Human rights are fundamental entitlements and freedoms claimed by every person because they are human. Their meaning, scope and enforcement are contested, making them central to the IB Global Politics thematic study of rights and justice.
Why Are Human Rights Contested?
The 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights identifies rights including life, liberty, equality, education and freedom of expression. However, it is not legally binding. Rights become enforceable through national law or binding treaties, such as the European Convention on Human Rights.
Different actors disagree over which rights take priority, who possesses them and who must protect them. These debates concern power, because actors influence definition and enforcement, and sovereignty, because international expectations may challenge state authority.
| Contested distinction | Meaning and example |
|---|---|
| Universal versus culturally relative | Universalists argue rights apply equally everywhere; cultural relativists emphasize local values. Uganda's 2023 Anti-Homosexuality Act shows conflict between state-supported norms and international claims to equality and privacy. |
| Negative versus positive | Negative rights require freedom from interference, such as freedom from arbitrary detention. Positive rights require action and resources, such as education or healthcare. South Africa's Constitutional Court has assessed government provision through constitutional socioeconomic rights. |
| Individual versus collective | Individual rights protect persons; collective rights protect groups. The 2007 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples recognizes collective claims to culture, land and self-determination. |
A common misconception is that international recognition automatically protects human rights. Protection depends on duty bearers, institutions, resources, political will and accountability mechanisms.
Exam Technique
For both SL and HL, treat rights as contested concepts, not a fixed list. Define the relevant right, identify rights holders and duty bearers, present competing perspectives, and use a specific contemporary case to evaluate whether formal recognition produces effective protection.
