Democracy and Human Rights

“True Democracy is that which ensures maximum good for maximum number of peoples”

Democracy does not means merely majority rule; it means majority rule coupled with Human Rights. In the absence of Human Rights, Democracy is not possible, Liberty, Freedom of dissent, rule of law and all other matters which go to consitute Human Rights are necessary so that Democracy should be maintained. This was so clear after the second world war that the United Nations was founded with two objects, not with one: The First object was to prevent war in the future and the second object was to protect and promote Human Rights. This is given in the charter of the United Nations because the whole history of the second world war showed the important of Human Rights without which no Democracy was possible, no freedom was possible.

Human Rights can be regarded as the civic counterpart of political power which is vested in those who govern the State. There is power of State and there is power of the people arising from Human Rights. As Jai Prakash Narayan use to say, what we want is to increace people power – What is called “Lok Shakti” which is developed by propagation of Human Rights among the people and their enforcement by the people. The Lok Shakti must be mare powerful than the Raj Shakti, he said.

Democracy is established when people’s power dominates over the power of the State. Actually the where movement of Human Rights is a people’s movement. It is a civic counterpart of the political power of the government established in the country. That is the scope and importance of Human Rights. There is hardly and Human Rights which is not included in United Nations 1966 convention.

It is true that in the present Indian situation there is corruption from top to bottom, all sorts of power-politics, lack of principle, morality detached from politics, making the situation worse all the time. No doubt there is darkness coming down from the top. They are coming from the awakening which we find amongst the poor people of this country-the scheduled castes, scheduled tribes and other poorer people.

But there is a denger involved. The danger arises from the tendency of government at present of overriding Human Rights by taking advantage of the situation created by the growth of terrorism. The point, however, is that when police arrest a person, he is merely a suspect. Police have some information which may be wrong or may even have been givern by an enemy of the person who is arrested.

We may at the most ask question to the person who is arrested and make other enquiries. But the police use all the severe third degree methods. I know that those methods are. No law allows the police to torture; no law allow the police to take the law into their own hands and arrest a person on suspicion and kill him and declars that he died in an encounter. Every time a person is arrested or disappears, the commission asks that the police must give an explanation. I have heared police officers saying that this is wrong and there is no place for the Human Rigths Commission in India.

In 2000, the Commission recommended a series of important legislative, institutional and practical measures to consolidate democracy (resolution 2000/47); and in 2002, the Commission declared the following as essential elements of democracy:

• Respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms

• Freedom of association

• Freedom of expression and opinion

• Access to power and its exercise in accordance with the rule of law

• The holding of periodic free and fair elections by universal suffrage and by secret ballot as the

   expression of the will of the people

• A pluralistic system of political parties and organizations

• The separation of powers

• The independence of the judiciary

• Transparency and accountability in public administration

• Free, independent and pluralistic media.

Recommendations & Conclusion

Human rights and liberal democracy are not merely complementary, rather, they are interdependent.  A democracy that is substantive as well as procedural cannot function without human rights, just as human rights, meaning civil, political, economic, social, and cultural rights, cannot be ensured in the absence of democracy. 

n the case of Palestine, a foundation exists for both the realization of human rights and the development of a substantive democracy, but both internal and external factors have hindered the building of viable institutions to actualize those ideals.  Greater attention thus needs to be given to the development of mechanisms such as elections, political parties, and separation of powers, and the restructuring of institutions including the judiciary branch and security sector. 

Despite the absence of these institutions to date, the will and perseverance of the Palestinian people, through both civil society and direct participation, has continued to push forward the democracy and human rights movements.  Thus, attention must be given to these bottom-up efforts of popular participation, in addition to the top-down efforts of institution-building, if a liberal democracy is to be established.  To be sure, no amount of institutional reform will be sustainable if it does not develop in tandem with popular will and public participation.  For this reason, it is necessary for civil society organizations and actors to continue to facilitate political participation and raise public awareness, and it is imperative that individuals and communities seize opportunities to demonstrate their will.  Media institutions in particular can play a key role in this process by serving as a means of popular communication, education, and mobilization.  The human rights framework can be helpful for developing direction and coordination for these efforts, and can integrate the distinct yet interdependent ideals of peace and justice, and human rights and democracy.