Human Dignity and Fundamental rights | Essay

What is human dignity?

What rights are fundamental to an open society? 

What are the limits of political power? 

All these questions are very important. Since ancient times, these ideas have been stirring up human beings and these series of ideas gave rise to concepts, which made the life of man better. Human rights is one of these concepts.

Introduction

As we know, there is a lack of compatibility in various concepts, due to which the opposing concepts are born. Individual human rights and collective rights are also two such concepts. Rights are an essential condition for the all-round development of a person. The basis of this right is very broad which includes legal rights, fundamental rights, civil rights etc. Human rights are also rooted in these concepts.

If we talk about human rights, then these are the rights that human beings get by being human. The rights that human beings need for their personal development are called human rights. The rights exercised for one's own development are called individual human rights. At the same time, when it comes to the human rights of all the people of the society, all these rights fall under the category of collective rights.

After the end of World War II, in the year 1948, a group of 48 countries signed a charter explaining the fundamental rights of the entire human race. It was agreed on the view that human rights of the person should be protected at all costs.

Human Rights

•  Right to work and right to equitable condition etc.
•  Right to freedom and security in life.
•  Right to equality before law.
•  Right to social security.
•  Right to be considered a person before law.
•  Property right.
•  Right to equal pay for equal work.
•  Social Protection Rights of Children.
•  Right to Education.
•  And prohibition of slave trade.

Looking at these rights, the question arises whether individual human rights and collective rights are incompatible with each other. If we look at it from one point of view, there are many points of inconsistency in it, such as-The philosophical basis of individual human rights is considered freedom, while the basis of collective rights is equality.

Qualification is predominant under the first, while the second emphasizes socialist society.

Under the first concept, overuse creates selfishness in the person, while according to the second concept, overuse ends the rights of the person.

Individual human rights eventually find their economic basis in capitalism, because capitalism places special emphasis on individual freedom and rights. Collective rights, on the other hand, speaks of the rights of all and in this way its economic basis shows proximity to socialism.

According to the great philosopher Rousseau, "Society is made up of individuals, a person gives some of his rights to society so that society can protect that person's far-reaching rights."

It is clear that there is not only inconsistency but also complementarity between individual human rights and collective rights. Balance is the pillar of our Indian culture, for example-

Balance in enjoyment and yoga

Balance in materiality and spirituality etc.

According to the Preamble of Proclamation of Human Rights also-

“All human beings, individuals are born independent and everyone has the same rights and dignity. All are full of logic and reason. So everyone should be treated with brotherhood. "

Here everyone means society and person means a person. These lines show the balance between the two. In the decision given by the Supreme Court, there has been talk of security and balance between the two.

According to the Keshavanand case, “Individual rights and collective rights are two sides of the same coin. Balance and harmony is necessary in both. In the absence of one, the second is destroyed and in the absence of the second one becomes paralyzed. "

In fact, at present, the issue is of maximum happiness for maximum people, for which the rights of some empowered people are curbed so that everyone can get benefit in the society. Therefore, to give collective human rights to all sections of society, it is necessary to impose individual rights. There is certainly no inconsistency between individual rights and collective rights.

The above facts prove that individual human rights are different from collective rights as well as antagonistic because when it comes to human rights, the personal interest is preferred over the collective interest. In this situation the development of a person is based on his / her ability.

Due to having different abilities, if someone goes ahead, then someone remains behind. There are many examples related to this in capitalist countries.

The Conclusion

Collective authority, on the other hand, directly or indirectly discourages merit. Such a right is helpful in the development of society but the pace of that development is very slow. In such a process a more qualified person is unable to make full use of his talent, which leads to frustration and unproductivity. This process can also become a hindrance in the development of the society. Thus there seems to be inconsistency between individual human rights and collective rights and it seems as if the two are stopping each other's development.

But by making a subtle observation, it is known that individual interest and collective interest are not complementary to each other but complementary. Development of one in development of another

It is not a hindrance but an ally. If we look closely at the structure of the society, then we find that the unit of society is the person because individuals make the society. The important thing is that no person or society alone can fully utilize their rights, a balance between the two is necessary for the creation of a balanced society.

Hope you liked our article on the Human Rights. If so, then don't forget to share this article with your friends and subscribe to our newsletter to get our articles as earliest as possible.

Wishing you a happy reading.  :)