The Hierarchy of Human Rights - "Think about it!"

Tom Farer's "The Hierarchy of Human Rights" emphasizes the paramount importance of non-derogable rights such as life, physical security, and due process, essential for the exercise of other rights.

In his article[1] "The Hierarchy of Human Rights," Tom Farer explores the concept of prioritizing certain human rights based on their fundamental importance. Farer argues that a hierarchy exists among human rights, placing non-derogable rights such as the right to life, physical security, due process, and non-discrimination at the apex. These rights are considered non-derogable because their violation is universally recognized as particularly egregious and they form the foundation upon which all other rights depend. Farer emphasizes the functional and deductive reasoning behind this hierarchy, noting that without the protection of these primary rights, the exercise of other rights becomes meaningless.

Right to Life as the Paramount Right

The right to life stands as the paramount right because it is the foundational prerequisite for the enjoyment of all other rights. Without the assurance of life, no other right can be exercised or valued. This principle is universally acknowledged in international human rights law and is enshrined in key legal instruments such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Article 3) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Article 6).

The right to life is paramount because:

1.     Intrinsic Value: Life itself is the most fundamental of all human values. The loss of life is the ultimate deprivation, making the protection of life the highest priority.

2.     Precondition for Other Rights: All other rights, whether civil, political, economic, or social, presuppose the existence of life. Without life, the concept of rights becomes irrelevant.

3.     Universal Recognition: The right to life enjoys universal recognition and is non-derogable, meaning it cannot be suspended even in times of emergency.

Protection of the Right to Life in Common Law

In common law systems, particularly those of England and other Commonwealth countries, the right to life is protected through various legal mechanisms, even in the absence of a formal Bill of Rights. Common law principles and judicial decisions play a crucial role in safeguarding this paramount right.

1.     Habeas Corpus: The writ of habeas corpus is a fundamental mechanism that protects individuals from unlawful detention, ensuring that the state cannot arbitrarily deprive a person of their liberty and, by extension, their life.

2.     Duty of Care: Under common law, there is a duty of care imposed on individuals and the state to prevent actions that could foreseeably harm others. This duty extends to protecting life by ensuring safe environments, practices, and policies.

3.     Judicial Review: Courts have the power to review actions by the executive and legislative branches to ensure that they do not violate fundamental rights, including the right to life.

4.     Inquests and Coroners: Inquests conducted by coroners investigate unnatural or unexplained deaths to determine the cause and circumstances, thereby ensuring accountability and preventing future violations of the right to life.

The Imperative Nine Highest Ranked Rights

Following the right to life, the next highest ranked rights in the hierarchy, listed in order of priority, are:

1.     Right to Physical Security: Protection from torture, cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment. Reasoning: Physical security is essential for individuals to live without fear and to exercise other rights.

2.     Right to Due Process: Fair treatment through the normal judicial system, especially as a citizen's entitlement. Reasoning: Due process ensures legal protection against arbitrary deprivation of rights and liberties​​.

3.     Right to Liberty and Security of Person: Protection from arbitrary arrest and detention. Reasoning: Liberty is essential for personal autonomy and freedom of movement.

4.     Right to Non-Discrimination: Equal protection and non-discrimination based on race, gender, or other ascriptive categories. Reasoning: Equality before the law is fundamental to the fairness and justice of any legal system.

5.     Right to Freedom of Expression: The right to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas. Reasoning: Freedom of expression is crucial for democracy, transparency, and individual self-fulfilment.

6.     Right to Privacy: Protection from arbitrary interference with one's privacy, family, home, or correspondence. Reasoning: Privacy is vital for personal autonomy and dignity.

7.     Right to Freedom of Assembly and Association: The right to peacefully assemble and to form and join associations. Reasoning: These freedoms are essential for the functioning of a democratic society and for the protection of other rights.

8.     Right to Participate in Government: The right to take part in the conduct of public affairs, directly or through freely chosen representatives. Reasoning: Participation in governance ensures that individuals have a say in the decisions that affect their lives.

9.     Right to Education: The right to receive an education. Reasoning: Education is foundational for the development of individuals and societies, enabling the exercise of other rights and fostering understanding, tolerance, and friendship.

The hierarchy of human rights places the right to life at its apex, acknowledging its fundamental importance as the foundation upon which all other rights are built. Without the protection and guarantee of the right to life, no other rights can be meaningfully exercised or enjoyed. This paramount right is universally recognized and is non-derogable, reflecting its critical role in human dignity and existence.

The protection of the right to life in common law systems demonstrates the commitment to safeguarding this paramount right through various legal mechanisms. These mechanisms include the writ of habeas corpus, which protects against unlawful detention; the duty of care, which imposes obligations to prevent harm; judicial review, which ensures government actions comply with fundamental rights; and inquests, which investigate unnatural or unexplained deaths to ensure accountability. These legal tools collectively work to uphold the sanctity of life and prevent its arbitrary deprivation.

The imperative nine highest ranked rights, following the right to life, are essential for ensuring the dignity, freedom, and equality of individuals. These rights include the right to physical security, due process, liberty and security of person, non-discrimination, freedom of expression, privacy, freedom of assembly and association, participation in government, and education. Each of these rights plays a crucial role in creating a just and fair society.

Physical security protects individuals from torture and inhumane treatment, ensuring they live without fear. Due process guarantees fair treatment within the judicial system, protecting against arbitrary actions. Liberty and security of person ensure personal autonomy and freedom from unjust detention. Non-discrimination ensures equality before the law, preventing bias based on race, gender, or other ascriptive categories. Freedom of expression allows individuals to share ideas and opinions, fostering a transparent and democratic society. Privacy protects personal autonomy and dignity. Freedom of assembly and association enables collective action and democratic engagement. Participation in government ensures individuals have a say in decisions affecting their lives, reinforcing democratic principles. Education is foundational for personal and societal development, enabling the exercise of other rights and fostering understanding and tolerance.

---

[1] Tom Farer published "The Hierarchy of Human Rights" in 1992. The article appeared in Volume 8, Issue 1 of the American University International Law Review.

You might be wondering…

If the Right to Life is the paramount right, how do the authorities justify risking the live’s of tens of millions of people during and beyond the alleged COVID-19 pandemic?

The right to life is a foundational principle intended to protect the inherent dignity and sanctity of every human being. However, in the hands of unscrupulous individuals and institutions, even the most noble principles can be twisted into tools for manipulation, control, and oppression. This stark reality should challenge our perceptions of those in power and compel us to critically question their true motives.

In an era where trust in leadership is often taken for granted, it's crucial to recognize that those wielding power can, and sometimes do, exploit the principles we hold dear to advance their own agendas. The right to life, designed to uphold the sanctity of human existence, can be manipulated in ways that subvert its original intent, leading to outcomes that are diametrically opposed to its foundational purpose.

When we fail to question the motives behind policies and actions cloaked in the guise of protecting life, we risk enabling a system where the very principles meant to safeguard us become instruments of our own subjugation. By examining how the right to life can be perverted, we can better understand the broader implications of unchecked authority and the importance of vigilance in preserving our fundamental rights. Here are some ‘hypothetical’ examples illustrating how this can happen.

1. Justification of Authoritarian Measures:

Foundational Principle: Right to Life Twisted Aim: Authoritarian Control and Surveillance

Example: Governments might justify extensive surveillance, restrictive laws, and curtailment of freedoms under the guise of protecting the right to life. For instance, in the name of preventing terrorism or ensuring public safety, authorities could implement draconian measures that infringe on personal liberties, such as mass surveillance, indefinite detention without trial, and suppression of dissent.

Case Study: A government could argue that monitoring all citizens' communications is necessary to prevent terrorist attacks, claiming it protects the right to life. However, this can lead to a surveillance state where individual freedoms and privacy are severely compromised.

2. Eugenics and Forced Sterilization:

Foundational Principle: Right to Life Twisted Aim: Eugenics and Population Control

Example: The right to life can be distorted to justify eugenics programs or forced sterilizations under the pretext of improving the genetic quality of the population or managing population growth. This violates individual rights and bodily autonomy.

Case Study: A regime might claim that certain groups of people with disabilities or genetic disorders should be prevented from reproducing to protect the right to a healthy life for future generations. This perverse interpretation leads to gross human rights abuses.

3. Justification of War and Violence:

Foundational Principle: Right to Life Twisted Aim: Military Aggression

Example: The right to life can be misused to justify military interventions and wars. Governments or groups might claim they are engaging in violent actions to protect their citizens' right to life, even when such actions result in significant loss of life and destruction.

Case Study: A country could launch a pre-emptive strike on another nation, arguing that it is necessary to protect its citizens from potential threats, thus twisting the right to life to justify aggressive military action and causing widespread harm.

4. Implementation of Strict Population Controls:

Foundational Principle: Right to Life Twisted Aim: Coercive Population Control Measures

Example: Governments may implement coercive population control measures, such as one-child policies or forced abortions, claiming that these measures are necessary to ensure the right to life by preventing overpopulation and resource depletion.

Case Study: A government might enforce a strict one-child policy, penalizing families that have more children, under the argument that limiting population growth is essential to ensuring that existing citizens have access to adequate resources and a better quality of life.

5. Denial of Life-Saving Treatments Based on Criteria:

Foundational Principle: Right to Life Twisted Aim: Rationing of Healthcare Based on Subjective Criteria

Example: Healthcare systems might ration life-saving treatments based on criteria such as age, disability, or economic status, arguing that resources must be allocated to those with the highest potential for a long life or societal contribution.

Case Study: In a hypothetical scenario, a healthcare system could decide to deny organ transplants to individuals over a certain age, arguing that younger patients should have priority because they have more years ahead of them. This could lead to discriminatory practices that undermine the right to life for vulnerable groups.

6. Health Measures and Catastrophising Health Emergencies:

Foundational Principle: Right to Life

Twisted Aim: Exaggeration of Health Threats for Control

Example: The right to life can be manipulated to justify extreme health measures during emergencies. Governments or organizations might exaggerate health threats, such as pandemics, to impose strict controls, restrict freedoms, and justify extensive surveillance, even when such measures may not be proportionate to the actual threat.

Case Study: During a pandemic, authorities might enforce severe lock-downs, extensive monitoring of personal health data, and mandatory vaccinations, arguing these measures are necessary to protect the right to life. While some measures may be justified, overreach can lead to significant infringements on personal freedoms and privacy.

These hypothetical examples demonstrate how the right to life, a principle meant to protect and preserve human dignity, can be distorted to justify actions that ultimately undermine the very essence of this right. This stark reality underscores an urgent and unequivocal call to vigilance. We must recognize that the true threat to our rights often comes not from external adversaries, but from within—disguised as well-intentioned policies and protective measures.

We cannot afford to be complacent. The very fabric of our societal principles can be unravelled by those who manipulate foundational ideals for their gain. This manipulation not only corrupts the principles themselves but also erodes public trust and the moral integrity of our institutions. By remaining vigilant and demanding transparency, we hold those in power accountable, ensuring that their actions align with the genuine intent of safeguarding human dignity and rights.

Ethical considerations must be at the forefront of policy-making and implementation. It's not enough to have principles on paper; we must actively engage in their interpretation and application to prevent their distortion. We must challenge policies that seem overreaching, question motives that appear self-serving, and resist measures that infringe on our freedoms under the guise of protection.

Ultimately, the preservation of our rights hinges on our collective awareness and willingness to act. By steadfastly upholding the true spirit of foundational principles like the right to life, we protect not only our own dignity and freedom but also that of future generations. Let us remain ever watchful, ever questioning, and ever committed to the ethical application of the values we hold dear. The stakes are too high to do otherwise.