three generations of human rights essay

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

We're Hiring!
Help Center

Karel Vasak's Generations of Rights and the Contemporary Human Rights Discourse

2019, Human Rights Review

In the late 1970s, when Karel Vasak offered his concept of the three generations of rights, it was inclusive enough to embrace the whole spectrum of existing human rights. Forty years later, this paper explores the nature of contemporary human rights discourse and questions to what extent Vasak's categorization is still relevant. Our work discusses the evolution of the concept of human rights, the changing dichotomies of national and international, individual and collective, and positive and negative rights. This paper uses qualitative methods of content analysis and quantitative frequency analysis method to explore the nature of scholarly discourse presented in human rights journals. Our research findings highlight the dynamic evolution of contemporary human rights discourse. The paper specifically illustrates the increasing emphasis on collective and internationalist rights and the enhancement of human rights matters that are difficult to categorize using Vasak's approach. In doing so, the paper calls for the clarification of the language of contemporary human rights.

Related Papers

The Age of Human Rights Journal

Dolores Morondo Taramundi

This article aims to address some of the criticisms that have been made of human rights research, especially of human rights research conducted by legal scholars. It argues that a conscious and critical approach to the limitations of the 'ivory tower' of legal scholarship on rights is becoming increasingly necessary in a research context marked by the convergence of multiple disciplines, the ever-growing contestation of human rights, and the complexity of the international regime for the protection of human rights. This article outlines three strategies that could be useful for legal scholars to escape from the ivory tower and make a significant contribution to multidisciplinary human rights studies.

Marta Szczepanik

Magdalena Zolkos

The problematic accommodation of human rights as a research object within the discipline of political science has, in the last decade, attracted a good deal of intellectual attention. While some researchers have highlighted human rights'conceptual connection to the metaphysics of the natural law notion,, others have pointed out their post-war juridical genesis and their appropriation by the domain of law,,

Reza Afshari

ESCAE JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT AND SECURITY (EJMSS)

EJMSS ESCAE JOURNAL

This paper begins with a brief overview of the role of power before moving to examinethe politics of the current human rights regime within the institutions of the United Nations Organization. The argument presented here is that the birth of the humanrights regime cannot be understood solely as a response to the horrors of Nazism, asis often claimed. This paper stresses that while the shock of the concentration campsand the revelations of the Holocaust certainly played a part, a further insight is gainedby looking at the postwar regime as a response to international and domestic economicinterests. It opines that following the collapse of the Cold War, and the decline ininfluence of the socialist states, an understanding of universal human rights that serve particular interests has achieved even greater legitimacy than in the past. In short,economic and social rights that could have empowered the poor in their fight againstexploitation and exclusion, now take second place to civil and political rights, or thoserights that support freedom in the private sphere of economic interests. This paper thenlooks in detail at the tripartite structure of human rights discourse. It argues that thedominant conception of human rights reflects the central principles upon which thecurrent global order is built, including ideas of economic growth and development,individualism, and free market economics. This paper emphasizes that, as in othereras, hegemonic power does not rely upon force and the threat of force alone, but alsoseeks to maintain order by providing a normative framework that justifies the activitiesof particular interests. It shows that in the current period, the responses to violationshave centred largely upon the formal machinery developed for protecting humanrights, which assumes that the individual is responsible for his or her actions. Thislargely ignores the possibility that the causes of violations may be found within thesocial, economic and political structures that define the current order.

César Rodríguez-Garavito

The international human rights movement faces a context of uncertainty due to: (i) the rise of a multipolar world with new emerging powers, (ii) the emergence of new actors and legal and political strategies, (iii) the challenges and opportunities presented by information and communication technologies, as well as (iv) the threat posed by extreme environmental degradation. The author first reviews the critical literature on human rights, highlighting how these transformations are unsettling prevailing structures and practices in the human rights field such as: the hierarchical nature of traditional human rights discourse and movement, asymmetry between North and South organisations, over-legalisation of human rights language, and the lack of concrete assessments of human rights outcomes. The author identifies two responses to these critiques among human rights practitioners: denial that defends traditional boundaries and gatekeepers, on one hand, and reflexive reconstruction that reimagines practices and boundaries to generate productive symbiosis among diverse human rights actors, on the other. Overall, the author favours the latter approach, arguing that human rights practitioners should strive to create a human rights ecosystem. This approach seeks strengthen the collective capacity of the human rights movement by harnessing its diversity. Thus, a human rights ecosystem prioritizes collaboration and symbiosis with a much more varied range of actors and issues coupled with more decentralized and network-based forms of collaboration than that of previous decades.

Ratio Juris

Christine Chwaszcza

Gert Verschraegen , mikael R madsen

Human rights have become a defining feature of contemporary society, permeating public discourse on politics, law and culture. But why did human rights emerge as a key social force in our time and what is the relationship between rights and the structures of both national and international society? By highlighting the institutional and socio-cultural context of human rights, this timely and thought-provoking collection provides illuminating insights into the emergence and contemporary societal significance of human rights. Drawn from both sides of the Atlantic and adhering to refreshingly different theoretical orientations, the contributors to this volume show how sociology can develop our understanding of human rights and how the emergence of human rights relates to classical sociological questions such as social change, modernisation or state formation. Making Human Rights Intelligible provides an important sociological account of the development of international human rights. It will be of interest to human rights scholars and sociologists of law and anyone wishing to deepen their understanding of one the most significant issues of our time.

Acta Baltica Historiae et Philosophiae Scientiarum

Ondrej Hamulak

ANAIS SOCIOLOGY OF LAW 2017: Perspectivas das relações entre direito e sociedade em um sistema Social Global

Nicole Berto Silveira , Priscila Vargas Mello

In a world of political and economic instabilities, the role of human rights discourse should be seen as neutral, solid and coherent towards the preservation of the individuals' life and dignity. However, this article aims to promote a debate about the modern interpretation of what emerged as the man's natural law, and today is the foundation of a transnational and highly complex structure: the international humanitarian system. Through a critical literature review, this work combined arguments proposed by Habermas and Arendt, with the morphological structures of the state, rights of the man and sovereignty, and the Kantian view of cosmopolitanism. This article's main objective is to highlight discrepancies between the theory and practice of human rights discourse, demonstrating the dilemma of duality that abases this system's effectiveness. Yet, the present work found and sustains that human rights discourse may fail where it aims to universalise and promote civil rights as inherently human rights, which ultimately disregard sovereignty, people's self-determination and, in numerous cases, contributes to the destabilisation of institutions and international relations.