There are a number of international human rights documents which recognizes socio-economic rights. These documents include the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and the 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR).
The human rights are divided into two categories: the civic and political rights and the socio-economic rights. Civil and political rights are called are most times referred to as the First class or Fundamental human or justiciable rights. They include the right to life, vote, a fair trial, freedom of speech, movement and assembly.
On the other hand, the socio-economic and cultural rights are referred to as ‘mere aspirations or second class rights’ not deserving of the status of human rights hence are not justiciable. These rights include:
- Right to work
- Right to choice of employment
- Right to own property
- Right to adequate standards of living
- Right to access to education
- Right to found a family
- Right to respect and protection of the family
- Right to science and culture
- Right to social security
- Right to social and medical assistance
- Right to adequate nutrition
- Right to social welfare benefits
- Right to enjoyment of scientific advancement
- Right to protection of health
- Right to protection of morals
The civil and political rights have been getting preference over the socio-economic rights because of the classification of the former as first class or fundamental rights while the latter is referred to as the mere aspiration.
There have been series of advocacies to establish that social and cultural rights, and civil and political rights, are mutually inter-reliant, inseparable and equally important. The real life experiences of people show that the two groups of rights cannot be separated. To lead a meaningful life and to fully develop, a person needs to enjoy civil and political rights and socio-economic rights. Each depends on the other to be real and meaningful.
These two groups of rights have continued to be treated differently in the legal systems of different countries. Civil and political rights are usually more strongly protected than social and economic rights. This often happens in two ways. Firstly, it is more usual for civil and political rights to be included in the Bill of Rights as enforceable rights (e.g. United States Constitution and Nigeria Constitution). Secondly, even if social and economic rights are included in a constitution, they are often included as ‘directive principles of State policy’. This means that they are included as mere guidelines for the government, but cannot be enforced in courts to the same extent as civil and political rights
In 1991, Manfred Max-Neef, Antonio Elizalde and Martin Hopenhayn developed a ‘Human Scale Development’[i] where Fundamental Human Needs were enumerated. These Fundamental Human Needs are seen as ontological, are few, finite and classifiable (as distinct from the conventional notion of conventional economic "wants" that are infinite and insatiable). They are also constant through all human cultures and across historical time periods. What changes over time and between cultures is the strategies by which these needs are satisfied. It is important that human needs are understood as a system - i.e. they are interrelated and interactive. In this system, there is no hierarchy of needs apart from the basic need for subsistence or survival contrary to the postulation of Western psychologists such as Thomas Maslow.
A table showing the Fundamental Human Needs and there enunciations below:
Need | Being (qualities) | Having (things) | Doing (actions) | Interacting (settings) |
subsistence | physical and mental health | food, shelter, work | feed, clothe, rest, work | living environment, social setting |
protection | care, adaptability, autonomy | social security, health systems, work | co-operate, plan, take care of, help | social environment, dwelling |
affection | respect, sense of humour, generosity, sensuality | friendships, family, relationships with nature | share, take care of, make love, express emotions | privacy, intimate spaces of togetherness |
understanding | critical capacity, curiosity, intuition | literature, teachers, policies, educational | analyse, study, meditate, investigate, | schools, families, universities, communities, |
participation | receptiveness, dedication, sense of humour | responsibilities, duties, work, rights | cooperate, dissent, express opinions | associations, parties, churches, neighbourhoods |
leisure | imagination, tranquillity, spontaneity | games, parties, peace of mind | day-dream, remember, relax, have fun | landscapes, intimate spaces, places to be alone |
creation | imagination, boldness, inventiveness, curiosity | abilities, skills, work, techniques | invent, build, design, work, compose, interpret | spaces for expression, workshops, audiences |
identity | sense of belonging, self-esteem, consistency | language, religions, work, customs, values, norms | get to know oneself, grow, commit oneself | places one belongs to, everyday settings |
freedom | autonomy, passion, self-esteem, open-mindedness | equal rights | dissent, choose, run risks, develop awareness | Anywhere |
A critical look at the 36 cell matrix is developed by Max-Neef[ii] revealed that all the fundamental needs of human are rooted in the Socio-Economic and Cultural rights stated above. This infer that, for humans to demand and exercise their ‘fundamental rights’ their basic needs (socio-economic and cultural rights which are not justiciable) must have been met. It is however a known fact that rights are for the ‘living’; hence the imperatives of the right to life (fundamental and civic rights which are justiciable).
The standard of living of human beings is measured of by the degree at which the fundamental human needs are met. When these fundamental human needs (socio-economic and cultural rights are met), people are said to be living an in an acceptable standard of living (humanely) but in the absence of these socio-economic rights, people are said to be living in a deplorable and inhuman state.
Inferring from the above, one can argue that adequate provision of the fundamental human needs which are deeply rooted in the socio-economic and cultural rights is the ‘elementary nature of being human’.
There is an critical need for government of all nations where provision of socio-economic and cultural rights of their citizens are still presented as ‘directive principles of State policy’ and are not made justiciable in their national laws to embark on a total review of such laws as a way of ensuring adequate provisions for their citizens to enjoy services and facilities which depict them as ‘human’ by making its provision enforceable by law and defaulters of such laws brought to book.
[i] Manfred A. Max-Neef with Antonio Elizalde, Martin Hopenhayn. (1991). Human scale development: conception, application and further reflections. New York: Apex. Chpt. 2. “Development and Human Needs”, p. 18.
Comments
Post a Comment