MODULE 2.

CITIZENSHIP TRAINING

HUMAN RIGHTS: THE BASICS

Learning Outcomes:

At the end of this module, students will be able to:

1. Know the historical background of the Human rights Law and be acquainted with the various
legal instruments relative thereto.
2. Appreciate the importance of knowing one’s rights.
3. Recognize the vital role citizens and civil society organizations in ensuring respect, promotion
and protection of human rights.
4. Have an in-depth knowledge of the different categories of human rights and the different
philosophical principles underpinning them.
5. Participate effectively in the enhancement of human rights awareness through active
participation in human rights advocacy work particularly in the effort to disseminate the Anti-
sexual Harassment Act and gender sensitivity in the academe and in the community as a whole.

I. Learning Resources:
Television and DVD (Digital Video Disc) player, PowerPoint presentation, online resources.

II. Methodology:

 Preliminary assessment to level off on expectations and situate the students where they are in as far
as the subject area is concerned.
 Observe how the students conduct themselves in the context of observance or nonobservance of
human rights.
 Using one’s observation, find the appropriate level of introduction to human rights education.
 Legal technicalities that may arise must collectively be addressed by the group so that everybody learns
by actually doing it. Difficult legalities must be given as an assignment as students are referred to on
line resources for their references and consult lawyers on the matter.
 This module only offers a starter kit. With knowledge gained from this module, students will be able to
learn by themselves more advanced discourses on human rights.
 III. Learning Concepts:

HUMAN RIGHTS MODULE: THE BASICS

By Hilton J. Aguja, Ph. D.

Human Rights are rights to which every person is entitled simply because of being human (Matsheza, 2001).
The enjoyment of these rights are not contingent on one’s circumstances in life such as skin color, gender, religion,
race, ethnicity, education, wealth, political conviction, etc. The foundation principle of human rights is the equality
of all human beings. The preamble of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which was passed by the United
Nations (UN) on 10 December 1948 categorically declares that “all human beings are born free and equal in dignity
and rights.” Keeping such declaration in mind, the UN member countries are under obligation to ‘strive by teaching
and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures, national and
international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance…” (UN-UDHR, 1948).

The emphases on human equality further find their way in the preambular part of other international
treaties like the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (UN-ICCPR, 1966) and the International Covenant
on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (UN-ICESCR, 1966). The same pronouncement on equality is expressed in
Section 1 of the Bill of Rights (Art. 3) of the Philippine Constitution (1987) which talks about equality before the law.

The Historical Development of Human Rights

The word ‘right’ as a “justifiable claim on moral or legal grounds” dates back to the 9 th and 10th centuries
when it first entered the English Dictionary (Oxford English Dictionary, 1979). However, in essence, the western
conceptualization of rights goes even further back in time. In ancient Greece for instance, citizens had political
rights. As practiced in the Athenian city states, citizens had equality before the law, equal right to speak in a forum
and the right to seek public office, etc. These rights are enjoyed by citizens only. To be a citizen however, one had
to be an adult male with property (Cranston, 1973). Rights were then the privilege of a few. And for the enjoyment
of men only!

During the height of Roman imperial rule, the notion of rights was for the first time articulated to be of
universal application. Universality means applicability of the law to anyone, anywhere and anytime. The logic for this
universality was the belief that Roman law was to be applied to the entire realm which practically covers the entire
known world under Roman control. The philosophical basis of such assertion was declared by Emperor Marcus
Aurelius when he argued that “All men had equal powers of reason. Hence, all men should enjoy equality before the
law regardless of nationality or station in life” (Ebenstein, 1969). Despite these notable philosophical
pronouncements by the Emperor himself, Rome remained to be a slave trading society. Universality then was more
of a lip service than anything else, designed to placate the conscience but not to alter the reality. And yes, rights
remained to be the prerogative of men only!

The decline of the Roman Empire paved the way for the medieval period characterized by incessant conflicts
noted for their cruelty and barbarity. Consequently, the middle ages contributed very little in the development of
human rights theory and principles. The philosophical contribution of the middle ages which was a reflection of its
troubled and tumultuous era, was on the development of the ‘just war’ theory as it applied to protection of
combatants and noncombatants alike (Walzer, 1977). The just war theory, despite its limitations, provided some
customary building blocks for the eventual development of the principles governing the conduct of warfare which is
now known as International Humanitarian Law or the Law of Armed Conflict.
 While the underlying principles which eventually served as the foundation stone of human rights theory
were already laid in times long past, its provenance providing the impetus for its rapid development is traceable to
the reign of King John I. The developments in human rights discourse during the early modern period were largely
attributable to the reactions by the nobility in England against the increasing tyranny of the King. The most significant
event characterizing this period was the passage of the Magna Carta of 1215 which was force upon the King by the
aristocracy. Fearing the loss of the support of the nobility, King John I grudgingly obliged. The Magna Carta in effect
placed limitations on the King’s whim and set in place clearly written rules on the matter of the nobility’s special
privileges which may not be arbitrarily trampled upon by the monarchy. The Magna Carta also included a ‘primitive
formulation of the right to a fair trial (Robertson and Merrills, 1992).

Among the Magna Carta’s contribution to human rights theory was the recognition of the new concept that
the King was bound by law. The influences of the Magna Carta were developed over the course of centuries. While
the word “Freeman” in article 39 of the Magna Carta originally referred to a baron, it gradually evolved to refer to
the fundamental rights for all and not just the aristocratic class (Henderson, 1896). The Magna Carta of 1215 inspired
subsequent legal documents like the English Bill of Rights (1689), the US Constitution (1789) and the French Rights
of Man (1789). These documents guarantee freedom of speech, due process, trial by jury, freedom from cruel
punishment, etc. Although the term human rights were not yet commonly used during those days, the substantive
essence of the concept was developed in that period.

Human Rights after the Second World War (WWII)

Human rights as a term popularly came into use only after the Second World War. It gained currency as a
post 1945 phenomenon. Contributory to this delayed internationalization of human rights was the Westphalian
system of international relations which focused only on the sovereign state as the actor in the international system.
Thus, prior to WWII, how a country treated its people were not subject to international law. It was purely a domestic
concern over which no other state has any business to intervene.

Due to Adolf Hitler’s monstrosity during the Second World War, the protection of human rights was
declared as a justification for the international community of nations to step in and to punish a sovereign
government for the way it treated its own people (Meyer, 1998). This development represented a revolutionary
development in international relations which undermined the hitherto existing Westphalian System (Forsythe,
1989). National Governments can no longer hide under the cloak of state sovereignty on matters of human rights
violations. It has now become a matter of international concern, violation of which is considered as crime against
humanity.

The Legal Basis

After the Second World War, the United Nations, as a new institution provided the leadership in awakening the
interest in human rights discourse. Article 55 of the UN Charter mandates all members to “promote universal respect
for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms”. As a requisite to membership to the UN, countries
must ratify the UN charter thereby binding them to respect and promote human rights. In pursuit of Article 55 of
the UN Charter and having in mind the recent atrocities committed by the Nazi regime of Hitler during the war, the
UN by a vote of 48-0 on December 10, 1948 approved General Assembly Resolution 217A (III) otherwise known as
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It represented the ‘common standard of achievement’ for all to strive
for. To date, we have, among others, the following major legal instruments in as far as human rights are concerned.

 The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR, 1948)

  The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR, 1966)
 The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR,1966)
 The International Convention on the Political Rights of Women (1953)
 The International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination (1965)
 The International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women (1979)
 The International Convention Against Torture (1984)
 The International Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989)
As if to really emphasize the need to promote and protect human rights, Regional Human Rights Conventions
all over the world found the light of day. To wit:

 European Convention on Human Rights (1950)

 American Convention on Human Rights (1969)
 African Charter on Human and People’s Rights (1981)
There is no Asian Charter on Human Rights as of yet.

Three Generations of Human Rights

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is composed of 30 articles in all. Perusing all the articles, one can
make the following classification of rights embodied therein.

 1st Generation Rights (Civil and Political). Art. 2-21 of the UDHR. The central message of these articles is
Liberty.
The first generation rights which are composed of civil and political rights are largely inspired by the writings of
Jean Jacques Rousseau and John Locke. They argued for the protection of the citizens from the abusive reach of
political authority. These rights are designed to prevent the government from unnecessary interfering in the private
affairs of the people. These rights ensure the liberty of the people to be shielded from state. As such, they are
conceived more in the negative (freedoms from) rather than positive (rights to) terms.

Political rights are rights which give the people the right to participate in running the affairs of the government.
Examples of such rights are:

The right to vote

The right to run for public office
The right to strike
The right to petition the government

Civil rights are rights to be imposed at the instance of private individuals to ensure to them the enjoyment of their
means of happiness. Examples of civil rights are:

The right to privacy

The right to travel
The right to own property
The right to marry
Another set of rights which the Constitution particularly highlights are those rights intended for the enjoyment and
protection of persons accused of any infraction of the law. Among the rights of the accused are:

The right to be presumed innocent

The right to due process
 The right to bail
The right to speedy impartial public trial

 2nd Generation Rights (Economic, Social and Cultural) Art. 22-27. The central message of these rights is
Equality.
2nd Generation Rights which are composed of socio-economic and cultural rights are inspired by the socialist
line of thinking which gives priority to the satisfaction of the material well being of the people. It promotes the
collective interest as against individual self interest by providing for avenues towards social equality. These rights
are designed to ensure the equitable distribution of wealth and participation in productive activities of society. As
such, these rights are characterized as follows:

 Advocate strong government intervention.

 Stated in positive (rights to) terms.
 Goals which the government must work towards achieving.

Examples of socio-economic and cultural rights are:

The right to work

The right to education
The right to a minimum wage
The right to humane conditions of work

 3rd Generation Rights (Solidarity Rights) Art. 28 of the UDHR. The central message of this article is
Fraternity.
The 3rd Generation Rights are called solidarity or group rights because they cannot be appropriated singly or
individually and must be enjoyed collectively. These rights are designed to create “a social and international order
in which the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration can be fully realized” (Art. 28). Thus far there are only
five solidarity rights, thus:

 Right to peace
 Right to development
 Right to a healthy environment
 Right to humanitarian aid
 Right to share in the world’s cultural heritage

Contextualizing Human Rights in the Philippine Setting.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights finds its way, albeit not entirely, into the Philippines
jurisprudence. Article III (Bill of Rights) of the Philippine Constitution enumerates these rights. To wit:

Bill of Rights
Article III of the Philippine Constitution
Section 1. The right to due process and equality before the law.

Section 2. The right against unreasonable searches and seizures.

Section 3. The right to privacy of communication and correspondence.

Section 4. Freedom of expression and assembly.

Section 5. The freedom of religious worship.

Section 6. The right to abode and of changing the same.

Section 7. The right to information on matters of public concern.

Section 8. The right to form unions and associations.

Section 9. The right to just compensation when private property is taken for public use.

Section 10. The right to enter into contracts.

Section 11. The right to have free access to courts and quasi-judicial bodies.

Section 12. The rights of the accused person.

Section 13. The right to bail.

Section 14. The rights of the accused person (cont).

Section 15. The right to the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus.

Section 16. The right to speedy trial.

Section 17. The right against self-incrimination.

Section 18. The right against involuntary servitude.

Section 19. The right against excessive fines and cruel, degrading, inhuman punishment.

Section 20. Non imprisonment due to non-payment of debt or poll tax.

Section 21. The right against double jeopardy.

Section 22. The right against ex post facto law and bill of attainder.

Concluding Call to Action

 In this brief narrative on the development of human rights, one cannot help but notice that women as a
group were getting the shorter end of the deal. Human rights discourse has been centered mainly on the perspective
of men. Men to the exclusion of and at the expense of women have shaped male centered and male dominated
bureaucracies with their concomitant structures, cultures, authority relations management styles and division of
labor. As such, they represent the interest of men. Consequently, women have fared less well in the development
process than men due to their relative powerlessness. This is reflected in the heavy male domination of parliaments,
congresses and other assemblies at all levels of state (Turner, 1997).

Politics has been presumed to be the natural sphere of men as masculine characteristics are cited as the
requirements for politics while women’s natural sphere has been determined as the private and domestic. Women
are thus made ineligible for political roles (Richter, 1990). This politics of exclusion results into women having fewer
legal rights and career opportunities than men in all societies and sphere of activity. Practices and beliefs in tradition,
politics, and religion, perpetuated throughout most of history are unfavorable to women (UNCHR, 2006). Men on
the contrary have all the opportunities and privileges as a whole in terms of power and control (Women Watch,
2006).

While the current talk on gender equality acts like a soothing balm to alleviate the injury inflicted to women,
much remains to be done. The Millennium Development Goals of the United Nations identify gender equality as one
of the issue concerned that has to be rectified by 2015. To make such a goal possible, it is necessary for all of us have
a change of heart and discard all the age old biases against women. Then and only then can we say with a clear
conscience that we are indeed all equal.

IV. Assessment

Guide Questions:

1. Apart from those cited in the module, identify other rights falling under the different categories/classification of
rights found in the Philippine Constitution. Explain your answer.

2. Can a right have multiple classifications i.e. political, civil, socio-economic and cultural? Support your answer.

2. Why is it in our interest to know our human rights?

3. Distinguish the first and second generation rights on the basis of their philosophical underpinnings.

4. Do women in our society enjoy equality with men? Substantively support your answer.

5. Why are third generation rights considered solidarity or group rights?

6. What do you think are the rights most commonly violated in the Philippines? What can you possibly do about it.?

7. Looking at the Bill of Rights in the Constitution, would you consider it heavily leaning on political rights, civil rights,
rights of the accused or socio-economic cultural rights? What do you prefer?

Activity:

1. Class Debate:
 Resolve: “It is an advantage to be a woman in the Philippines.”

“What men can do, women can do better.”

Rubrics for Debate

Category 21-25 16-20 11-13 5-10

Role Point of view, Point of view, Point of view, Point of view,

arguments, and arguments, and arguments, and arguments, and
solutions proposed were solutions solutions solutions
consistently in proposed were proposed were proposed were
character. often in sometimes in rarely in
character. character. character.

Required Elements Student included more Student Student included Student included
information and included all most less information
substance than was information and information and and substance
required. substance that substance that than was
was required. was required. required.

Relevance/Accuracy All information and Almost all Most of the Very little of
demeanor/gestures information and information and information and
appeared to be relevant demeanor/ demeanor/ demeanor/
and accurate. gestures gestures gestures
appeared to be appeared to be appeared to be
relevant and relevant and relevant and
accurate. accurate. accurate.

Props/Costume Student uses several Student uses 1-2 Student uses 1-2 Student uses no
appropriate props appropriate appropriate appropriate
(could include costume) props that props that make props or the
that accurately fit the accurately fit the the presentation props chosen
role played. role played. better. detract from the
presentation.

About the author:

Hilton Joyo Aguja is a faculty member of the Political Science Department, College of Arts and Social Sciences (CASS)
and was the Chair of the Political Science Department and the Head of the Center for Local Governance Studies
(CLGS), Office of the Vice Chancellor for Research and Extension, MSU-Iligan Institute of Technology. He obtained
his Master of Arts in International Politics from the International University of Japan and his Master of Philosophy
and Doctor of Philosophy in International Political Economy from the University of Tsukuba, Japan. He likewise
completed an Advanced Course in Human Rights at the Mahidol University in Thailand in cooperation with the Lund
University in Sweden. Also, he completed another Advanced Course in International Humanitarian Law from the
Geneva Academy of Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law in Geneva, Switzerland. Currently, he is the
Director of the National Service Training Program (NSTP) at MSU-IIT.

References:

Cranston, Maurice. What Are Human Rights? (New York: Taplinger, 1973)

Ebenstein, William. Great Political Thinkers: Plato to the Present. (Hinsdale:Dryden Press, 1969)

Forsythe, David P. Human Rights and World Politics (Lincoln: Nebraska University Press, 1989)

Forsythe, David P. The Internationalization of Human Rights (Lexington: D.C. Heath Press, 1991)

Henderson, E. F. Historical Documents of the Middle Ages (London:1896)

Matsheza, P. and G. Mudzongo. Human Rights, Democracy and Good Governance. (Harare: Wilmac Ltd., 2001)

Meyer, William H. Human Rights and International Political Economy in Third World Nations (Westport: Praeger
Publishers, 1998)

Richter, L. ‘Exploring Theories of Female Leadership in South and Southeast Asia’, Pacific Affairs Vol. 63 (4), 1990.

Robertson, A. H. & Merrills, J. G. Human Rights in the World. (New York: Manchester University Press, 1992.)

Turner, Mark and David Hulme. Governance Administration and Development: Making the State Work. (Connecticut:
The Kumarian Press, 1997)

United Nations, Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948.

United Nations, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1988.

United Nations, International Covenant on Social, Economic, and Cultural Rights, 1966.

UNCHR, 2006. ‘Discrimination Against Women’. UNCHR online, 2006. Online October 12, 2010. www.unchr.ch/html.)

Walzer, Michael. Just and Unjust Wars: A Moral Argument with Historical Illustrations. (New York: Basic Books, 1977)
Women Watch, 2006. ‘Women’s Right’. Women Watch Online www.un.org/womenwatch.daw/ed. Online
November 15, 2010.

Module 2. Answer Sheet

_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________