• Category:
  • Document type:
  • Level:
  • Page:
  • Words:

Human Rights Issues


In the contemporary society, human rights is a renowned product of historical development. Human rights is highly embedded to social, political, economic, culture, and values of particular country. Basically, the essences of universality of human rights is to gear normative and morals across countries. As such, it can be argued that the basis of universality of human rights is highly embedded to the framework of the natural law, implying that all people across countries possess certain fundamental rights and freedom.

The normative foundation of Human rights is laid down in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights through the membership of the community states. The declaration of the human rights is reaffirmed and accepted through international instruments and United Nations resolutions. This paper seeks to identify contemporary human rights issues, the key details of the identified human rights issues, and how to bring changes of the identified human rights issues.


Since 9/11 terrorism attack in United States of America, war on terrorism is highly based on nationalisms and the national identities of the perpetrators. For example, North America war on terrorism is highly renowned for negatively radicalizing the migrants, expansion of migrant detention centers, and the legalization of the racist profiling (Nandita, 2009). Essentially, U.S.A fights terrorism through extraordinary renditions. The approach implies that U.S.A kidnap and incarcerated persons perceived to be terrorists without undergoing trials in court (Nandita, 2009). It is presumed the assumed terrorists undergo torture as an approach of interrogations in sites outside the U.S.A territory (Nandita, 2009).

National security weakness the human rights through sovereignty of a countries. As per Tariq Ali observations, states violence’s are confronted based on the states sovereignty (Nandita, 2009). As such, people under their sovereign land tend to shrug their shoulders and blame most of the terrorism activities to the migrants. Such an approach fosters domesticated discourse of national security which fails to adhere to the rules and regulations of human rights. This has been showcased through socioeconomic divisions, cultural differences, and civilization differences whereby different people are kept apart. As such, human rights are exposed to detriment whereby the privileged people within the country sovereign displace terrorism responsibility from themselves onto those who suffers the most, thus the migrants.

Based on the Arar case, the Canadian Government detained the noncitizen persons by observing the national security certificate. By adhering to the national security certificate, Canada court detained the migrants indefinitely by failing to observe any evidence presented against the noncitizens persons (Nandita, 2009). Such a case exposes Canada government failing to observe human rights issues by detaining migrants indefinitely and without charges (Nandita, 2009). Such an approach showcases the real limitation of the nationalizing whereby the governments takes advantage and fail to observe the bill of rights especially to migrants.

Historically, majority of slaves underwent torture for offenses that were either real or imaginary. Under the Roman law, torture was perceived to be a corrective measure whereby a guilty person was believed give detail information of the crime, of which an innocent would not know (Jerome, 2004). Consequently, the French law advocated for torture as a criminal law enforcement procedure purposefully to attain real victory over the accused through confession and contrition.

In recent history, torture has been applicable by the stable democracies. some of the well renowned torture practices include beating detainees with batons, and fists, detainees standing for long hours, placement of black hoods on the heads of the perceived criminals, detaining perceived criminals in rooms with hissing sounds prior to interrogation, and prevention of the detained from accessing food, drinks, and sleep (Jerome, 2004). Though the European Court of Human Rights ruled that such practices were not alluded to torture simply because torture is a word of reproach, it court implied that the practices were cruel, inhuman, and degrading thus going against the human rights.

From the analysis, it can be argued that the main purpose of torture is for the interrogator to attain a criminal conviction, and not evidence that justify individual to have either have, or have not breached law. For example, under the case of Brown and Missippi, the police interrogated the contemplating custodians purposefully to produce evidence that will only be acceptable by the court for trial. Such an approach breached the human rights across the perceived criminals (Jerome, 2004).

To ascertain that torture worked against human rights issues, the English judges and the supreme court justice excluded information that were presented after the perceived criminal underwent threat or torture (Jerome, 2004). The judges and supreme court justice implied that free and voluntary confessions were deserving because the information will be credible because it flows from the strongest sense of guilt (Jerome, 2004).

Positive Change

Basically, discrimination against migrants whom their communities are highly associated with terrorisms, and persons undergoing torture can be dealt with through the construction of cross movement solidarities. Such movement will foster the realization of people to stay as a community rather than focusing on ethnic terms that are highly embedded in indigenous and colonized groups. By constructing a cross-movement solidarity that will realize the many-headed hydra, individuals will stand up for future without violence, oppression, and exploitation. To effectively tackle torture as a human rights issues, enforcement agencies need to tactics that are enforced by the law such as the post-Miranda privilege, but not against the human rights laws. This implies that the interrogation process should not expose the perceive witness or criminal to severe pain. Essentially, countries perceived to be highly engaging in torture, the law enforcement commissions need to structure an approach that will adhere to the normative standards of interrogations that fails to inflict pain, and inhuman environment during the custodial interrogation.


Conclusively, it can be argued that in contemporary society human rights issues is still an urgency of eradication. Practices such as discrimination of groups, and torture inflict pain across the weak group. As such, human rights movements and restructuring of human rights laws need to be imposed purposefully to eradicate such practices.

References List

Jerome, H. (2004). American Interrogation. From Torture to Trickery. In Sanford Levinsion (ed), Torture: A Collection, Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp.109-122.

Nandita, S. (2009). Organizing the Motley Crew and Challenging the Security of National States. Paradigm Publishers, 3360 Mitchell Lane, U.S.A. pp. 119-122.