Human rights violations on the rise: NHRC Chief
Dr. Justice A.S. Anand, Chairperson, National Human Rights Commission has said that the twentieth century stands out as the period when there has been an unprecedented denial of human rights. He said this denial led to the birth of the League of Nations and then the United Nations, which incorporated human rights as a fundamental issue to every human.
Justice Anand was delivering the Nalini Nath Phukan Memorial Lecture on "Human Rights and Some Challenges for the 21st Century" at the India Club in Dibrugarh, Assam on 30 March 2005.
He observed in his lecture that when the United Nations adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948, several countries across the world expressed their reservations, saying it was an internal matter concerning sovereign States. "This view today, mercifully receives very little credence and the universality of human rights has been globally accepted," he said.
Justice Anand stated that the theory of universal human rights stems from democracy as the pre-eminently acceptable form of governance throughout the world. He stressed that human rights could flourish best under the democracy and not under other forms of governance. He observed that for human rights to be guaranteed, certain fundamentals have to be agreed upon. "These include social, economic and cultural rights and equitable distribution of prosperity."
Pointing out to gender inequality as yet another violation of human rights, Justice Anand said that women continue to be at a disadvantage vis-à-vis men throughout the world. The violation against the human rights of women converts into discrimination and denial of their rights as humans, he felt. He said that human rights violations of women result in more illiterate women, poorer women, higher prevalence of disease among women resulting out of trafficking and the murky tendencies in countries like India to go for female foeticide.
Giving his opinion on expensive and delayed justice as yet another human rights abuse, Justice Anand spoke of the Supreme Court's repeated stress on speedy and fair trials. He attributed the mounting number of in-trial cases to the disproportion in cases admitted and cases disposed. He said this could be solved by higher number of judges and better law dispensation infrastructure.
Justice Anand was delivering the Nalini Nath Phukan Memorial Lecture on "Human Rights and Some Challenges for the 21st Century" at the India Club in Dibrugarh, Assam on 30 March 2005.
He observed in his lecture that when the United Nations adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948, several countries across the world expressed their reservations, saying it was an internal matter concerning sovereign States. "This view today, mercifully receives very little credence and the universality of human rights has been globally accepted," he said.
Justice Anand stated that the theory of universal human rights stems from democracy as the pre-eminently acceptable form of governance throughout the world. He stressed that human rights could flourish best under the democracy and not under other forms of governance. He observed that for human rights to be guaranteed, certain fundamentals have to be agreed upon. "These include social, economic and cultural rights and equitable distribution of prosperity."
Pointing out to gender inequality as yet another violation of human rights, Justice Anand said that women continue to be at a disadvantage vis-à-vis men throughout the world. The violation against the human rights of women converts into discrimination and denial of their rights as humans, he felt. He said that human rights violations of women result in more illiterate women, poorer women, higher prevalence of disease among women resulting out of trafficking and the murky tendencies in countries like India to go for female foeticide.
Giving his opinion on expensive and delayed justice as yet another human rights abuse, Justice Anand spoke of the Supreme Court's repeated stress on speedy and fair trials. He attributed the mounting number of in-trial cases to the disproportion in cases admitted and cases disposed. He said this could be solved by higher number of judges and better law dispensation infrastructure.