Human Rights Law

Prelim Examinations

1. Explain the concept of human rights. Explain briefly about its origin
Ans:
Human rights are rights we have simply because we exist as human beings. They
are not granted by any state. These universal rights are inherent to us all, regardless of
nationality, sex, national or ethnic origin, color, religion, language, or any other status.
They range from the most fundamental, the right to life, to those that make life worth living,
such as the rights to food, education, work, health, and liberty. Human rights are rights
which necessarily spring from being a member of the human species.
Human rights law covers not just the relationship between men and the government
but rather, it also refers to three generations as its broad coverage. Human rights would
refer mostly to the political rights and civil liberties of humans. Second, it also covers the
rights towards economic, social and cultural aspects. Lastly, the rights of individuals
emerging towards a clean environment and the right to live in a peace.
The concept of human rights and security is based on recognizing that all
individuals are equal in the eyes and are subject to dignity and rights.
The modern conception of rights can be traced back to enlightenment political
philosophy and the movement, primarily in England, France, and the United States, to
establish limited forms of representative government that would respect the freedom of
individual citizens. The UN General Assembly adopted the human rights day in 1948 to
establish the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which proclaims the inalienable
rights of all people.

2. a. Explain the concept of jus cogens and erga omnes and explain as to which is
stronger between the two as a source of human rights.
Ans.:
Jus cogens is a concept of "compelling law." It is the technical term given to those
norms of general international law that are argued to be hierarchically superior. It is
accepted and recognized by the international community. This analysis is focused on
the legal impact of a subsequent norm of general international law having same
character. And so, there is an intrinsic correlation between peremptory norms
and human rights.

Erga omnes is a Latin phrase which means "towards all" or "towards everyone".
In legal terminology, erga omnes rights or obligations are owed toward all. For
instance, a property right is an erga omnes entitlement, and therefore enforceable
against anybody infringing that right. These are obligations that are owed by the States
to all, regardless of the presence or absence of their assent to be bound thereby.

The concept of erga omnes is a useful one because it facilitates the integration of
community interests into international law, and the reflection of those interests in the
invocation of state responsibility. It is also preferable in that it maintains a higher level
of conceptual clarity with regard to its parameters of notion of and the relationship with
other legal concepts.
 b. Suppose the Philippines since olden times practiced spanking children as a
form of discipline. Can this be considered as a violation of children’s human
rights considering that all forms of physical abuse is prohibited?
Ans.:
This form of discipline is not to be considered as a form of physical abuse.
It is because spanking looks to be instantly effective in disciplining a child. For a
parent doing such, this type of discipline is considered to be a powerful tool. If a
child is misbehaving, if he keeps swearing, or playing with matches and then you
spank that child, the behavior stops immediately. But not in a severe way. Moderate
spanking is advisable in order to create an impression to a child that it is for his or
her own good. Old experience tends to be more powerful than facts.

3. During the COVID pandemic, people have complained that their right to travel,
freedom of assembly, the right to seek employment abroad, etc which are all
protected by human rights have been violated. Do you think that States can be
cited for these human rights violations?
Ans.:
No, the State cannot be cited for these human rights violation.
According to the 1987 Philippine Constitution, Section 17, “In times of
national emergency, when the public interest so requires, the State may, during the
emergency and under reasonable terms prescribed by it, temporarily take over or direct the
operation of any privately-owned public utility or business affected with public interest.”
With the existence of COVID-19 as a global pandemic and the declaration of the
President for a nationwide state of calamity, the State thru its President, can take actions in
order to fight the spread of corona virus. Hence the implementation of these restrictions. It
is clear that the pandemic had an important impact on Human Rights but the restrictions
imposed were part of the protocols. Therefore, rights of individuals were not violated.

4. Xiao, a Chinese working in the Philippines has been discriminated in his

subdivision and in his workplace. He complained to the authorities but Filipinos
responded that they have their own right to protect themselves against a possible
virus carrier. Do you think that Xiao’s human rights has been violated?
Ans.:
Yes, Xiao’s human rights have been violated.
It is clear that human rights protection is not just made available to Filipinos but
rather, even foreigners residing in the country can likewise exercise their human rights. His
right to equal protection has been violated. This is mirrored in Article 26 of ICCPR, which
further provides that the “the law shall prohibit any discrimination and guarantee to all
persons equal and effective protection against discrimination on any ground such as race,
colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property,
birth or other status.”
Therefore, Xiao’s right against discrimination has been violated.

5. General Mugali is a notorious warlord in Sudan. His group is reported to be

responsible for the death of almost 1 million ethnic minorities in the country.
While on vacation in France, he was arrested by the French police for crimes
 committed in his country. His lawyer then conveyed to the international media
that his client was tortured which is a violation of his human rights.

a. Assuming that Gen. Mugali committed no crime in France, is his arrest for
human rights violations valid?

Ans. Yes, the human rights of Gen. Mugali were violated. The legal
counsel of the said person is correct vouching that French authorities have
no right to arrest the General. It is not indicated in the case that Gen.
Mugali was guilty of the said crime and therefore could not be held
arrested.

b. Assuming that the allegations against General Mugali are indeed true, can
France deny him his human rights considering the atrocities he himself is
a very notorious criminal and murdered millions of his people?

Ans. Granting in the above situation that General Mugali was found to be
guilty of said crimes, yes, the French authorities can perform the arrest
considering the heinous crime that he has committed. International
treaties may be considered with this arrest.

c. Assuming that Sudan is not a signatory to the International Declaration

of human rights, can the President of Sudan claim that they are not bound
to respect the human rights of their people?

Ans. No, if Sudan is not a signatory to the International Declaration of

human rights, the President is still bound to respect the human rights of
their people. It is because, as mentioned above, rights of every human is
inherent by the moment of its birth and ends at his/her death. And so,
rights of individuals may not depend on the actions of a State but on the
human himself or herself as a benefit right.

6. a. From your study of Human Rights Law, do you think the Philippines has done
enough to comply with its obligations to protect and respect human rights? Why
or why not?
Ans.:
The State continues to uphold with what is reflected in Section 11 of Article II of
the 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines. It declares that the State values
the dignity of every human, person and guarantees full respect for human rights. With all
aspects of human rights, the Philippines thru its current administration had strongly upheld
and fought for every Filipino rights. I may consider that the administration has not yet
provided enough the rights of human. Like for example, which I myself also vouch for the
passage of Rights of Nature Acts. This is an example of an environmental right which the
government should take into consideration.

b. Do you think the human rights situation in the country has improved or
worsened under the current administration?
Ans.:
 The human rights situation in the Philippines became an issue in recent years with
reports of rising number of victims of extra-judicial killings, prompting the United Nations
to take action. The Philippine human rights situation is not however limited to the issue of
extrajudicial killings and disappearances. We have to look into the general concept of how
the Filipino rights were being protected or secured by the current administration. And yes,
the human rights of Filipinos, in the over-all have improved. Why? In terms convenience.
The emergence of infrastructure projects which creates jobs to most of us improved our
rights to live in a comfortable and convenient life. In terms of public security. Due to a
powerful war against drugs, less crimes have taken into place. Thus, improved our rights
to live in a peaceful community.