Subnostr

[8]

The backgrounds and convictions behind these groups of human rights were fundamentally different, as became apparent during the Cold War: while the states of the Soviet Union were criticised for violating the civil and political rights of their citizens, the Western democracies were accused of neglecting the economic and social rights of their populations. Even today, it is sometimes argued that the guarantee of economic security for all is simply unrealistic and that the norms contained therein are a mandate to the legislators to guarantee unenforceable individual rights.

2kee 2y ago

[9]

This division of human rights into three generations can therefore be useful in terms of better comprehensibility and also the historical background of the emergence of various human rights. The division into social rights and civil rights took place against the background of the Cold War. Today, however, the idea is widespread that human rights are a common whole in terms of their meaning and value and cannot be considered separately. In concrete enforcement, however, differences remain in that first-generation human rights are protected by stronger enforcement mechanisms than social rights. In their meaning, human rights are always interconnected: For example, economic rights are the basis for the exercise of political rights and the right to freedom of expression is both a central part of personal freedom and an important political right.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

2kee 2y ago

[10]

The role of the state in the implementation of human rights

Fundamental rights and human rights regulate the relationship between people and the state. The state has various functions in the realisation of these rights: Depending on its content, a right can give the bearer claims to defence, claims to benefits or claims to protection.

The defensive claim is intended to prevent state intervention and protect the self-determination of the individual. This is particularly important in the case of civil liberties, for example, if the state is not supposed to interfere with the free opinion-forming of the population.

In other cases, the state can or even must act: If there is a right to benefits, the state has a duty to ensure that the right in question is realised. For example, the state must operate schools in order to realise the fundamental right to free schooling.

Finally, a duty to protect exists when the state is supposed to protect people from assaults by third parties.

2kee 2y ago

[11]

These various duties of the state can be assigned to different categories of human rights in a very simplified way: Frequently, first-generation rights confer a defensive claim against the state, while second-generation rights establish entitlements to benefits. However, it must always be kept in mind that the demands on the state to realise human rights can be quite different and interwoven: For example, if our constitution guarantees everyone the right to life, on the one hand the state must not kill people itself, but on the other hand it must also take precautions to ensure that third parties do not do so.

2kee 2y ago

[12]

Relation to Switzerland

UN Covenants I and II entered into force for Switzerland in 1992. The European Convention on Human Rights has also been binding on Switzerland since 1974. However, the Swiss Federal Constitution also contains a separate catalogue of fundamental rights, most of which can be claimed directly by individuals. These rights, which are guaranteed in the Federal Constitution, have developed and been supplemented since the creation of the federal state in 1848.[12] This results in a historically evolved system of human rights.

This results in a historically evolved interplay of norms under international and national law, which guarantee rights to individuals.

Lisa Fahrni8. November 2021