Man is born free. No one has the right to deprive
him of the basic necessities such as food, clothing shelter and education. No
government has the authority to violate the integrity of his person and to curb
his right to freedom of thought of religion, of assembly, of speech, and of
movement both within and outside the country.
Authoritarian regimes have been known to repress this
right by arbitrarily imprisoning a person, denying him a fair public trial and
meting out inhuman punishments to him.
They have been guilty, sometimes, of denying him his basic needs by
placing a vast proportion of its limited resources to corrupt officials or to
creating luxury goods for the elite. It is well known that many totalitarian regimes
are premised on a denial of these rights. When regimes in countries having
democratic traditions violate these rights it is most distressing. The Iranian
example disregarding diplomatic norms and holding innocent diplomats as hostage
is a grim pointers to the violation of human rights. When human beings are
forcibly abducted from their homes, interrogated incessantly at the pleasure of
their captors and prided with electrodes or held under water to the point of
drowning-when such things are happening in this so called civilized world-all
who truly value human rights must speak up.
Human rights all over the world are, in fact threatened by
(i)
Excessive concentration of wealth and means of
production and distribution and the most extravagant per capita consumption
patterns in the so-called advanced and developed countries of the world.
(ii)
Racial discrimination new economic imperialism
and restrictive trade practices:
(iii)
Overt or covert interference by some powers to
dictate and determine the national policies and programd of other countries,
using nations as pawns in their global aims and for that purpose to prefer
military governments without popular base; and
(iv)
The growing and ever increasing gap between the
affluent developed countries and the poor developing countries of the world.
The former President of the U.S.A. Mr. Carter, had
been so forth-right in his advocacy of human rights and civil liberties that
many Communist countries were re-examining the problem in the changing social
situation. Though the Soviet Union had shown very little interest in the
question of human rights, many Communist countries have reacted quite
favourably. But President Carter had critics in his country. They looked upon it
as unwarranted interference.
Pakistan has been championing the human rights
movement since the days of the Quaid-e-Azam and has always looked at it from a
broader angle. The Quaid-e-Azam had always placed the individually above
institutions and had consistently emphasized the need for remaking of man so
that an egalitarian society could be ushered ii. The human rights movement has
been carried forward by the late. Dr. Martin Luther King in the U.S.A. by
Julius Nearer in Tanzania and many other personalities in Asian, African, and
Latin American countries of the world.
But though interest in human rights has been
steadily increasing and many social analysts, philosophers and politicians have
been vociferous in their advocacy in practice we find flagrant violations. For
example, if the continent of Asia were to is coloured, according to the extent
of freedom of civil liberties permitted to the citizens. Very few countries,
barring Pakistan, Japan and Sri Lanka, would emerge all white. A few like
Indonesia, Singapore and Malaysia may’ be shaded grey denoting their partly
free status. But the rest of the continent would be a uniform black symbolizing
regime, whether of the right, left or centre, having no respect for the
non-conformist individual but still calling them democracies.
The most important pre-require site for the
meaningful realization of human rights, in particular economic, social and
cultural rights, is independence, territorial integrity and national
sovereignty. No economic or social development could lead to a more egalitarian
and just society without independence, territorial integrity and national
sovereignty. Foreign models are not a satisfactory solution to the unique economic,
social, cultural and political problems of each country. The best model may be
that which suits the special circumstances and the existing problems of a
particular country. In developing countries the limited resources available and
other factors, such as administrative problems and the security of qualified
manpower. Will often make it advisable to establish priorities appropriate to
the social economic, political and cultural conditions and needs of the
country. Increasing population in the garb of the scarce means and resources
imposes choice and makes it necessary to lay down priorities. From the point of
view of social development and human rights, the priorities dictate a series of
balances such as the balance between the various levels of education. Between
technical and liberal education, between country and town, between skills and
jobs, between poor and rich regions, between present and future.
In Pakistan special steps have been taken to
protect human rights and to provide better amenities to youth. The preamble of the
Pakistan Constitution promises to all its citizens justice-social. Economic and
political liberty of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship equality of
status and of opportunity and to promote among them fraternity assuring the
dignity of all.