Do you agree that universal human right is valid for all? Why and how?

Since independent scholars and development thinkers including Amartya Sen has widely discussed on different aspect of the validity of the universal human rights so for start I would not agree with the claim that universal human rights are valid for all. However, I insist that there are some minimum standard of values including civil and political liberties, non-violence, equality and right to live that everybody should have respect.

The debate over the validity of universal human rights echoes from the two different corners of this world, western countries including USA and eastern countries including Singapore and China. United Nations World Conference on Human Rights in Austria, the Vienna Declaration states – “All human rights are universal, indivisible and interdependent and interrelated”. Not agreeing totally, In the same conference, the foreign minister of Singapore warned gave his statement-‘universal recognition of the ideal of human rights can be harmful if universalism is used to deny or mask the reality of diversity’ (Sen, 2000, p.149). This debate, recognized as Lee’s Thesis, argues over the incompatibility of western-imposed human rights with the diversified and heterogeneous eastern societies where “values do not regard freedom to be important in the way that it is regarded in the West”(Sen, 1997). China’s statement in the Human Right conference “Individuals must put the states’ rights before their own.” There are hardcore criticism against human rights which understand the spreading of human rights as the imposition of political ideology from western into other parts and hence with it comes the rest of the liberal packages (Treanor, 2004).

Some criticizes the acceptance of Human Rights as the outcome of “Self-Orientalism ” (Chin-Dahler, 2010) which refers to the taken-for-granted follow of Human rights imposed by Western to the eastern world. Such debate over the validity of universal rights gave rise to the theory of Cultural relativism, which keeps the local cultural traditions (religious, political and legal practices) in center to determine the scope of civil and political rights.

The western accents in the UDHR document itself reflects from the article 4 which states that -No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms. Without disagreeing with its objective, the inclusion of slavery system reminds us the cultural practices prevalent during the context of the European colonialism or that of ancient western societies. That tempts us to question over the few democrats or the initiator of UDHR, grounding such provision on western practices. Because In eastern society, slavery never became an issue to revolt for.

Hence, universal human right are just the standards to follow but cannot be imposed on the whole world because some of the provision of UDHR might not be applicable in some countries whose cultural practices might not have been considered while drafting such documents.

 References

 

Adhikary, J. (2005). Nepalima Gareebeko esthiti: etihasik bibechana. In Bhaskar Gautam, Jaganath Adhikary, Purna basnet (eds.). Nepal ma gareebi ko bahas. Kathmandu; Martin Chautari, pp.49-67

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2009). 2009 H1N1 Flu (“Swine Flu”) and You. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/h1n1flu/qa.htm

Chin-Dahler, Patrick (2010). Universal human rights, cultural relativism and the Asian values debate. (February 25, 2012) <Retrieved from http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2010/10/09/universal-human-rights-cultural-relativism-and-the-asian-values-debate/>

Diana Ayton-Shenker, (1995).The Challenge of Human Rights and Cultural Diversity. (February 25, 2012) <Retrieved from http://www.un.org/rights/dpi1627e.htm>

Sen, A .(1997).”Human Rights and Asian Values,” (February 25, 2012) retrieved from < http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/sen.htm>

Sen, A. (2000). Development as Freedom. New Delhi; Oxford University Press

Shakya, S. (2009). Unleashing Nepal past, present and future of the economy. New Delhi; Penguin Group

Treanor, P. (2004).Why human rights are wrong. (February 25, 2012) Retrieved from http://web.inter.nl.net/users/Paul.Treanor/human-rights.html

READING MATERIAL ….

Do you have to be rich before you can provide universal education and health care?

Theoretically, being rich should not be a precondition to have access to universal education and health care facilities because the provision of universal education and health care system has been included in the Article 25 of Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Also, The broadening horizon of democratic governments and their flexibility towards welcoming international donor agencies has facilitated the access of universal education and health care system irrespective of whether one have money or not. Nepal is a vigilant example.

If I was citizen of Nordic countries including Spain, Italy, UK, German then I can have access to health care facilities through the legal mechanism enforced by the government in the form of different insurance act irrespective of whether I am rich or not. Similarly, universal primary education and maternal care are one of the main goals of Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and different international donor agencies like World Bank and UNDP are working together to materialize such goals which favors the ‘poor’ citizen of poor Asian countries like Nepal and Sub-Saharan Africa.

The existing reality is that in general Nepalese people have to pay high cost to have access to health and education because we are not being able to separate the concept of ” basic health  and education’ and running for costly high standard of health facilities as well as strictly disciplined education at Boarding schools. In Afghanistan within the period of 7 years from 2001 to 2008, the number of girls attending schools jumped from 15,000 to 2.2 million as the consequence of joint venture of World Bank and International Department Association (IDA). Though the data and facts might be deceptive and might not cover all factor behind the progress but one have sufficient point to agree that with the inflow of donor driven development projects  like MDGs, people access to health and education has increased irrespective of whether they had money or not.

So, one shouldn’t need money to have access for such basic needs because the prevalent happenings shows that such accesses are facilitated either by government alone like that of Nordic countries whose income strengths are very high or international donor agencies like World Banka and UNDP in poor countries whose government and people can’t afford.

 

References

Adhikary, J. (2005). Nepalima Gareebeko esthiti: etihasik bibechana. In Bhaskar Gautam, Jaganath Adhikary, Purna basnet (eds.). Nepal ma gareebi ko bahas. Kathmandu; Martin Chautari, pp.49-67

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2009). 2009 H1N1 Flu (“Swine Flu”) and You. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/h1n1flu/qa.htm

Chin-Dahler, Patrick (2010). Universal human rights, cultural relativism and the Asian values debate. (February 25, 2012) <Retrieved from http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2010/10/09/universal-human-rights-cultural-relativism-and-the-asian-values-debate/>

Diana Ayton-Shenker, (1995).The Challenge of Human Rights and Cultural Diversity. (February 25, 2012) <Retrieved from http://www.un.org/rights/dpi1627e.htm>

Sen, A .(1997).”Human Rights and Asian Values,” (February 25, 2012) retrieved from < http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/sen.htm>

Sen, A. (2000). Development as Freedom. New Delhi; Oxford University Press

Shakya, S. (2009). Unleashing Nepal past, present and future of the economy. New Delhi; Penguin Group

Treanor, P. (2004).Why human rights are wrong. (February 25, 2012) Retrieved from http://web.inter.nl.net/users/Paul.Treanor/human-rights.html

 

Has democracy been helpful to reduce poverty in Nepal?

If one observe the post 1990s poverty indicator issued by World Bank then its crystal clear that Nepal’s poverty increased to 44.4% (1995-96) from 41.4% (1984-85) and 33% (1976-97). To be noted, post 1990s political history of Nepal marks the radical shift from traditional ‘isolationism and protectionism’ (Shakya, 2009, p.173) economic policies imposed by Royal autocratic actors to ‘free and autonomous liberal market’ economic policies advocated by neo-liberal democratic forces. The aforementioned facts and background directly questions over the restoration of democracy and its positive consequences over the poverty reduction.

 

However if one analyses the nature of poverty that has grasped Nepal then it is evident from the available literature that generally two kinds of poverty exist in Nepal. First, one is urban poverty, which covers the minor section of major cities of Nepal having low-income strength and relatively lower standard of living despite having access to wide opportunities created by liberal democratic environment in city area. The second one is the Rural poverty which covers the major bulk of populations of villages of Nepal which have little or no access to opportunities given by free democratic change. To be precise, urban poverty decreased to 17.8% (1995-96) from 19.2% (1984-85) and 22% (1976-77) while rural poverty (which is dominant in Nepal) increased to 46.6% (1995-96) from 43.1% (1984) and 33% (1976-77). these changes in poverty indicators and increasing free market policy based on democratic principles suggest that the democracy Nepal restored in 1990 though opened up global market, issued foreign investment policy, prepared and implemented various five year development plans couldn’t distribute those basic opportunities uniformly to all Nepalese. The urban population, which were already rich and had strong hold in market, grabbed the opportunities leaving the major section of rural population, which were still finding hard to sustain their daily life. This tragic phenomenon finds its relevance in Amartya Sen’s assertion that Democracy can flourish only if it guarantees equality and equal shares of benefit and losses (Sen, 2000, p.187), which is quite contrary in Nepalese context. Sen’s conceptual framework of democracy and freedom might have failed to decrease Nepal’s poverty because Nepalese government took the face value of democracy and failed to materialize equal access of those freedoms and accompanying opportunities to all the people of Nepal.

However, the donor-driven programs and projects related to poverty alleviation  including Millennium Development Goals are also the outcome of democracy in one or the other way. That has been taken as somehow effective to reduce poverty because the major section of Nepalese population living in rural areas are experiencing their basic human and economic needs including primary health care, primary education, minimizing child mortality and access to employment opportunities through donor-driven programs in post 1990s though previous autocratic government system failed to address the issue of poverty even after starting to receive aid during 1950s and 1960s.

Hence, it can be agreed that democracy in Nepal has created free market and environment for exercising various political rights including voting rights but then since democracy, in Sen’s term, failed to remove those unfreedom from the marginalized and isolated section of rural area, as it was during Panchayat regime and Rana regime, democracy hasn’t been so much effective in reducing poverty.

 

References

Adhikary, J. (2005). Nepalima Gareebeko esthiti: etihasik bibechana. In Bhaskar Gautam, Jaganath Adhikary, Purna basnet (eds.). Nepal ma gareebi ko bahas. Kathmandu; Martin Chautari, pp.49-67

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2009). 2009 H1N1 Flu (“Swine Flu”) and You. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/h1n1flu/qa.htm

Chin-Dahler, Patrick (2010). Universal human rights, cultural relativism and the Asian values debate. (February 25, 2012) <Retrieved from http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2010/10/09/universal-human-rights-cultural-relativism-and-the-asian-values-debate/>

Diana Ayton-Shenker, (1995).The Challenge of Human Rights and Cultural Diversity. (February 25, 2012) <Retrieved from http://www.un.org/rights/dpi1627e.htm>

Sen, A .(1997).”Human Rights and Asian Values,” (February 25, 2012) retrieved from < http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/sen.htm>

Sen, A. (2000). Development as Freedom. New Delhi; Oxford University Press

Shakya, S. (2009). Unleashing Nepal past, present and future of the economy. New Delhi; Penguin Group

Treanor, P. (2004).Why human rights are wrong. (February 25, 2012) Retrieved from http://web.inter.nl.net/users/Paul.Treanor/human-rights.html

 

Ethics in Communication

 

Communication according to Eunson (2005) is understood as a ‘the study of transfer of meaning’ (p. 2). Adhikary (2008a, p.3) explains communication as ‘process, human act and discipline of knowledge’ while also suggesting the consideration of ‘context’ to know what dimensions of communication are in current discourse. It is to be noted that communication as a discipline of knowledge or process does not find much relevance in combination with the notion of ethics so the discourse of ethics in communication directly leads to the details of ethical standards maintained by communication practitioners. According to Adhikary (2006), these ethical standards are further based on different ‘principles, religion and culture’ (p.6) which defines what is wrong and right. For example broadcasting the movie American Pie in Jay Nepal Hall may not be unanimously acceptable for Nepalese society because the culture of nudity is not accepted by Nepalese society and hence recognizing such phenomenon as unethical. Similarly, broadcasting the video clips showing someone beheading cow may not be appropriate to be broadcasted in Nepali Televisions because that hurts the Nepali sentiment but that does not mean that it cannot be broadcasted in other countries where people have no problem seeing such clip. The ‘Context’ aforementioned also means to explain that the same act may be ethical in some context but directly rejected somewhere else.

Communication as a profession refers to media practices and simultaneously our dealing with ethics in communication discourse automatically link us to the issues of ethics in those practices. The notion of ethics in ‘communication as a discipline’ comes into light when there is incorporation of ethics as a subject within the curriculum of communication studies (Adhikary, 2008b, p.293).

Ethics in communication as a concept refers to the state of ethical considerations in communication practices. The term ‘ethics’ and ‘communication’ have their diverse meanings and definitions. The dictionary meaning of communication is- ‘the exchange of thoughts, messages or information, as by speech, signals, writing or behavior’ while McQuail defines communication as ‘process of increased commonality or sharing between participants’ (Adhikary, 2008, p.5). Similarly ethics is a system of principle that guides action according to Potter ( Potter, 2006:55 as cited in KC, 2009, p.7) while Adhikary (2006) relates ethics with distinguishing between good and evil in the world, between right and wrong human actions, and between virtuous and non-virtuous characteristics of people (p.1).

Ethics in communication as a concept is a wide discourse among development thinkers and media professionals because media in today’s dynamic age has to deal with many controversial issues during which might create confusions and never-ending debate among practitioners while taking decision regarding what is right and wrong. In such situation, ethics provides guidelines to take appropriate decision. For Nepal, Journalistic code of conduct issued by Press Council Nepal is such an example.

How to decide whether the act or decision made by communication practitioners are moral or not? One may find several approaches to analyze the phenomenon but no one can deny that everybody should follow some universally accepted values like humanity, brotherhood or fraternity and non violence. The central idea is the inquiry towards the morality of the behavior or actions depending upon the standard of values and norms followed in the particular society. These codes of behaviors are further explained by different principles and theories including categorical imperatives, Golden Rule, Stuart Mill’s theory of utilitarianism and social relativism (Wimmer & Dominick, 2011, p. 66). The answers might differ from eastern and western perspectives because they both have their own ethical standards.

There has been literature on ethical practices in media in south Asia by Kshetri (2009, p. 25) where the present condition of media ethics in Nepal, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Bhutan, Maldives, Afghanistan is explored. In context of Nepal, Kshetri has given his critical review over the unethical media practices of the then only state-owned Gorkhapatra Sansthan, which used to publish the content just to portray loyalty to Royal families instead of correctly informing people (p. 31). Similarly, Bhuwan KC (2009) explores the practice of journalistic ethics in Nepal where he states that the practice of ethics in Nepali media was challenging because Nepali journalism has its history of advocating for political cause for a long time (p. 22).

Hence, it is safe to infer from aforementioned examples that ethics in communication practices varies from context as well as different ethical theories and principles that guides the particular society. In addition, this discourse gives space for other thinkers to make necessary ethical enquiry into several dimensions of communication as well.

 

References

Adhikary, N.M. (2006). Studying Mass media Ethics. Kathmandu: Prashanti Pustak Bhandar

Adhikary, N.M. (2008a). Communication, media and journalism An integrated study. Kathmandu: Martine Chautari

Adhikary, N.M. (2008b). Nepalima Media neetisastra adhyaan. In D. Humagai, P. Onta, S. Parajuli, K. Bhatta (Ed.), Media Adhyaan (pp293-305). Kathmandu: Martin Chautari

Bhuwan, K.C. (2009). Practice of journalistic Ethics in Nepal. In. Bhuwan KC (Ed.), MBM methodology of Media Ethics (pp 7-24). Kathmandu: Madan Bhandari Memorial College

Eunson, B. (2005). Communicating in the 21st century. Sydney:John Wiley & Sons Australia ltd.

Kshetri, I.D. (2009). Ethical practices in media in south Asia. In. Bhuwan KC (Ed.), MBM methodology of Media Ethicsi(pp 25-46). Kathmandu: Madan Bhandari Memorial College

Wimmer, Roger D., and Joseph R. Dominick. (2011). Mass Media Research An Introduction. 9th ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 2003

 

 

 

 

Legalizing the Prostitution is not ‘pricking the balloon’

A helium-filled balloon if left ‘ignored’ will inevitably burst one day, nevertheless its hazard can be minimized by placing it in proper space or deflating it tactically. Prostitution, which has been widely discussed as ‘too big to fight’ or ‘has always existed from ancient civilization’ issue looks more like a helium balloon left ‘ignored’ which is dormantly nourishing the proliferation of street sex workers, human traffickers and pimps, viruses of STDs and AIDs, women exploiters ( since female prostitutes comprise major shares in sex market), in case of Nepal ,dance bar and massage centers, lodges and hotels near bus parks. The vast literature in this debatable issue has, out of ignorance, understood the use of legal tools to validate and manage prostitution as ‘pricking’. Legalizing the prostitution leads to the respect of labor, economic prosperity and freedom of the prostitutes (male, female and transgender) because legal means are meant for preventing those aforementioned hazards rather than ‘nourishing’.

There are mixed views regarding the legalization of prostitution, which in response has received criticisms and supports from different theoretical schools including feminism as the most prominent one. Prostitution or trade of flesh for money has existed from the ancient time as far as the Mesopotamia civilization (1800 BC) and the discourse of legalizing it echoes from the western theories and principles. Generally, the issue of legalization is grounded on the parody that prostitution is believed to be the ‘oldest ‘ profession and states find almost impossible to curb it (Shrivastava, 2011). Charles Lammam (2005) informs that prostitution existed both in legal (ancient times) and illegal form (modern times) and is expected to exist in coming days. People working for women empowerment asserts that legalizing the prostitution is infact ‘facilitating’ human traffickers and women exploitation (Gupta, 2009).

Proponents of the idea supporting prostitution legalization hold the view that such effort secures the freedom of sex worker to use their body in the way they choose. However, what if ‘choice’ results from the outcome of unequal employment opportunities and capabilities? That gives rise to number of issues to be dealt with including equality, women’s special rights and sex education. To come to point, legalizing the prostitution secure respect for their profession and access to additional health services and facilities because sex worker are relatively more vulnerable to physical and psychological trauma and state should be responsible in addressing their needs.

Obviously, legalizing the ‘oldest profession’ leads to the considerable shares in GDP at macro level and income source for prostitutes at micro level. Research shows that the prostitution industry accounts for 5% of the GDP of the Netherlands, between 1 and 3% of Japanese GDP and in 1998, the International Labour Organization (ILO) estimated that prostitution accounted for between 2 and 14% of the total economic activity in Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines. Apart from stability income source, legalization might have other positive consequences.  It secures the basic health rights to prevent themselves from STDs and own right to knock the door of court for justice in case they are treated secondary to others. Development thinker Martha Nussbaum perceive social stigmatization of the prostitution as the main problem rather than prostitution itself in promoting the ‘subordinate’ image of women ( Nussbaum 1999 as cited in Laure, 2008).
The voice against the legalization generally echoes from the religious group and social activist working for women empowerment and anti-human trafficking. Ruchira Gupta, an Indian women fighting against sex trafficking through a organization Apne Aap Women Worldwide, criticizes the idea of legalizing the sex market because according to her, sex market has always served the powerful group of the society and legalizing it is ‘ sweeping under the rug”. While she also acknowledges the positive impact of prostitution legalization in Sweden, where sex workers have good health facilities and alternative way outs as well as prevented from vulnerability of sex traffickers. Social Activist Gupta’s assertion on disadvantages of legalizing sex market fails to address the fact that the special health facilities and special rights comes along with the process of legalization and not as a separate entity.

The ideas of Legalizing Prostitution are opposed by the group of radical feminism on the ground that that such effort only contributes to the ‘old’ social order of male domination (Laure, 2008). Since major shares of the sex market comprise of women, feminist often link the issue of prostitution with women exploitation and women being subordinate to men. Radical feminist (Bromberg, 2004) holds the view that a prostitute does not act out of free choice but is a victim of coercion in both its most subtle and direct forms. The ‘choice’ here might have pointed to the limited options available for illiterate and minor women who prefer to be prostitution rather die.

We see modern forms of illegal prostitution, though socially accepted, in the form of dance bar, nudity shows and pornography, but it’s time to ask – how long these forms of sex market will thrive and latently increase the violence and inequality and injustice? Therefore, legalization can be one of the most appropriate ways to channel the sex market for the prosperity of the sex workers as well as the nation. Critics repeatedly assert that legalization will facilitate the proliferation of pimps, violent sex activities and sex trafficking but one can argue that the sex traffickers and pimps are the legal responsibilities of the state rather than the villains for legal sex market. People’s desire for sex is inherent and prolongs till death, so legalizing sex trade will provide people to express their sexual desire in a manageable way which otherwise might have manifested in the form of sex crime like rape and abuses. So, better legalize prostitution rather leave it ‘ignored’ like a street dog.

References:

Gupta, Ruchira. (2009). “To let/For Sale?” < http://outlookindia.com/article.aspx?263361 >

Lammam, Charles (2005). “A case of Prostitution”. < http://www.peak.sfu.ca/the-peak/2005-3/issue7/op-prost.html>

Sarah Bromberg. (2004) ” Feminist Issues In Prostitution” <http://www.feministissues.com/issues.pdf>

Shrage, Laurie, (2008) “Feminist Perspectives on Sex Markets”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2008 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2008/entries/feminist-sex-markets/>.

Shrivastava, Richa. (2011). “Why Prostitution should not be legalized?”. http://www.mightylaws.in/545/prostitution-legalized