Human Rights as Demands for Communicative Action
A key issue with human rights is how to allocate duties correlative to rights claims. But the philosophical literature, drawing largely on naturalistic or interactional accounts of human rights, develops answers to this question that do not illumin...
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
2012
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/main?menuPK=64187510&pagePK=64193027&piPK=64187937&theSitePK=523679&menuPK=64187510&searchMenuPK=64187283&siteName=WDS&entityID=000158349_20120118161520 http://hdl.handle.net/10986/3239 |
| Summary: | A key issue with human rights is how to
allocate duties correlative to rights claims. But the
philosophical literature, drawing largely on naturalistic or
interactional accounts of human rights, develops answers to
this question that do not illuminate actual human rights
problems. Charles Beitz, in recent work, attempts to develop
a conception of human rights more firmly rooted in, and
helpful for, current practice. While a move in the right
direction, his account does not incorporate the domestic
practice of human rights, and as a result remains
insufficiently instructive for many human rights challenges.
This paper addresses the problem of allocating correlative
duties by taking the practices of domestic courts in several
countries as a normative benchmark. Upon reviewing how
courts in Colombia, India, South Africa, Indonesia, and
elsewhere have allocated duties associated with
socio-economic rights, the paper finds that courts urge
parties to move from an adversarial to an investigative
mode, impose requirements that parties argue in good faith,
and structure a public forum of communication. The
conclusion argues that judicial practice involves requiring
respondents to engage in communicative, instead of
strategic, action, and explores the implications of this
understanding of human rights. |
|---|