**4. Can human rights be justified?**

The potential of protecting human rights for enabling all humans to live quality lives lies in the fact that human rights guide humans to cope with the burdens of

*Education, Human Rights and Peace in Sustainable Development*

**2.4 Human rights in its historical dimension**

for current and future generations need identification.

balance conflicting human needs and interests within society.

governments must make.

cannot be overstressed [34]. The efficiency of democracies must, subsequently, be measured by the extent to which all of its members, including governments, are dedicated to ensure that human rights and laws are throughout equally respected and upheld [20]. Such dedication can be measured by dissecting the establishment and maintenance of positive human life experiences relating to political stability, economic prosperity, workable democracies, and peaceful co-existence in societies amidst the existence of potentially opposing divisions [35]. In this regard, Heard [2] emphasises that the rights of man must be held sacred, however great a sacrifice

The historical fight for human rights started with philosophical and/or theological ideas and concepts underscored by Hobbes, Locke, and Kant regarding the need to respect the inherent worth of humans which gradually spilled over to the political sphere of national governments and, eventually, to the international domain [14]. In acknowledging the prominence of the values embedded in human rights, Gearty [36] even opines that their recognition across political and ideological borders symbolised the end of all ideologies and, thus, the end of history. It brought an end to historical periods during which human beings were not treated with dignity nor equally protected to the extent to which they deserved and, consequently, started a new moral era [23] which can be inherited by future generations [16]. In order to delineate the efficiency of such an inheritance, the human rights most prominent

**3. Which human rights are pertinent to meaningful human existence?**

After analysing various definitions proposed by researchers, Doğanay and Öztürk [37] follow a philosophical natural rights approach as underscored by numerous philosophers [38–42] by defining human rights as entailing, par excellence, universal concepts of fairness and equality. In doing so, focus is placed on the generalisation and global application of human rights as well as its origin being the very existence of humans (life, self-esteem, and the intrinsic value of dignity [6]) in relation to equality (all human beings are born equal and should be treated equally—a concept initially based on the spiritual assumption that all humans possess a soul and are part of Christ's redemption plan [5]), which they consider to be the main feature of all human rights. Based on the intrinsic worth shared by all human beings, Metz [21] contends that humans are entitled to significant moral claims to receive equal treatment. This entails treating all humans in a special manner by virtue of their capacity to cooperative rather than by an endeavouring to

To Staerkle et al. [28], the rights to individual freedom and political participation are prominent as they are inherent to human nature. Ercan et al. [16], in turn, emphasise the essence of human dignity, tolerance, peace, respecting others' rights, brotherhood, solidarity, and friendship. From a philosophical point of view, the rights to human freedom/liberty and property also merits prominence although it has all along been recognised that humans naturally possess liberty [3]. Guaranteeing human freedoms has, nevertheless, became essential as humans, according to Rousseau [43], longed for their natural freedom when entering into a social contract with others, thus accepting legal systems governing their behaviour. In the South African context, the newly appointed democratic government of 1994 adopted a final Constitution in 1996, in which mostly individual fundamental rights

**172**

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 others [45].

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

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 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 society [45, 51].

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

**175**

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

**6. Understanding human nature and behaviour within the moral** 

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

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

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

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

obligations. This is mainly due to the potential of conduct being regarded as being in the best interests of the greater good of the entire society to lead to sacrifice or exploitation of minority interests. Since a harmonious balance needs to be obtained between diverse human interests, insight into the nature and behaviour of humans being the ultimate bearers of human rights warrants further understanding.

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

**and legal framework of human rights**

development of culture within such a society [17].

change as a function of who they are and where they live.

not totally favourable to themselves.

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

obligations. This is mainly due to the potential of conduct being regarded as being in the best interests of the greater good of the entire society to lead to sacrifice or exploitation of minority interests. Since a harmonious balance needs to be obtained between diverse human interests, insight into the nature and behaviour of humans being the ultimate bearers of human rights warrants further understanding.
