Group Assignment:

To what extend do you agree or disagree with the (Human Freedom Index 2022)
ranking, giving your well opinioned reasons as regard to how different Countries of
the world view and adopt the Human Rights doctrines.

By

Msc Civil Engineering Group

PAU 3104: HUMAN RIGHTS AND GENDER

Submitted to: K. Chepkemboi

Submission Date: 20 November, 2023.

 ASSIGNMENT QUESTION 1A

1. Read the excerpt as attached on World Human Rights ranking as regard performance of
selected indicators of measures in some areas of Human rights sphere and then address the
following issues:

(a) To what extend do you agree or disagree with the ranking, giving your well opined reasons as
regard to how different Countries of the world view and adopt the Human Rights doctrines. (20
marks)

https://www.fraserinstitute.org/studies/human-freedom-index
 Pan Africa University for Basic Sciences, Technology and Innovation (PAUSTI)
Sr.
Name
No
1 David Kakpama Sam
2 Rodrick Cheruyot
3 Aboubakar Abdou Saidou
4 Irakoze Dynah
5 Bukhwabethu Sithole
6 Wanangua Chinkhuntha
7 Tshepo Marang El Nthaga
ThankGod Chukwuebuka
8 Alexander
MOKOLE Bohlokoa
9 Cassandrah
10 Awa R. Sanneh
Group Assignment
HUMAN RIGHTS AND GENDER
Students Details
Reg. Number Email Nationality
CE-300-0004/2023 samdave0319@gmail.com Sierra Leone
CE-300-0018/2023 rodcheruyot@gmail.com Kenya
CE-300-0006/2023 aboubakarabdousaidou1@gmail.com Niger
CE-300-0013/2023 dynahirakoze7@gmail.com Rwanda
CE-300-0023/2023 bukhwa777@gmail.com Zimbabwe
CE300-0019/2023 wanangwachinkhuntha@gmail.com Malawi
CE300-0021/2023 tshepoelnthaga@gmail.com Botswana
CE300-0016/2023 thankgod.alexander.193124@unn.edu.ng Nigeria
bcmokole@yahoo.com
CE300-0001/2023 Lesotho
sannehawa988@hotmail.com
CE300-0017/223 Gambia
Table of Contents

1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................ 2

1.1 The Need For Constructive Criticism Of The 2022 HFI .................................................................... 2
1.2 The Research Approach ...................................................................................................................... 3
2.0 WESTERN EUROPE ....................................................................................................................... 3
2.1 Case Study .......................................................................................................................................... 3
2.2 Evaluation ........................................................................................................................................... 5
3.0 NORTH AMERICA (UNITED STATES AND CANADA)............................................................ 5
3.1 Case Study .......................................................................................................................................... 5
3.2 Evaluation ........................................................................................................................................... 7
4.0 OCEANIA......................................................................................................................................... 7
4.1 Case Study .......................................................................................................................................... 7
4.2 Evaluation ........................................................................................................................................... 9
5.0 SUB-SAHARA AFRICA ................................................................................................................. 9
5.1 Case Study .......................................................................................................................................... 9
5.2 Evaluation ......................................................................................................................................... 11
6.0 NORTH AFRICA AND MIDDLE EAST ...................................................................................... 11
6.1 Case Study ........................................................................................................................................ 11
6.2 Evaluation ......................................................................................................................................... 14
7.0 EAST AND SOUTH ASIA ............................................................................................................ 15
7.1 Case Study ........................................................................................................................................ 15
7.2 Evaluation ......................................................................................................................................... 18
8.0 CONCLUSION ..................................................................................................................................... 19
REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................................... 21

1
1.0 INTRODUCTION

Christian Bay defined human rights as any claims that ought to have legal and moral protection to
make sure that basic needs will be met (Vincent, 1986). Human rights according United Nations
(UN) are defined as those rights which are inherent in our state of nature and without which we
cannot live as human beings (Mishra, 2000). The (Equality and Human Rights Commsssion, 2019)
defines these rights as the basic rights and freedoms that belong to every person in the world, from
birth until death Scot Davidson defined human rights as closely connected with the protection of
individuals from the exercise of state government or authority in certain areas of their lives . It is
also directed towards the creation of social conditions by the state in which individuals can develop
their fullest potential (Biswal, 2006 ). In as much as human rights have to do with inherent moral
protection, it has much to do with freedom of individuals and social groups and how the state
cooperates to protect these rights, or allow freedom.

The Human Freedom Index (HFI) by the Fraser Institute is a comprehensive global measure of
civil, personal and economic freedom. Taking it from the definitions mentioned it fits to be a used
as human rights ranking for sovereign states. Its detailed footprint is expressed by its use of 83
human rights indicators which are summarized by different marks such as Rule of law, Security
and safety, Movement, Religion, Association, assembly, and civil society, Expression and
information, Relationships, Size of government, Legal system and property rights, Sound
money, Freedom to trade internationally, and Regulation. These are analyzed and each state is
ranked based on its performance (Vásquez et.al., 2022). The Human Freedom Index (HFI)
measures economic freedoms, including the freedom to engage in trade and utilize stable
currencies. Moreover, it assesses the extent to which individuals can exercise fundamental civil
liberties (Human Freedom Index 2022 - Fraser Institute, n.d.). The 2022 HFI ranking has been
compiled using human rights issues/events that took place in 2019 to 2020.

1.1 The Need For Constructive Criticism Of The 2022 HFI

The Human Freedom Index 2022 document, which is a global measurement of personal, civil, and
economic freedom clearly states that the authors along with the contributors to the various
preliminary papers and indexes that collectively contributed to the development of the document,
acknowledge that the global assessment of the human freedom presented in the document is an

2
ongoing endeavor. The authors thus invite constructive feedback to inform any potential revisions
or enhancements in light of the data presented within the index and expounded upon in the
document. Furthermore, the authors invite insight and invaluable input that will help the ongoing
efforts to advance the discourse on human freedom. This paper is a dedicated effort aimed at
offering both compliments and constructive criticism by expressing dissenting viewpoints
regarding specific rankings presented in the Human Freedom Index of year 2022 (Fraser Institute,
2022).

1.2 The Research Approach

The Human Freedom Index shows that the level of freedom, both social and economic is very high
in Western Countries (North America and Europe) and Oceania, as compared to the rest of the
world. While Western Europe and North America are often considered regions with high respect
for human rights, instances of violations have occurred, highlighting the complexities and
challenges in safeguarding these rights. On the other hand, although Africa and Asia have been
ranked lower in the HFI, they still have some good testimonies of upholding human rights values.
This paper will therefore present evidence that will support or disagree with the ranking and at the
end give an overall view of the position of these regions and the countries in the HFI. To achieve
this, we strictly considered countries that were ranked in these regions as captured in the human
freedom index data table attached on the website. In an attempt to agree and/or disagree with the
ranking to some extent, case studies of compliance of countries in these regions to human freedom
for some of the human rights indicators have been discussed and analyzed in this write-up.

This argument has been presented in regional compartments first and in some cases within regions
for comparative analysis and ease of understanding. The regions discussed are; Western Europe,
Northern America (United States and Canada), Oceania, Sub-Sahara Africa, North Africa,
Middle East, East Asia, South Asia.

2.0 WESTERN EUROPE

2.1 Case Study

In Western Europe, Human Rights are at the core of both EU internal and external action and
policy. The Lisbon Treaty (article 2 and Article 21) stipulates that the Union's action on the

3
international scene shall be guided by the values that have inspired its own foundation. (Ahmed &
Butler, The European Union and Human Rights: An International Law Perspective 2006).

Switzerland for example, has a very high standard of human rights internally, and an active human
rights policy abroad. There are no issues of major concern. In September 2021, the Swiss
parliament voted for the creation of a national human rights institution to monitor the application
of human rights domestically. The Swiss Centre of Expertise in Human Rights aims at promoting
the implementation of international human rights obligations in Switzerland and to support the
authorities, civil society and the economy. Work includes, for example, ensuring the rights of
persons with disabilities, children or persons belonging to the LGBTI communist (Western Europe
and other states group (WEOG): Recent regulation in business and human rights - forum on
business and human rights | UN web TV).

Additionally, Iceland ranked 5th in the current HFI ranking is no mistake as the country continues
to lead in the field of human rights, with very high standards of human rights domestically and a
high level of cooperation with international organizations on human rights issues. Gender equality
is prominent in Iceland's priorities, both nationally and internationally, and - according to the
World Economic Forum’s Global Gender Gap Index 2021 - Iceland is once again the most gender-
equal country in the world. Since 6 January 2021, legal registration for non-binary people has been
implemented in Iceland. In the spring of 2021, amendments were made to the Children Act, inter
alia, to ensure the rights of LGBTI parents. Following Iceland’s successful tenure on the UN
Human Rights Council in 2018-2019 - where it stressed in particular gender equality, the fight
against gender-based violence, the rights of LGBTI persons, and the rights of the child - its
intention to seek a full three-year term in 2025-2027 has been announced (EU Annual Report on
Human Rights and Democracy in the world 2021. eeas 2021).

However, although Western Europe as a whole has made some strides in the practice of human
rights, there still exist some footage of Human Rights Violation in some countries in Western
Europe. One of the major human rights violations in Western Europe over the last decade has to
do with Surveillance and data privacy concerns. In the United Kingdom (ranked 7th in the HFI),
intelligence agencies were noted to have collected personal data over social media and other
internet platforms without the prior consent of the data owners. Former NSA intelligence officer
Edward Snowden exposed these concerns in 2013 (Greenwald, 2013).

4
The mass surveillance programs included the collection of metadata from millions of
communications, both within the U.K. and globally, encompassing phone calls, emails, and online
activities. The indiscriminate nature of the surveillance, conducted without proper oversight or
warrants, raised fundamental questions about the place of privacy as a fundamental human right
and its balance with national security. Despite originating in the United States, this mass
surveillance also greatly affected the United Kingdom and its citizens. While Western Europe,
including the UK, is generally seen as a champion of human rights, specific cases still downplay
the nation’s freedom and should be reflected in its Human Freedom Index. Other incidences
include the treatment of asylum seekers and the existing counter-terrorism laws. The decline of the
UK in upholding human rights has been reflected in the HFI as they progressively dropped in HFI
from 6th in 2016 to 10th in 2017 to 13th in 2018, 15th in 2019 and now they are ranked 20th in 2020
in the HFI 2022 report.

2.2 Evaluation
To this end, the researchers agree with the overall ranking of Western Europe despite the fact that
some countries in this region are not totally compliant, but we could see the reflection of their non-
compliance in the HFI over the past decade. For example, the UK fell from 6th place in 2013 to
20th place in 2020. In addition these countries uphold democracy as ideology of rule and leadership
which is favourable for human rights protection

3.0 NORTH AMERICA (UNITED STATES AND CANADA)

3.1 Case Study

Although Canada and the United States have similar scores in Economic Freedom of the World;
both have typically been among the top 10 nations, though Canada fell out of the top 10 in 2021
(reflecting conditions in 2019) and has remained out since then. Mexico ranks much lower, at 64th
this year; an improvement over past years (North American Free Trade Agreement 2023). In the
HFI, the US ranks 7th and Canada 15th for Economic freedom ranking. However, with the rise of
other key human rights abuses in the region, the researchers disagree with the top ranking of the
region, and here is why;

A good case study that showcases human rights violations in North America, particularly the US,
is the killing of George Floyd in the United States in 2020. This is but one example that indeed

5
shows a violation of human rights with profound implications for the country's standing on the
Human Freedom Index (HFI). This incident brought to light the broad cases of racial injustice and
police brutality happening in the United States (UNHRC, 2020). Some of the rights that were
violated include freedom from discrimination, the right to life and security, and freedom of
assembly and expression. American law enforcement agencies have been recorded to use force
against individuals from marginalized communities, particularly African Americans and Latinos.
This systematic racial discrimination shows deep-rooted inequalities in the nation and a violation
of the fundamental principle of freedom from discrimination. Another right that was violated in
this incident is the right to life and security. The police officers who were arresting George Floyd
used excessive and unjustified force that resulted in his death denying him the right to life. In the
end, the protests that ensued as a result of this were met with force and curtailment of peaceful
assembly, which are essential components of a free society.

In Latin America, the administration focused on serious human rights abuses in Venezuela, Cuba,
and Nicaragua but failed to scrutinize abuses in allied countries, such as Brazil, Colombia, El
Salvador, and Mexico. In the Middle East, the administration presented in January a plan to
formalize Israeli annexation of large parts of the occupied West Bank, and helped broker
agreements to normalize Israel’s relations with the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain in
September. Meanwhile, the US took an increasingly hostile approach to Iran. In January 2020, the
US killed Assam Suleiman, commander of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Quds Force
in a drone strike in Iraq; afterward, President Trump tweeted that retaliation from Iran would be
met by targeting Iranian cultural sites, which would constitute a war crime.

In September, following the UN Security Council’s refusal to renew an arms embargo that expired
in October as part of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), the US argued it could
repose UN sanctions. Other permanent members of the council and parties to the JCPOA, as well
as the UN secretary-general, refused to accept the US position since the US had withdrawn from
the agreement.

In Africa, the US focused on normalizing relations with Sudan’s transitional government and
removed Sudan from the State Sponsors of Terrorism list; Sudan began a process of normalizing
relations with Israel, reportedly in exchange. The US continued its military activity in Somalia,
conducting dozens of airstrikes, some of which resulted in apparent civilian casualties that were

6
not adequately investigated or acknowledged. In May this year, the Department of Defense
released its third annual report on civilian casualties, documenting civilian harm from certain US
military activity and estimating 132 civilian deaths or injuries in 2019, a significantly lower
estimate than those by nongovernmental organizations. The report also listed the number of
allegations of civilian harm that had been received, concluding that only a fraction of the
allegations were “credible.

These case studies are just but an example of several violations of human freedom in the United
States and North America in general. The impact of such incidents on the Human Freedom Index
is on the Rule of Law and security, Civil liberties and political rights, and public perception as
well as the global standing.

3.2 Evaluation
To this end and with the examples provided above, showing a rise in key human rights abuses in
the region, we disagree with the top ranking of the region. It is worth noting that while the HFI
primarily focuses on an array of indicators, events like these shed light on the complex interplay
between systemic issues, government responses, and the protection of individual liberties.
Incorporating such incidents into the assessment framework allows for a more comprehensive
evaluation of a country's commitment to human rights and freedom.

4.0 OCEANIA

4.1 Case Study

In the Oceania region, an overview of the human rights and democracy situation by the EU in
Australia for example continued to have a clearly positive and solid human rights record
appearing as no. 11 for 2020 in the current 2022 HFI report. Australia has engaged in
advocating progress on human rights issues in the Asia-Pacific region and beyond. Australia
presented the following main human rights challenges, which were highlighted during its third
cycle of Universal Periodic Review (UPR) in 2021. The effort of the Australian Government in
closing the Gap Implementation Plan’ to improve the Indigenous population’s well-being and
preserve Indigenous Australian Culture is a move that deserves recognition (EU Annual Report on
Human Rights and Democracy in the World 2021. 2021), hence the researchers agree to the fact
that they were ranked 4th in the HFI.

7
In 2021, New Zealand continued to rank highly on human rights and democracy. New Zealand
also continued its active involvement in the promotion of human rights and democracy at the
multilateral level. In the current ranking, New Zealand also maintained a top ranking of 2 with
Switzerland being No. 1. The effort of New Zealand to reduce child poverty as a political priority
as reported in the government’s 2021 Child Poverty Related Indicators (CPRI) Report showed
improvements, though the COVID-19 impact was not yet fully reflected in the data. On social
inclusion and antidiscrimination, the government began implementing the December 2020
recommendations by the Royal Commission of Inquiry into the March 2019 Christchurch terrorist
attack and apologized for the 1970s expulsions (‘dawn raids’) that specifically targeted over-
stayers from the Pacific Islands. The government also established a Ministry for Disabled People
(EU Annual Report on Human Rights and Democracy in the World 2021 ... - eeas 2021). A host
of other efforts have been made and to this end, the researchers agree with their ranking of no. 2.

Despite the countries in Oceania being viewed as rights respecting and democratic countries, some
such as Australia and New Zealand face some human rights challenges that should have a
significant effect on the Human Freedom Index. Some of these issues include the treatment of
indigenous people, and asylum seekers. The indigenous people in Australia are facing significantly
high rates of incarceration by law enforcement agencies and deaths in custody (Smith, 2020). The
country also experiences a huge case of socioeconomic disparities between the indigenous people
and the rest of the citizens. Other cases of human freedom violation include the country’s policy
towards asylum seekers. This has been noted to be violated in the islands of Nauru and Manus
where there are cases of determent of asylum seekers who arrive by boat (Jones, 2021).

Additionally, Fiji and Papua New Guinea continues to rank somehow higher in the index (64th
and 75th respectively in 2020). The human rights situation in these countries continued to present
a mixed picture. It remained affected by tribal conflicts, gender-based violence, and sorcery
accusation related violence (SARV), weak institutional capacity and widespread corruption. There
was still insufficient progress in assuring women’s rights and the rights of the child, the rights of
persons with disabilities and sexual minorities, improving law and order and assuring basic
services (education, health, and sanitation) and environmental rights. The establishment of a
National Human Rights Commission was still pending.

8
4.2 Evaluation
In spite of the challenges in the region, which have been reflected in the index keeping Papua New
Guinea and Fiji at a relatively higher rank in the past decades, we agree with the overall ranking
of the region of Oceania. In our opinion and based on the pieces of evidence presented in this
paper, Oceania should be even ranked higher than North America (Canada and USA).

5.0 SUB-SAHARA AFRICA

5.1 Case Study

In Sub-Saharan Africa, countries have diverse historical, cultural, and political backgrounds,
which influence their approach to human rights. For instance, one can observe variations in how
different countries in the region interpret and prioritize human rights based on their unique
circumstances. In this case study, we will compare the perspective of Ethiopia and South Africa.
Ethiopia has a history of authoritarian rule, and its government has been criticized for suppressing
political dissent and freedom of expression. In recent years, the Ethiopian government's actions in
regions like Tigray have raised international concerns. The government's priority may be stability
and unity, which can sometimes come into conflict with individual human rights (Political
Structure of Ethiopia on JSTOR, n.d.). South Africa, on the other hand, has a long history of
fighting against apartheid and promoting human rights. The country's post-apartheid constitution
is considered one of the most progressive in the world, emphasizing equality, non-discrimination,
and individual rights. South Africa places a strong emphasis on addressing past injustices and
promoting social and economic rights (History South African Government, n.d.; South African
History, n.d.). These examples illustrate how differing historical experiences and priorities can
shape a country's approach to human rights, even within the same region.

Although to some extent the researchers agree with the overall low ranking of the Sub-Sahara
African region, the researchers would want to critique the Human Freedom Index (HFI),
ranking within the region. As an example, if one will compare Burkina Faso and Mali two
countries in Sub-Saharan Africa having Human Freedom Index (HFI) ranking of 93 and 119
respectively with Nigeria, another country in Sub-Saharan Africa having an index of 124. As
earlier stated, the Human Freedom Index is a valuable tool for assessing and comparing countries'
commitment to human rights and freedoms. Burkina Faso and Mali, two countries in the West
African region, have both experienced coups d'état in recent years, with Burkina Faso undergoing

9
a coup in 2021 and Mali facing political instability in 2020. These events, understandably,
disrupted political stability, civil liberties, and the rule of law in both nations. Such political turmoil
inevitably raises questions about the credibility of their Human Freedom Index rankings (The 7
Military Coups d’etat in Africa in the Last Three Years, n.d.).

As of the latest Human Freedom Index (Human Freedom Index 2022 - Fraser Institute, n.d.),
Burkina Faso's ranking appears higher than Nigeria's, which raises concerns when one considers
the recent coup. The index evaluates civil liberties, the rule of law, and political stability, among
other factors. In the wake of the coup, it's essential to question the accuracy of Burkina Faso's
ranking as it may not accurately reflect the country's present situation. Furthermore, Mali,
similarly, has witnessed multiple coups and political turmoil in recent years, but its Human
Freedom Index ranking also appears relatively high compared to Nigeria. The coup in 2020 further
adds to the complexity of assessing Mali's human rights and freedoms. Political instability and
security challenges have shaken Mali's foundations, which should be taken into account when
evaluating its ranking. Nigeria, on the other hand, has faced its own set of challenges, including
security concerns, corruption, and human rights abuses. However, Nigeria has maintained its
democratic system despite these challenges. The political stability and continuity of its democratic
institutions, although imperfect, may have contributed to a more consistent Human Freedom Index
ranking.

In addition, Tanzania is seen to have a Human Freedom Index (HFI) of 116 which is 8 place higher
than that of Nigeria. However, Tanzania's stance on LGBT rights has garnered international
attention and concern. In recent years, the government intensified its crackdown on the LGBT
community, resulting in widespread arrests, persecution, and the shuttering of LGBT
organizations. Such actions not only infringe upon the fundamental rights of individuals but also
raise questions about the credibility of Tanzania's Human Freedom Index ranking (Human
Freedom Index 2022 - Fraser Institute, n.d.; Tanzania’s Anti-LGBT Crackdown and the Right to
Health, n.d.).

On the other hand, the researchers agree with the ranking of Cabo Verde and Sychelles as the top
countries in Sub-Sahara Africa. Cabo Verde is a development success story in Africa. In less than

10
two decades, Cabo Verde transformed itself from one of the poorest countries in the world after
independence in 1975, it is one of the fastest growing economies in Africa. During its first 15 years
following independence (1975-1990), Cabo Verde successfully built the political, social, and
economic foundations of a democratic constitutional state, in 1991, peaceful political and
economic reforms culminated in a multi-party system and an open, free market economy, Cabo
Verde’s success has been socio-economic as well as political where Political stability and good
governance have been critical to the economic success story (African Development Bank, 2012).

Seychelles also is performing well in terms of protecting human rights and freedoms with 7.70 out
of 10, it has a good track record of upholding human rights, there were no reports that the
government or its agents committed arbitrary or unlawful killings, there were no reports of
disappearances by or on behalf of government authorities, as well no as no significant problem in the
security forces, prison conditions continued to improve during the year, the law requires warrants for
arrests, except for persons arrested under a law that allows police to arrest and detain persons suspected
of drug possession, use, importation, and trafficking (EU, 2022; US Department of States, 2022).

5.2 Evaluation
With the rise of inhuman treatment and political instability as a result of increasing incidents of
coups d'état, we agree with the lower ranking of the region of Sub-Sahara Africa. However, we
could not agree with some of the rankings within the region, for example; Burkina Faso's ranking
appears higher than Nigeria's with all the coups in Burkina Faso. Some countries like Tanzania
have many of human rights instrumentals in their countries, but their common state cultures which
will not be just for a clan but common to the majority clash with some viewpoints by the most
democratic countries. Evidence of that is especially the issue of LGBTQs. African cultures do not
seem to see this as freedom but rather bondage because they are not used to it. Therefore this
consensus is what has caused some of these nations' scores to be lower.

6.0 NORTH AFRICA AND MIDDLE EAST

6.1 Case Study

Implementation of Human rights in North Africa is facing different challenges that include civil,
political, economic, social, and cultural issues. From the report of Human Freedom Index 2022,
Morocco is the first country in the North Africa region yet it has an average ranking of 5.55/10 in

11
Human Freedom with a ranking of 136 globally. This on its own is a reflector of how devastated
the nations in the region are. Other countries such as Algeria, Libya, and Egypt Arab Rep have
5.13, 4.95, and 4. 28 respectively. The ranking index among North African countries is low
because of the region’s armed conflicts, committed war crimes and other serious violations of
international humanitarian law, gender gap, violation of women and children are high compared
to other countries, as well as lack of access for education especially for female, child marriage
(EU, 2022; US Department of States, 2022).

Many who attempt the sea crossing to Europe are intercepted by the Libyan Coast Guard and
returned to Libyan shores. More than 6,200 refugees and migrants had so far been disembarked in
Libya in the 2020 early report, suggesting the final figure for the year was predicted to likely
eclipse the 9,035 returned in 2019. They were often taken and held arbitrarily in official detention
centers, where they faced daily abuses and appalling conditions. Others end up in ‘unofficial
centers’ or warehouses controlled by smugglers and traffickers who subject them to physical abuse
in order to extract payments (UNHRC, 2020).

Egypt’s human rights record is dismal. A nationwide state of emergency was in force between
2017-2021, and the security apparatus has effectively taken control of the public sphere in the
name of “countering terrorism”. The number of disappearances have been rising since 2015, while
torture and other ill-treatment in detention remain rife. The arbitrary arrest of peaceful dissenters
is a regular, almost seasonal, government undertaking. Human rights defenders, lawyers,
journalists, politicians, artists, and members of minority groups, including sexual minorities, are
among those targeted. Detention for prolonged periods without trial on the grounds of “belonging
to a terror group” and “spreading false information undermining national security” is the norm.
Estimates suggest that there are more than 60,000 political prisoners. And it is not just politically
active Egyptians who suffer from these practices – members of the general population accused of
administrative offences such as violating building regulations have faced unfair prosecutions and
trials by both emergency courts and military courts (Lotfy, 2021).

Tunisia in the region is justified with a personal freedom score of 6.36 and ranked 113 in the
Human Freedom Index because it has had a very democratic government with 2 elections and has
a multiparty government, that protects the rights of children and women and no record of
disappearances in 2020 (US Department of State, 2020). What makes them ranked outside the top

12
100 is perhaps the shape of the economy and the extent of freedom of expression and religious
liberty in the country. Morocco is a monarchy-ruled nation under rule of Mohammed IV who
chooses his own head of government from an elected party with the highest votes. Freedom of
expression exists. However, it is a crime to express oneself against the monarch, and certain
government officials or about territory rights. Women are protected against sexual harassment yet
sexual harassment within marriage has not been decriminalized. Women’s rights are not equal as
far as inheritance is concerned under Moroccan law.

Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) are expected to have high human
freedom scores due to their stable economies, being one of the richest nations in the world.
However, they have scores of 4.56, 5.73, and 5.76. Their economic freedoms are quite fair with
UAE’s above 7 points. This is because they have a low personal freedom score with Saudi Arabia
having a score of 2.98, being one of the worst personal freedom scores in the list. These nations
are violators of several human rights. Saudi Arabia has no written penal code of law. It uses the
Islamic law as rule of law. It prioritizes the death penalty for crimes as murder and drug abuse. In
2019, it had executed more than 100 people in a year. It discriminates women, such that certain
activities like marriage must be authorized by women. It is involved in war in Yemen and is
responsible for air strikes that has caused thousands of civilian deaths in that war, thus responsible
for several war crimes. There is no religious liberty at all in Saudi Arabia. Protests and speech
against the government can lead to arrest. The issue of discriminating women in marriage, divorce
and other areas of life, abuse of migrant workers’ rights is part of life in Qatar which laws in the
country are limited to counteract. (Human Rights Watch, 2020).

The authorities, particularly the State Security Agency (SSA), subjected detainees, including
foreign nationals, to arbitrary arrest and detention, torture and enforced disappearance. The
authorities also restricted freedom of expression, imprisoning government critics and holding them
in dire conditions. In a positive development in women’s rights, almost 200 women stood in the
Federal National Council (FNC) elections in October, more than double the number in the last
elections; still, women continued to face discrimination in law. and in practice. On migrants’
rights, the authorities removed the job title criteria for sponsorship, which allowed more migrant
workers to sponsor family members to live in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). However, migrant
workers remained tied to employers under the kafala (sponsorship) system, which made them

13
vulnerable to labor abuses and exploitation. The UAE continued to deny nationality to thousands
of individuals who were born within its borders. While no executions were reported, courts
continued to issue death sentences. It is also involved in war crimes in the Yemen war (Amnesty
International, 2020).

These regions are haunted by human rights violations and the evidences justify their positions in
the Human Rights Index. Israel was ranked 62 in the ranking, with personal freedom of 7.36/10.
Despite the fact that Jews receive fair treatment within the state of Israel, yet some significant
human rights violations were witnessed during 2019 and 2020 which may render the state’s
personal freedom questionable. Israeli authorities have abused the human rights of Palestinians in
the name of security both in Israel and the Occupied Palestine Territory which is under Israel.
Many policies, though, like the denial of building permits in Area C, East Jerusalem, and the Negev
in Israel, residency revocations for Jerusalemites, or expropriation of privately owned land and
discriminatory allocation of state lands, have no legitimate security justification (Human Rights
Watch, 2021).

About 6.8 million Jewish Israelis and 6.8 million Palestinians live today between the
Mediterranean Sea and Jordan River, an area encompassing Israel and the Occupied Palestinian
Territory (OPT), the latter made up of the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and the Gaza
Strip. Throughout most of this area, Israel is the sole governing power; in the remainder, it
exercises primary authority alongside limited Palestinian self-rule. Across these areas and in most
aspects of life, Israeli authorities methodically privilege Jewish Israelis and discriminate against
Palestinians. Laws, policies, and statements by leading Israeli officials make plain that the
objective of maintaining Jewish Israeli control over demographics, political power, and land has
long guided government policy. In pursuit of this goal, authorities have dispossessed, confined,
forcibly separated, and subjugated Palestinians by virtue of their identity to varying degrees of
intensity. In certain areas, as described in this report, these deprivations are so severe that they
amount to crimes against humanity of apartheid and persecution (Human Rights Watch, 2021).

6.2 Evaluation
The two regions have several issues to consider that are not in line even with human rights
instruments put by United Nations. Violation of rights from freedom of expression to women
discrimination is common. Thus the ranking is by HFI 2022 is undisputed. However Israel being

14
ranked a free country with its questionable status is worth looking into. Religion is the main
propeller of viewpoint differences from the most democratic countries. Some still uphold to
monarchy and the Islamic religion is considered of higher authority above any document hence
why countries like Saudi Arabia have no penal code of law. However, it calls for reformation at
the same time United Nations viewpoint to consider strike between a nation’s culture and some
individual rights that are proposed.

7.0 EAST AND SOUTH ASIA

7.1 Case Study

East Asia sample: Taiwan against Japan
Taiwan is the freest country in East Asia and actually in the whole of Asia outpacing Japan another
democratic Asian state with a successful economy. How come is the question? Since the 1990s,
Taiwan has achieved an impressive democratization that has made it one of the most vibrant
democratic societies in Asia This is so vital to acknowledge, seeing the democracy surmounting
this little nation is a tale of healing from years of dictatorship, brutality, and human rights abuse
during the late 1900s when it was under the rule of martial law of Chiang Ching Kuo which was
lifted in 1987. It has become one country with a free online environment. In addition the Economist
Intelligence Unit ranked Taiwan the freest democracy in Asia (Chen, 2022)

It is one state that is not part of United Nations. Yet it has nobly embraced 6 of United Nation
Human Rights Instruments into its domestic law. It has been using its own local review system on
human rights by making use of teams composed of International experts. Non-Governmental
Organizations have found to be attended to without discrimination and involved in these review
meetings. In 2017’s International Review meeting, Taiwan was compelled to establish the National
Human Rights Institution according to Paris principles, and in 2019 that was fulfilled. In 2020
Taiwan legalized same-sex marriage, being the first Asian State to formally and officially legalize
and recognize LGBTQ rights within its laws. Its government has a significant population of femle
officials. It actually had a female president showing how women’s rights are protected and
advocated for.

15
This move has made it favourable as far as personal freedom and individual rights protection are
concerned. With an economy that is growing and has trading freedom, business freedom doing so
well, and fiscal policies and tax burdens that favour world economic standards according to the
Heritage Foundation Index of Economic Freedom scoring in 2019, that explains why it is one of
the freest countries in the world and why its above Japan and even South Korea, which are expected
to be on top of Asian Map.

South Asia
Singapore had been ranked the most economically free country in the world according to the
Heritage Foundation Economic Freedom Index Report 2020. It owes its success as a highly
developed free-market economy in large part to its remarkably open and corruption-free business
environment, prudent monetary and fiscal policies, and transparent legal framework. The
government has continued to promote economic growth through an active industrial policy that
targets fiscal incentives, increases public investment, promotes the development of skill sets
attractive to foreign investors, and focuses on economic diversification. Well-secured property
rights promote entrepreneurship and productivity growth. The rule of law is undergirded by a
societal intolerance of corruption (Heritage Foundation, 2020).

However, when turning to political and social rights, Singapore has a lot to work on which is the
reason why its ranking is 85, despite its powerful and free economy. Questions remain as to the
limits it imposes on fundamental freedoms, including freedom of expression, freedom of the
media, freedom of assembly, and the right to political participation. Opposition parties state they
are limited in their ability to contest elections, while civil society actors argue they are limited by
broadly construed defamation legislation, the legal right of government ministers to declare online
content as false, and restrictions on the freedom of assembly with courts declaring that even one
person can constitute an illegal assembly. Singapore ranked 158th of 180 in the 2020 World Press
Index, a significant decline in its position of 151st during the previous year. The death penalty and
corporal punishment, including judicial caning, remain in use in Singapore and their use is largely
uncontested, in the absence of public debate. Male homosexuality continues to be criminalized
(European Union, 2020).

India is expected to be one of the leading nations in this region’s human freedom scores seeing it
is one of the largest economies in the world. In 2019, its GDP was more than 2.8 trillion dollars

16
with its GDP larger than Brazil and that of Canada (World Bank, 2023). However, with such a
huge and its ever-growing economy, it has serious economic freedom setbacks. In 2019 it was
haunted by poor government integrity at 47.8%, labor freedom of 41.8%, investment and financial
freedom ranked at 40% and ravaged fiscal health of 14.7%. Economic liberalization measures that
began in the early 1990s, including industrial deregulation, privatization of state-owned
enterprises, and reduced controls on foreign trade and investment, have accelerated growth.
Corruption, underdeveloped infrastructure, a restrictive and burdensome regulatory environment,
and poor financial and budget management continue to undermine overall development (Heritage
Foundation, 2020).

In the late years of the second decade of the 21st Century, India has suffered human rights
violations that are of concern even with the West. Prime Minister Mohr’s administration
participated in a very violent possession of territory. In August, the government revoked the special
status of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) guaranteed under Article 370 of the Indian Constitution and
bifurcated the state into two union territories. This was preceded and followed by a region-wide
clampdown on civil liberties, increased militarization, a communications blackout, and detention
of key political leaders such as Farooq Abdullah, Omar Abdullah, and Mehbooba Mufti. In a move
to silence critics, hundreds of other political leaders and activists were also detained under various
administrative detention laws. No official information on the number of people detained, their
access to lawyers or family members, where they were held, and under what charges was made
available (Amnesty International, 2019).

Many of the allegations against the Indian government in recent years have focused on concerns
about the treatment of religious minorities. Human Rights Watch argued that the Indian
government has adopted laws and policies that have discriminated against religious minorities,
especially Muslims. In addition, the non-governmental watchdog organization Freedom House
argued that Indian President Narendra Modi and his Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party had
“presided over discriminatory policies and a rise in persecution affecting the Muslim population
(UK Parliament, 2022)

17
Pakistan is rated 5.44/10 and ranked 146 globally. The authorities intensified their crackdown on
the right to freedom of expression. Enforced disappearances remained pervasive, with no one held
accountable for them. The government failed to uphold its commitments to legislate against torture
and enforced disappearances. Violence against women and girls remained widespread. Parliament
blocked attempts to restrict child marriage. Religious minorities continued to be prosecuted under
blasphemy laws and attacked by non-state actors. Maldives human rights defenders were opposed
by religious groups and the government over issue of women in certain positions. Myanmar ihas
had war crimes committed between the government and certain ethnic groups of the Rhankine
State. The Bangladesh government failed to protect Chittagong areas from military attacks and the
indigenous people. In Thailand; non Muslim ruling class discriminated Muslim by imposing laws
such as banning women covering their head. The south Asian states also face governments
suppressing freedom of expression and fighting human rights defender (Amnesty International,
Human rights in Asia-Pacific, 2019).

7.2 Evaluation
These parts of Asia have been held between different religions of Christianity, Hinduism and
Islam, Buddhism, Shinto, and other religions and this affects how people as a majority accept
human rights viewpoint compared to the full democratic states. In India, where Muslims were
routinely arrested and prosecuted for exercising their religious freedoms, the Karnataka state
government, following the example of other states, passed a law criminalizing marriages where
the forced conversion of one spouse, often the Hindu woman, was alleged by a relative or other
person. Girls were also banned from wearing the hijab in public schools in Karnataka. Allegations
of violations of blasphemy laws continued to result in death sentences and lynchings in Pakistan
where forced conversions to Islam of Hindu, Christian and Sikh women and girls also persisted.
In China, religious leaders and Falun Gong practitioners were among those subjected to arbitrary
detention and imprisonment, while the continued persecution of Uyghurs, Kazakhs and those from
other predominantly Muslim ethnic minority groups in Xinjiang threatened to erase both their
religious and cultural identities.

18
At the same time; social ideologies of communism against democracy have advocated to find their
place in their leadership. The Cold War between the USSR and the United States of America might
have ended, but its effects are still real in Asia. Taiwan is America’s ally and ground of
disseminating democracy hence they accept the whole culture of freedom endorsed by America.
This is almost true with Japan. Yet states like China which ranked very low in the HFI do not want
to bend to democracy but rather ideologies of communism. Several countries’ transition to
democracy while having religion dividing them, and haunted by corruption in their leadership
which causes poorly run economies are some causes that make it difficult for them to be the most
free countries. They still need time and economic support perhaps to make it work. Then the other
factor is ethnicity and community groups divided against each other. This is another factor
plaguing this region. Thus these factors have affected and divided people views with respect to
one another and not choose to perceive one another as equal.

8.0 CONCLUSION

Ranking states using 84 indicators representing social, economic, political rights is quiet a complex
work in pursuit of producing a comprehensive global measure of human rights and freedom.
Therefore such system is bound to mistakes and misinterpretation. However, the researchers to a
greater extent from evidences region by region agree with the ranking not leaving the fact that
there are some questionable rankings in the regions. Firstly the United States of America might be
very democratic yet it still has issues that within its state and outside. It has racial discrimination
cases that need to be addressed. In addition its involvement in supporting human rights violators
in Israel, in Africa is evident that they are not full ambassadors of human rights protection but
rather indirect violators. The ranking is also disputed after ranking coup de Tait administered Mali
over some democratic states in Africa like Nigeria.

Religion, culture , political ideologies is cause of the differences in views of human rights in the
several regions of the world. Therefore as long Africa and Asia will not learn to embrace the
diversity and deal with their differences within, these violations are bound to continue. The other
common trend in the continents that causes human rights violations is leadership thinking
administration is place of ruling people instead of viewing it as place of serving the people. This
is why criticism is not accepted, but rather restricted and some leaders pass laws that are not in

19
line with recognizing the human rights of others. Corruption comes in, degrading the economies
and people are unsatisfied and leaders who do not want to lose power continue suppressing
people’s rights. Leadership in states should be viewed as service to people not mastery.

20
REFERENCES
1. Economic Freedom of north America 2023 (2023) Fraser Institute. Available at:
https://www.fraserinstitute.org/studies/economic-freedom-of-north-america-2023
(Accessed: 10 November 2023).
2. Human Freedom Index 2022. Fraser Institute. (2023b, January 26).
https://www.fraserinstitute.org/studies/human-freedom-index-2022
3. Ahmed, T., & Butler, I. de J. (2006). The European Union and Human Rights: An
International Law Perspective. Academic.oup.com.
https://academic.oup.com/ejil/article/17/4/771/2756292
4. UPR documentation. Log in - OHCHR UPR Contribution Submissions. (n.d.).
https://uprdoc.ohchr.org/
5. EU Annual Report on Human Rights and Democracy in the world 2021 ... - eeas. (2021).
https://www.eeas.europa.eu/sites/default/files/documents/220323%202021%20EU%20An
nual%20Human%20Rights%20and%20Democracy%20Country%20Reports.docx.pdf
6. United Nations. (n.d.). Western Europe and other states group (WEOG): Recent regulation
in business and human rights - forum on business and human rights | UN web TV. United
Nations. https://media.un.org/en/asset/k1r/k1r0i078li
7. African Development Bank (2012). Cabo Verde: A SUCCESS STORY. Abidjan, Ivory
Coast: African Development Bank. p1

8. Amnesty International. (2020). HUMAN RIGHTS IN THE MIDDLE EAST AND NORTH
AFRICA. REVIEW 2019. London: Amnesty International.
9. AU. (2021). 40TH Anniversary of the Adoption of the African Charter on Human and
Peoples’ Rights. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: African Union.
10. BANK, A. D. (2012). CAPE VERDE: A SUCCESS STORY. Abidjan, Ivory Coast:
AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT BANK.
11. Bastian Herre, P. A. (2016). Human Rights. Retrieved from Our World in Data:
https://ourworldindata.org/human-rights
12. Biswal, T. ( 2006 ). Human Rights Gender and Environment. Delhi: Viva Books Private
Limited, p.
13. Chen, K. (2022). Taiwan's Democracy under fire. Journal Of Democracy Volume 33.
14. Economy, T. G. (2023). Human rights and rule of law index - Country rankings.
Retrieved from

21
 https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/rankings/human_rights_rule_law_index/Sub-Sahara-
Africa/
15. Equality and Human Rights Commsssion. (2019, June 19). What are human rights.
Retrieved from Equality and Human Rights Commssion:
https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/human-rights/what-are-human-rights
16. EU. (2022). EU ANNUAL REPORT ON HUMAN RIGHTS AND DEMOCRACY IN THE
WORLD. europa.eu.
17. European Union. (2020). EU Annual Reports on Human Rights and Democracy.
Retrieved from EEAS: https://www.eeas.europa.eu/eeas/eu-annual-reports-human-rights-
and-democracy_en
18. Fraser Institute. (2022). Human Freedom Index 2022:A Global Measurement.
Massachusetts: The CATO and Fraser Institute.
19. Greenwald, G. (2013). No Place to hide: Edward Snowden, the NSA, and the US
Surveillance state. Metropolitan Books.
20. Heritage Foundation. (2020). 2020 Index of Economic Freedom. Washington DC: The
Heritage Foundation.
21. Human Rights Watch. (2020). World Report 2020: Saudi Arabia. Retrieved from Human
Rights Watch: https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2020/country-chapters/saudi-
arabia#0c3936
22. Human Rights Watch. (2021, 27 April). A Threshold Crossed: Israeli Authorities and the
Crimes of Apartheid and Persecution. Retrieved from Human Rights Watch:
https://www.hrw.org/report/2021/04/27/threshold-crossed/israeli-authorities-and-crimes-
apartheid-and-persecution
23. International, A. (2022). AFRICA REGIONAL OVERVIEW. London( UKA): Amnesty
International.
24. Jones, B. (2021). Asylum Seeker Policies and Civil Liberties: A Comparative Analysis.
Human Rights Quarterly, 43(2), 287-312.
25. Josep Maria Royo, C. M. (2021). The Human Rights Situation in Sub-Saharan Africa:
Progress, Violations and Remaining Challenges in Times of Pandemic. IDEES.
26. Lotfy, M. (2021, October 13). Europe and Human Rights in Middle East and North
Africa: Egypt. Retrieved from ECFR: https://ecfr.eu/special/mena-human-rights/egypt/
27. Mishra, P. (2000). Human Rights Global Issues. Delhi: Kalpaz Publications, p. 4.
28. Nations, U. (2023). Countdown to Human Rights Day: Cabo Verde. New York: USA:
UN.

22
29. Smith, A. (2020). Indegenous Rights in Australia: Challenges to the Rule of Law.
Challenges to the Rule of Law, 12(3), 375 - 394.
30. States, U. D. (2022). 2022 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: Seychelles.
USA, Wahington D.C: Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and labour.
31. UK Parliament. (2022, Novemeber 14). Human rights in India. Retrieved from UK
Parliament: House of Lords Library: https://lordslibrary.parliament.uk/human-rights-in-
india/
32. UNHRC. (2020). Report on Systemic Racism, Police Brutality, and Human RIghts
Violation. United Nations Human RIghts Council.
33. US Department of State. (2020). US Departement of State. Retrieved from 2020 Country
Reports on Human Rights Practices: Tunisia.
34. Vincent, R. (1986). Human Rights and International Relations. Cambridge University
Press.
35. Watch, H. R. (2023). Democratic Republic of Congo. New York( USA): Human Rights
Watch.

23