İNSAN HAKLARI - Deneme Sınavı - 11

qqqqqqqqq

The idea of human rights, as a kind of universal
moral rights that belong equally to all human beings
only in virtue of being human, has been one of the
prominent ideas in the second half of the 20th Century.
Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) adopted
by the United Nations General Assembly in 1948 have
constituted a milestone in the history of human rights

Conceptual objections are mostly directed either
to the vagueness and abstractness of the concept
of human rights, and of human nature on which
the idea of human rights supposed to be to rest,
and of the claim of universality. Dembour tries to
summarize these in the following three propositions
which represents the main line of the conceptual
critiques, “(1) the concept of human rights is
wrongly presented as universal; (2) it pertains of
a logic which focuses on the individual to the
neglect of solidarity and other social values; (3) it
derives from a reasoning which is far too abstract”
(Dembour, 2006, 6).

According to Burke, rights discourse of his
century suffers from metaphysical idealism and
rationalism. The proponents of rights follow a
clumsy metaphysical theory; they are metaphysical
rationalists or “speculatists”, the worst insult
in Burke’s rich vocabulary of abuse. For Burke,
therefore, the standpoint of the absolute and
universal discourse seems to blind the politicians
to the realities of the particular and concrete and
turns them into metaphysicians and prophets
(Douzinas, 2000, 148-151).

The new objections to human rights are more
radical and harsh, but mostly directed to the
failure of human rights movement and the gap
between the idea of human rights and its practice
more than the idea itself. Though some critiques
originate from postmodern thinkers who consider
a transformation from grant narratives to small
narratives, from human rights to the rights of
children, to the rights of immigrants necessary
and unavoidable; the others esteeming the idea of
human rights in itself criticize the practice of human
rights which seems them far from securing human
rights to all members of the world community,
referring especially the huge gap between the idea
of human rights and its practice.
On the other hand, the concept of “the right to
have rights” introduced by H. Arendt triggered a
chain of challenges to human rights as we observe
in the accounts of scholars as Balibar, Agamben,
Douzinas, Dembour and Rancière. Samuel Moyn
decided to label human rights as The Last Utopia.
Even though all of those scholars are partly
sympathetic to the idea of human rights in principle
and believe still its potential in creating a more
human world, some argue that it has deviated its
initial revolutionary discourse; and today “human
rights have been turned from a discourse of
rebellion and dissent into that of state legitimacy”
(Douzinas, 2000, 7). M. Ignatieff identifies the
crisis that human rights face today as a spiritual
and cultural crisis related to both ‘intercultural
validity of human rights norms’ and ‘the ultimate
metaphysical grounding for these norms’ (Pedersen
and Murray, 2012, 6). Many believe that human
rights are in crisis in the beginning of 21th Century
and the idea of human rights either will face an
end or have to undergo some transformations to
survive.

Although
the theological content of the term was abandoned,
the ethical content was not. From time to time in
the course of the history one encounters the idea
that human rights are protections of our human
status and that the human status in question is our
rational or, more specifically, normative agency”

Cultural relativists claim
that every person lives in a specific culture and each
culture possesses its own values and principles of
conduct, therefore it would be nonsense to speak of
universal values or principles and of human nature
valid for all cultures.

According to humanism, humanity has two unique characteristics, it can
determine its own destiny and, secondly, it is fully conscious of itself transparent to itself through self-observation and reflection.

Kuçuradi asserts that human rights norms might be asserted as universal because of their epistemological and axiological specificity,

Critique of Deviation from its Utopian
and Revolutionary Core
Some social scientists and philosophers of our
era as Douzinas, Demboor, Gearty and Baxi are
skeptical to the human rights claiming its deviation
from its original utopian and revolutionary
nature.

Kennedy has expressed that has not been critical
to human rights, though he used criticism. He has
treated criticism as an instrument to return to
ideals or to perfect the assessment of consequences.
He argues for human rights not as a codification
of what we know justice to be, but as a lexicon for
criticizing the pretenses of justice as it is. He lines up
with a human rights training in critical reasoning,
with treaty instruments reminding us to ask again
what justice requires; with a humanitarianism
that invigorated our political life for heterodoxy
(Kennedy, 2004, 20).

Right to fair trial and that ever-significant presumption of innocence are among the rights and freedoms touched upon by the 7th Article of the Charter. Thus, the answer is B.

According to the 45th Article of the Charter, co-operating with other African and international institutions which are concerned with the promotion and protection of human and peoples’ rights is one of the obligations of the Commision. Therefore, the answer is A.

To reach a conclusion of admissibility regarding the communications, they should not be based exclusively on news discriminated through the mass media. Thus, the answer is A.

Between 2006 and 2008, the Court dealt principally with operational and administrative
issues, and in June 2010, the Court adopted its Final Rules of Court. Thus, the answer is D.

The Court is composed of 11 Judges, who are expected by the Protocol to have high moral values, high professional recognition and experience. It is another expectation of the Protocol that the nominations should be made from among such a group of individuals, who are either academically successful or who have great practice-oriented careers. Therefore, the answer is E.

The Organization of American States (OAS) was established by the Charter of OAS signed in Bogota, Colombia in 30 April 1948. Thus, the answer is C.

The Statute of the CoE is signed on 5 May 1949 by ten States

The Statute of the CoE is signed on 5 May 1949 by ten States, namely Belgium, Denmark, France, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden and the United Kingdom. Iceland, Greece, West Germany and Turkey joined the original signatories within a year and therefore regarded by some as founding members. The Council has 47 members as of 2019. Canada, Vatican, Japan, Mexico and the US are Observer States, whereas Israel is Observer to the Parliamentary Assembly.

The CoE, which introduces itself as “the continent’s leading human rights organisation”