FUNDAMENTAL HUMAN RIGHTS IN UK AND PAKISTAN

A Critical Analysis & A Comparative Study of the Recognition of Fundamental Human Rights in the United Kingdom (UK) and Pakistan



Table of Content

CHAPTER-I: INTRODUCTION3

Aims and Objectives of the Study4

CHAPTER-II: LITERATURE REVIEW6

Kinds of Rights7

Legal Rights9

Moral Rights10

History of Rights13

The Development of Rights in Modern-Day Societies16

The Nature of Rights18

Declaration of Human Rights25

State of Fundamental Human Rights in Pakistan27

Women and Human Rights in Pakistan28

Children and Human Rights in Pakistan29

International Human Rights As Partisan Standards36

Neutrality and Paternalism43

Decency and Minimal Legitimacy51

Religious Minorities and Human Rights in Pakistan60

The Systematic Study of Repressive Behavior61

The Democratic Proposition and the Effect of Regime Type65

CHAPTER-III: DATA AND METHODOLOGY72

Operationalization73

Strategy of Investigation80

CHAPTER-IV: RESULTS AND FINDINGS83

A Question of Endurance87

Dynamics Of Change And Reflections On The Democratic Proposition92

CHAPTER-V: CONCLUSION97

BIBLIOGRAPHY100

CHAPTER-I: INTRODUCTION

In general, the term right is used to describe a person's entitlement. For example, people claiming an entitlement to say what they think express a right of freedom of speech. In modern-day societies, it appears that claims to entitlements are proliferating; matters as diverse as liberty, abortion, health care, privacy, human welfare, euthanasia, capital punishment, and suicide are all steeped in claims to certain rights. Indeed, the term rights is used extensively in relation to a vast array of contentious matters; debates concerning politics, morality, justice, and fairness are especially peppered with claims to rights. The notion of rights is now also commonly used in relation to claims concerning inanimate objects, plants, and nonhuman animals. It becomes important therefore to consider exactly what we mean by “rights.”

The language employed in relation to rights is, however, problematic. Some rights are, on occasion, described as “fundamental.” This suggests a hierarchy of rights, some of which are of greater importance, in terms of morality or otherwise, while others are simply rights. It may be that in more developed societies the rights that are seen to be fundamental to civil society have been enshrined in their constitutions. But “fundamental rights” could also refer to those rights that are the minimum entitlement of every person no matter their society's stage of development. The term natural rights is sometimes employed in this regard. Life, liberty, property, and equality are often cited as “fundamental natural rights” for the reason that they underlie or are a necessary condition for the enjoyment of all other rights. It is also claimed that natural rights are implicit in human nature.

On other occasions, some rights are described as “inalienable.” For example, an individual's freedom, dignity, and choice are commonly described as inalienable rights. These particular rights are also sometimes described as “moral rights.” But it is sometimes difficult to determine whether fundamental is one and the same as inalienable or moral or otherwise.

Aims and Objectives of the Study

The main objective of this research is to provide a critical analysis and comparative study of the recognition of fundamental human rights in the United Kingdom and Pakistan. This research will look to show that despite the clear social and legal differences between the two jurisdictions, there are many differences with regards to the recognition ...