The case of human rights in the move towards economic development is a curious thing. It is generally perceived, regardless of academic definitions, that democracy is the political system where human rights are basically recognized, promoted, and protected. On the other hand, communism and socialism are the political systems that essentially do not prioritize individual human rights over the rights of the state. All these ideologies, however, have the common desired end result of general progress even if they belong to opposite ends of the political spectrum.

Operationally, the evaluation of these ideologies has rested on the belief that a more socially (centrally) controlled economy that does not take into account each and every possible human right will move much faster. This is for the reason that expediency in progress, translated into political and economic choices and decisions, rests in the hands of only a few.

The debate has been put on the chopping block, weighed, and found wanting. Modern history now debunks the old argument, short of pronouncing it a myth.

Communism and Socialism eventually fell in Europe with the non-democratic countries of the continent not having shown advanced economies. In fact, poverty prevailed before the demise of the non-democratic ideologies. Cuba which has been practicing a state-centered political and economic set-up is known to be still reeking in despondency. Russia has not really proven to be beneficial to the social and economic development of its huge constituency. During the old and bitter division between the two sides of Germany, the democratic section showed a more socially and economically progressive development than the socialist one.

While communist North Korea is more nefariously known for its advanced and extremely expensive nuclear weapons, it is the non-communist South Korea that owns an economy that has moved forward in leaps and bounds. The countries run by oligarchic despots and military juntas in Asia, Africa, and Southern America are widely publicized as poverty-stricken nations where hunger, famine, disease, and social degradation are the norm.

War torn countries that have perennially been a hotbed of military strife, such as Lebanon, Sudan, East Timor, and Iraq, are also the very same places where the utter disrespect for human life continues to ferment. In these places, human development is farthest from the minds of warring factions.

When the reins of development are in the hands of a few or the so-called “state,” the human rights that are protected the most are the ones that belong to those holding the ropes. Time and history have showcased this fact.

Progress for all, and economic development that is meant to benefit the greater many, can never ignore the protection and promotion of human rights. There can never be a general and favorable atmosphere of development for a group if there is no development of the individual belonging to that group. The emerging economies of China and India are a clear result of these countries’ awakening to the fact that what humankind calls progress is the sum total of each and every human potential – unlocked.

Only with collective effort will progress really come. The world has learned this lesson, albeit painfully. The recognition of human rights as an engine towards development is a lesson learned – and learned well by the progressive nations. These groups have recognized that progress is nothing short of a rights-based approach. Eradication of poverty, harnessing education, and good governance are all stalwart landmarks on the map of economic development. Those who have not set their sights on these guideposts are lost in the way, and will probably take a long, winding, and torturous route to development. Social progress can only be seen in the light of better standards of life and the equitable enjoyment of fundamental freedoms.

Development is defined as “people-centered, participatory, and environmentally sound movement that involves economic growth, equitable distribution, enhancement of people’s capabilities, and widening of people’s choices.” It ensures “the constant improvement of the well-being of the entire population and of all individuals, on the basis of their active, free, and meaningful participation in development and in the fair distribution of the resulting benefits.”

The abovementioned definition, offered by the United Nations Development Program, entails that all people are entitled to participate in, contribute to, and enjoy economic, social, cultural, and political development. This can be achieved when all human rights and fundamental freedoms are fully realized. According to this view, people have the right to choose and pursue a path of socio-economic development that brings them benefit.

The masses of people should participate at the different levels of social and economic development, from the decision-making processes to determination of societal goals to the allocation of resources to achieve these goals and to the execution of resulting programs and projects.

In such, the role of the state is to represent the people and their aspirations. This should constitute the valid and legitimate interest of the state.

When everyone has a voice coming from a healthy and adequately nourished body that comes with a well-informed mind and an understanding and peaceful heart, can the best of progress be far behind? Violations of human rights are a major determinant of poverty. Conversely, poverty alleviation will help realize human rights. Stripping away of institutional and legal abilities, or the power to use, control, and allocate human rights endowments is to condemn poor people to poverty.

The implementation of human rights should be an equal part and parcel of the process of wealth creation. Human rights are not a legacy of wealth but an operational tool of it. Development is no longer about separate and selective creation of pockets of human betterment. Everyone has to be fit and able to paddle an oar for the boat not to sink.

Image 1

Image 2

Image 3

Via UN News Centre