Protection and Humanity Intervention in an independent state

Sadly, human rights violation persists in this modern era. This is clearly the case in third world countries run by operators. The states are all independent for that matter; there comes a point when third party must intervene for saving the humanity at large.

When massive portions of population are being wiped off, efforts must be taken to avert the killings. The violations of human rights are a concrete reason to intervene in an otherwise independent state.

There are a number of factors which affect the present dilemma. By proposing that human rights are being violated means that the issue at hand is being handled too loosely. This paper will profess to highlight the value of human rights violation. Then situations will be examined where it was imperative to intervene, considering the ins and outs each party carry. The justification of the parties to intervene will also be taken under consideration. Last but not the least, the methods for intervening must be looked upon in some cases.

Human rights violations occur on a daily basis. It can range from racist employers to selecting one candidate over a talented one due to racial differences, to copying another author's work to murder and raping. The United Nations is always under scrutiny when human rights violation is discussed. The United Nations is the supreme force in the world with total authority. It accounts for all nations spread across the globe. For instance, the Canadian Charter for Rights and Freedom can't cater to every race and ethnicity, because not every race is Canadian (Ghandi, p210).

United Nations is the only organization where human rights and its violations are addressed. The norms and ground rules for human rights and its violations were established only after United Nations created it. The ground rules for United Nations and promotions, violation and humanitarian group rights are found in United Nations Charter (Economist, p38).

Along this charter, United Nations created the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which highlights human rights first and foremost. It is now fifty five years old. It was adopted in late 1948 on a wintery December. It has been acknowledged worldwide. It was through the efforts made by United Nations that human rights came into existence (Chronicle, p94).

Thirty articles on human rights exist in the Universal Declaration for Human Rights. The examples given below are excerpts from the real five articles of the Human Rights Declaration.

Article no 1

Human beings are all born free and equal in rights and respect. They are empowered with conscience and reason. Thus they should act in the kindled spirit of brotherhood.

Article no 2

The humanity is given all kinds of freedom and rights in this declaration with no regard to race, language, color, political, sex and religious differences, national, property, birth and social status and others.

No segregation will be made on the race, creed, political, social status, jurisdictional condition of a particular state and territory an individual belongs to. No matter, if the state is independent, non-self-governing and under independency stipulations.

Article no 3

Every person has the right to safety, life and liberty.

Article no 4

No individual will be held in for slavery and service. Slavery has been barred in all conditions.

Article no 5

No human being shall be put through human torture, human degrading and deplorable punishment (Ofuatey-Kodjoe, p320).

These points give a brief insight into Universal Declaration of Human Rights. While discussing violations and interventions, there are disagreements about the human rights infringements as ambiguity persists regarding issues (Soares, p26).

The trouble with the human rights violation charter is that each nation interprets it according to their ideologies. That is also true for one person to another. United Nations created the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and it is the only charter that the global community agrees to. It has relevance and significance. United Nations has 191 member states now and it's the most respected organization in the world. It can hold and honor the Charter of Human Rights itself. It can even impose and enforce these human rights violations when necessary. Unfortunately, it has been a complete failure in withholding its own charter (Ghandi, p233).

The declaration is wide open to different interpretations; a committee of eighteen members of human rights is present to iron out the contentions in the document (Chronicle, p94).

While ironing out the details, United Nations needs to decide when to take evasive action and when to avert forceful action....

This means that swearing at a fellow human being also means violating his rights and respect. People will not deem this as human rights violation for that matter and won't pay heed to intervene for that matter. In other situations, the reason for intervention is immense and immediate.
People cursing at each other may also fall under emotional abuse. Cursing, swearing and arguing can come under emotional abuse too. The courts and authorities can intervene in this case. That's a case in point for three people. Looking at the bigger picture can escalate matter.

Sometimes, the individuals require protection from the clutches of the state militia itself. Sometimes, the groups also require similar protection when they stand for a particular ethnicity. Activists of such forms take huge calculated risks. These human rights violations escalate to a heightened level; it's now too late for the criminal law to be tasked with solving it. It becomes even more troublesome when self-autonomous states are taken in regard. Two countries can't possess similar laws and not all nations can arrive on a single chartered human rights violation form. That is where United Nations enters the scenario. It has drafted a charter for human rights violations accepted and acknowledged by the global community at large.

Intervening is deemed tolerable under some situations. A common misconception is that if institutions averted the human rights violations at the right time, the world would be wreaked with wars. While in the real world, rigorous violations of human rights have occurred and the global community couldn't prevent it.

As mentioned before, it is troublesome to create a uniform set of principles for human rights violation. The western cultures accept war crimes, genocides, female exploitation, torture and child labor as human rights violations openly. For all of these criminal acts, one state will always deny it as unlawful or illicit (Sens, Stoett, p287).

Genocides are situations in which the foreign forces must intervene at any cost. Genocide is not mass killing; they are ordered by the state itself. The irony is apparent when human rights violation is discussed when the state should safeguard its citizens. There are multiple incidents to this day which follow a similar pattern. Sometimes the parties who should be averting the disaster find themselves in a tough predicament. Other times, the intervening is very beneficial for the third party, even though it wasn't required.

In the summer of 1993, United Nations called on a World Conference on Human Rights. In this conference, they affirmed the "safety and security of the human rights as a concern for the entire global community" (Sens, Stoett, p273). One year after the World Conference took place, the mass genocide in Rwanda occurred. Hutus killed the Tutsis and are widely known as state hired gunmen. The genocide of Rwanda took place in 1994 as the government militia sought to wipe out one ethnic group once and for all. They were executed on sight. The United Nations became silent spectators in this case, as the action unfolded in front of them in Rwanda. The casualties due to the massacre were 500,000 (CQ Researcher). The international organizations were at a complete loss of words. This was a dire scenario for foreign help needed in an independent state. As mentioned earlier, the global community will threaten, warn and give ultimatums but won't intervene.

A probable intervention must occur before the ship has sailed. Human aid worth millions of dollars and food supplies does not justify the millions dead due to human rights violation.

A framework must be followed by the book for situations like these. The "1503 Procedure" is in plain writing for the United Nations experts to focus on allegations regarding a concerned state and probe for violation of human rights for that matter. The reputation of these people precedes them (they are hired by Commission on Human Rights) and they investigate very grave issues. These rapporteurs are tasked with dealing racial and ethnicity injustices apart from "summarizing torture, arbitrary executions, sudden disappearance, detention, human trafficking, child abuse, religious radicalism, mercenaries and their behavior with respect to self-determination (Chronicle, p94)." These rapporteurs as well as working groups submit annual reports on their findings to the General Assembly and Human Rights Commission. Information is amassed from eyewitnesses, governments, victims, relatives and NGO's to work out the steps needed to be taken. Due to this, there have been many trials for the perpetrators accused with human rights…