty [36] blames the incorporation of human rights into law as it imprisons and restricts human rights to the sphere of the law. To avoid this, Wolfgang [30] advocates the following of, as opposed to a totalitarian approach, a pluralistic ethical approach based on the principle that everyone matters equally and that all have access to rights by virtue of their humanity, not only as citizens but also as noncitizens, in order to avoid the exclusion of certain humans.

The practical realisation of human rights, nevertheless, necessitates some form of legal protection. Crimes against humanity, in essence committed by humans themselves, being it through governments or on an individual level, can only be corrected if such crimes are indeed legally punished [27]. Whilst some States are not able to protect human rights, others simply do not want to [57]. It is often contended that giving effect to human rights, especially socio-economic rights, is just too costly. Ferreira [61] criticises such an argument by pointing out that human rights are more complex than such a contentment allows for, as human rights cannot merely be interpreted as entitlements to some good. The inability of States to provide for the necessary infrastructure within which the human rights of all regarding

*Education, Human Rights and Peace in Sustainable Development*

being beneficial used as a muti.

tions towards human rights.

human behaviour. Kramers-Olen [55], for example, in researching the violation of the human rights of people with intellectual disabilities, found that the meaningful realisation of human rights inevitably intersects with the educational level of humans. It was concluded that such humans are often the victims of human rights abuses purely due to their lower intellectual functioning. As a direct result, the same author underlines the importance of obtaining loyalty amongst all societal members and institutions towards respecting human rights. In researching the violation of humans living with albinism, Mswela [29], similarly, found that such humans are marginalised and even killed due to misconceptions held by community members regarding them as being a curse on community or considering their body parts as

It is in view hereof this respect, that the importance of human rights **education** in increasing knowledge, skills, understanding, attitude and mindfulness; all essential for preserving, endorsing and promoting fundamental rights and freedoms [37] and obtaining peace, cooperation, tolerance as well as democracy; is stressed [16]. The positive effect of education on changing humans' attitudes regarding their behaviour towards protecting human rights in general and even for future generations is highlighted [37]. Mkabela [31], conversely, cautions that human rights education should not negate traditional and indigenous values but rather be receptive to unique community perspectives in order to close the gap between the conceptualisation and practice of human rights by members belonging to different cultural groups. Mkabela's research results displayed the negative consequences of education taking a too globalised approach. It led parents to start relinquishing their roles of inculcating values to their children and to blame the education system for presenting human rights education in schools which encourages unacceptable behaviour in their communities. Human rights education should, according to Cohrs et al. [33], include more general anti-authoritarian and democratic or egalitarian values and attitudes for them to become more dominant and give rise to more positive orienta-

Ercan et al. [16] advocate the starting of appropriate human rights education at primary schools to positively affect learner behaviour through knowledge and socialisation. They highlight the fact that learners at this developmental level are more open to adopting lifelong tolerance, awareness, and the ability to compromise, obtain overall positive attitudes towards human rights, and assume self-reported behaviour, thus being less inclined to violate such rights. Ongoing civic education or education for democracy as part of school reform is, nevertheless, encouraged. From an interdisciplinary point of view, Kirchschlaeger [14] opines that both the law and education can establish an ethical foundation upon which legal systems can be changed in order to make provision for morally laden human rights. In this regard, he points out that the realisation of human rights cannot be automatically achieved; they necessitate a suitable ethos that ensures their enforcement. They need to be truly lived by, by both humans and governments; they are not a gift but a human task. Humans must be educated on how to behave in ways that compliment human rights, they need to be prepared to take action on behalf of fellow human beings, and they must be taught to have sympathy for others and remain committed to obtaining social justice and peace [14]. The eminence of human rights education is underscored by the

Although political leaders globally vowed in 2000 to do all within their power to endorse and respect internationally recognised human rights, more than 800

fact that gross human rights abuses continue to take place globally.

**7. Persistent human rights violations**

**176**

housing, medical care, education, employment, and food can be realised as a global concern as it denies humans their right to have their basic human needs to be met that will enable them to live dignified lives [61].

South Africa is, with regard to governments, merely not wanting to effectively realise human rights, a good example. Whilst this country's unemployment and poverty rates are increasing, government is misusing State funds for their own personal gain—corruption amongst State members is at the order of the day. Pensioners are, for example, left without resources as government used their funds to build e-tolls on its public roads. Increasing conflict amongst society members over employment opportunities and wages, the showing of intolerance towards diversity, the discrimination between inhabitants by way of name-calling through the social media and even from political platforms, the political upheavals from government scandals, as well as constant violent protests by the black majority who have yet to fully benefit from the transition from apartheid to democracy, all contribute to the unwillingness of the South African government towards creating a society reflecting a human rights culture. To this, the corruption-plagued governance of old President Zuma, supporting the rights of oppressors over their victims, can be added [62].

Regarding the political dimension of human rights, Gilbert [63] remarks that politicians are only concerned about being re-elected and will do everything and promise anything as long as they achieve their goal, without any true commitment to respecting the human rights of those electing them. Politicians tend to adopt a culture of control characterised by dismissing societal welfare pertaining to alleviate poverty, bring about equality, and create better life and employment opportunities as well as punishing crime by using expressive, emotive, and moralistic rhetoric to demonise those who seek State assistance as they are progressively marginalised from the economy [64].

In other parts of the world, the rise of secret terrorist activities are also used to secretly, without any legal justification, intrude the lives of humans of which the events of 11 September 2001 in the USA is but one example [36]. States are, likewise, using the protection of national security (the common good [21]) as a main means of restricting the individual rights belonging to humans. They fail to balance conflicting rights and competing interests effectively.

In South Africa, the acceptance of a human rights-driven Constitution and that of democracy instilled new hope for a better life for all South Africans. However, government soon turned to uplift themselves at the cost of those in a dire need of equal life opportunities. As a result, faith was lost in this country's ability to meet the needs of its inhabitants which led South Africans displaying new behaviour to obtain the attention of the world. They have turned to, amongst other, drug abuse, murders, aggressive strikes, land grabbing, and brutal aggression towards foreigners, gangsterism, hate speech, and human trafficking.

The South African Constitutional Court, despite repeated attempts to convince it to do so, has even on numerous occasions [*Government of the Republic of South Africa v Grootboom* 2001 (1) SA 46 (CC) paras 32-3; *Minister of Health v Treatment Action Campaign* 2002 (5) SA 721 (CC) paras 34-9; *Nokotyana v Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality* 2010 (4) BCLR 312 (CC); and in *Mazibuko v City of Johannesburg* 2010 (4) SA 1 (CC) fn. 46] refused to adopt a minimum core approach to the realisation of individual's socio-economic rights in order to oblige the government to give effect to such rights. Thus, even the judiciary indicated its lack of commitment towards the realisation of human rights by opting for rather maintaining good relationships with the executive authority by showing empathy to the latter's limited available resources. Rudman [65] disapproves of such an approach by stating that Constitutional Courts, par excellence, established to protect constitutional rights,

**179**

**8. Conclusion**

imperatives.

benefit of all living in such a society.

meaningful human existence, to their fullest potential.

*Humans: The Biggest Barrier to Realising Human Rights - A South African Perspective*

should be much more flexible in their approach as to enable them to be stricter when it comes to the violations of human rights. The unwillingness of courts is criticised by Barak [34] to the extent that the judiciary's main duty is to guard the effective implementation of human rights and, thus, to stand up to a government guilty of abusing its powers. Courts should not negate their responsibility to ensure that governments do not exceed their powers to the detriment of humans [66]. If courts remain unwilling to assist humans in this regard, humans will come to distrust judicial systems to adjudicate human rights infringements effectively [36].

It is evident that the Constitution presupposed an efficient government with the capacity and commitment to meet the hopes of its inhabitants in their desire for a participatory and efficient democracy, the realisation of their human rights, peace and security, equal developmental opportunities, social justice, and integration [24]. In this quest, it must be recognised that humans themselves do not just live in a democracy; a constitutional State does not embody a complete structure but is rather imperfect, revisable, subtle, and delicate in its aim at recognising human rights afresh under dynamic circumstances. As such, the responsibility lies with all living in contemporary South Africa to endorse human rights and inspire government to do the same [54]. In a democracy humans are obliged to actively participate and take responsibility for the realisation of human rights and cannot, as the case in authoritarian regimes, exclusively blame government for human rights violations [28].

In studying human rights through a philosophical lens, this chapter succeeded in recognising the moral or ethical dimensions lying at the foundation of human rights. Although it was acknowledged that humans by nature tend to behave ethically, it became evident that persistent human rights violation through human behaviour necessitates the inclusion of human rights within a legal framework. This allows for obliging not only governments but also private individuals to adhere to the responsibilities indispensably linked to human rights. It also empowers those whose human rights are violated to legitimately claim compliance to normative legal

The interplay between the egoistic nature of humans and the need for humans to harmoniously co-exist in society amongst other humans depicted the effect of society-specific conditions on human behaviour. It came to the fore that humans, with their own individual set of morals and beliefs, need to be well educated in order to adopt and adapt to mutually acceptable behaviour that would be to the

Reference to the persistent occurrence of human rights violations globally underscored the gap, despite the widely acceptance of human rights in their ethical, legal, political, and historical dimensions that remains to exist between both moral and legal ideals and the extent to which effect is given to human rights in reality. This keeps the gate open for furthering the debate pertaining to how human behaviour needs to be adopted to realise human rights, at least those pertinent to

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.88912*

#### *Humans: The Biggest Barrier to Realising Human Rights - A South African Perspective DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.88912*

should be much more flexible in their approach as to enable them to be stricter when it comes to the violations of human rights. The unwillingness of courts is criticised by Barak [34] to the extent that the judiciary's main duty is to guard the effective implementation of human rights and, thus, to stand up to a government guilty of abusing its powers. Courts should not negate their responsibility to ensure that governments do not exceed their powers to the detriment of humans [66]. If courts remain unwilling to assist humans in this regard, humans will come to distrust judicial systems to adjudicate human rights infringements effectively [36].

It is evident that the Constitution presupposed an efficient government with the capacity and commitment to meet the hopes of its inhabitants in their desire for a participatory and efficient democracy, the realisation of their human rights, peace and security, equal developmental opportunities, social justice, and integration [24]. In this quest, it must be recognised that humans themselves do not just live in a democracy; a constitutional State does not embody a complete structure but is rather imperfect, revisable, subtle, and delicate in its aim at recognising human rights afresh under dynamic circumstances. As such, the responsibility lies with all living in contemporary South Africa to endorse human rights and inspire government to do the same [54]. In a democracy humans are obliged to actively participate and take responsibility for the realisation of human rights and cannot, as the case in authoritarian regimes, exclusively blame government for human rights violations [28].
