Human Rights

By Professor Jon Saul

The United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights was originally adopted in 1948. Since that date, this document has been the world’s Human Rights standard. Over 102 countries of the world have agreed to the human right s recognized therein. The United States finally ratified the Declaration in 1992, separating this nation from the very few, such as China, Saudi Arabia and South Africa, that have not signed the agreement.

Article 19 states, “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.”

Access to social media platforms, which many corporations are restricting these days, appears to be a clear violation of human rights.

This Declaration does not simply apply to governments, as does the United States Bill of Rights, which limits government power over citizens. The United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights applies to all people everywhere, as stated in the Preamble, “as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations.”

Article 1 states, “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.”

Dignity is a key word in the Declaration. The clear intent is for people to relate to other people in what can only be called a humane fashion.

Article 12, states, “No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.”

Attacks on people in social media which disparage anyone’s honor or reputation, on all fronts by any person, are clear violations of Human Rights. According to the Declaration of human Rights, everyone has the Human Right of legal protection against such attacks.

Another key word here is ‘arbitrary’, which in the context means ‘not according to law’. The law of the United States regarding free speech is crystal clear. Unless one’s speech is directly threatening someone’s safety, such as yelling “fire” in a crowded theatre when there is not any fire, the government cannot infringe on anyone’s right to express themselves. This is representative of the limit of free speech. It is disingenuous to argue that a political point of view is threatening to the public welfare, unless violence, or deprivation of anyone’s human rights, are explicitly advocated.

Note that Article 30, states, “Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.”

Attempts to justify the limitation of anyone’s Human Rights, including the right of free expression, based on words appearing in this Declaration is prohibited and is, in itself, a violation of human rights. 

Thus, corporations do not have the ‘right’ to silence anyone. They do not have the right to ‘suspend’ people’s social media accounts, whether they are regulated by the government or not. Corporations are not the arbiters of what is dangerous to the public. In the United States, thankfully, such matters can only be decided in a court of law. Moreover, even in the United States, with a government duly elected by the people, the state is not morally licensed to limit individuals’ human rights.

Think about what is happening today in the United States. People of all stripes are attempting to disparage and silence other people of different stripes. Whom does this serve? Only the forces that are antithetical to human rights. Authoritarian forces, which deny individual rights, which place the state over the citizen, which seek to control the lives of individuals…this is what is supported and advanced when anyone condones or is complicit the violation of another’s human rights.

Human Rights are for everyone. No one’s Human Rights should be infringed upon by anybody, whether an individual or a government. Every time in human history when individual rights were trampled on by government has ended in misery for the people. There is not any reason to expect the future to be any different than the past. Whether we agree with someone’s opinion or not, we must all respect each other’s’ human rights.