• Human rights are moral principles or norms,[1] which describe certain standards

of human behaviour, and are regularly protected as legal

rights in municipal and international law.[2] They are commonly understood as
inalienable[3] fundamental rights "to which a person is inherently entitled simply
because she or he is a human being,"[4] and which are "inherent in all human
beings"[5]regardless of their nation, location, language, religion, ethnic origin or
any other status.[3] They are applicable everywhere and at every time in the sense
of being universal,[1] and they are egalitarian in the sense of being the same for
everyone.[3] They are regarded as requiring empathy and the rule of law[6] and
imposing an obligation on persons to respect the human rights of others,[1][3] and
it is generally considered that they should not be taken away except as a result
of due process based on specific circumstances;[3] for example, human rights may
include freedom from unlawful imprisonment, torture, and execution
• The doctrine of human rights has been highly influential within international law, global, and
regional institutions.[3] Actions by states and non-governmental organisations form a basis
of public policy worldwide. The idea of human rights[8] suggests that "if the public discourse
of peacetime global society can be said to have a common moral language, it is that of
human rights." The strong claims made by the doctrine of human rights continue to provoke
considerable scepticism and debates about the content, nature and justifications of human
rights to this day. The precise meaning of the term right is controversial and is the subject of
continued philosophical debate;[9] while there is consensus that human rights encompasses
a wide variety of rights[5] such as the right to a fair trial, protection against enslavement,
prohibition of genocide, free speech,[10] or a right to education, there is disagreement about
which of these particular rights should be included within the general framework of human
rights;[1] some thinkers suggest that human rights should be a minimum requirement to
avoid the worst-case abuses, while others see it as a higher standard
• Human rights are the most fundamental and important of
rights. They are the rights that the government in the
United States spelled out in the Bill of Rights and the
Constitution, and they are the rights that the United
Nations aims to protect for all people. These rights would
exist even without government protection or
intervention.
•
• The right to life.
• The right to liberty and freedom.
• The right to the pursuit of happiness.
• The right to live your life free of discrimination .
he right to control what happens to your own body and to make medical
.decisions for yourself.
• The right to grow old.
• The right to a fair trial and due process of the law.
• The right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment.
• The right to be free from torture.
• The right to freedom of speech.
• The right to freely associate with whomever you like and to join groups
of which you'd like to be a part.
• The right to freedom of thought .
?
• A Human Rights Act will provide a range of enforceable remedies if our human
rights have been breached.
•
One of the strengths of a Human Rights Act is that it will provide Queenslanders
with an avenue to seek justice if our rights have been violated. If our human rights
have been breached, we should have access to appropriate remedies.
•
A Human Rights Act is also likely to be educational. By clearly stating
Queensland’s human rights and related responsibilities, a Human Rights Act will
promote a greater awareness of, and respect for, human rights within
government and throughout the community. If we have a strong human rights
culture in Queensland, human rights problems will be more easily prevented.
• Negative and positive rights (not to be confused with negative and positive liberties) are rights
that respectively oblige either action (positive rights) or inaction (negative rights). These obligations
may be of either a legal or moral character. The notion of positive and negative rights may also be
applied to liberty rights.
• To take an example involving two parties in a court of law: Adrian has a negative right to x against
Clay if and only if Clay is prohibited from acting upon Adrian in some way regarding x. In contrast,
Adrian has a positive right to x against Clay if and only if Clay is obliged to act upon Adrian in some
way regarding x. A case in point, if Adrian has a negative right to life against Clay, then Clay is
required to refrain from killing Adrian; while if Adrian has a positive right to life against Clay, then
Clay is required to act as necessary to preserve the life of Adrian.
• Rights considered negative rights may include civil and political rights such as freedom of speech,
life, private property, freedom from violent crime, freedom of religion, habeas corpus, a fair trial,
freedom from slavery.
• Rights considered positive rights, as initially proposed in 1979 by the Czech jurist Karel Vasak, may
include other civil and political rights such as police protection of person and property and the right
to counsel, as well as economic, social and cultural rights such as food, housing, public
education, employment, national security, military, health care, social security, internet access, and a
minimum standard of living. In the "three generations" account of human rights, negative rights are
often associated with the first generation of rights, while positive rights are associated with the
second and third generations.
• Some philosophers (see criticisms) disagree that the negative-positive rights distinction is useful or
valid.
Steps taken to Protect Human Rights in India

• Sati Practice has been prohibited in India.

• The minimum age for marriage has been fixed by law. A boy below
the age of 21 and a girl below the age of 18 cannot marry.
• The Protection of Human Rights Act, was enacted in 1993.
• Right to Information act was passed in 2005.
• Right to education has been accepted as a fundamental right in
India. The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education
Act was passed in 2009.
• Child Labor (below the age of 14) is prohibited in factories, and
mines.
 Conclusion

• There is always a hierarchy in the subjects of human

rights law. No human rights can be detracted from
the individual’s human rights, and human rights laws
recognize certain rights of the groups. Moreover, the
diversity of the cultures and civilization, beliefs and
traditions, history and aspirations reflected in polico-
legal system, give rise to ever changing meaning to
‘human rights’.