Three Generations of Human Rights

There are three overarching types of human rights norms: civil-political, socio-economic, and collective-
developmental (Vasek, 1977). The first two, which represent potential claims of individual persons against
the state, are firmly accepted norms identified in international treaties and conventions. The final type,
which represents potential claims of peoples and groups against the state, is the most debated and lacks
both legal and political recognition. Each of these types includes two further subtypes. Scholar Sumner B.
Twiss delineates a typology:
Civil-political human rights include two subtypes: norms pertaining to physical and civil security (for
example, no torture, slavery, inhumane treatment, arbitrary arrest; equality before the law) and norms
pertaining to civil-political liberties or empowerments (for example, freedom of thought, conscience, and
religion; freedom of assembly and voluntary association; political participation in ones society).
Socio-economic human rights similarly include two subtypes: norms pertaining to the provision of goods
meeting social needs (for example, nutrition, shelter, health care, education) and norms pertaining to the
provision of goods meeting economic needs (for example, work and fair wages, an adequate living
standard, a social security net).
Finally, collective-developmental human rights also include two subtypes: the self-determination of
peoples (for example, to their political status and their economic, social, and cultural development) and
certain special rights of ethnic and religious minorities (for example, to the enjoyment of their own
cultures, languages, and religions). (1998: 272)
This division of human rights into three generations was introduced in 1979 by Czech jurist Karel Vasak.
The three categories align with the three tenets of the French Revolution: liberty, equality, and fraternity.
First-generation, civil-political rights deal with liberty and participation in political life. They are strongly
individualistic and negatively constructed to protect the individual from the state. These rights draw from
those articulates in the United States Bill of Rights and the Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen in
the 18th century. Civil-political rights have been legitimated and given status in international law by
Articles 3 to 21 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the 1966 International Covenant on
Civil and Political Rights.
Second-generation, socio-economic human rights guarantee equal conditions and treatment. They are
not rights directly possessed by individuals but constitute positive duties upon the government to respect
and fulfill them. Socio-economic rights began to be recognized by government after World War II and, like
first-generation rights, are embodied in Articles 22 to 27 of the Universal Declaration. They are also
enumerated in the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights.
Third-generation, collective-developmental rights of peoples and groups held against their respective
states aligns with the final tenet of fraternity. They constitute a broad class of rights that have gained
acknowledgment in international agreements and treaties but are more contested than the preceding
types (Twiss, 2004). They have been expressed largely in documents advancing aspirational soft law,
such as the 1992 Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, and the 1994 Draft Declaration of
Indigenous Peoples Rights.
Though traditional political theory presents liberty and fraternity as inherently antagonistic (and therefore
would assert the incompatibility of collective-developmental rights with the preceding generations),
progressive scholars argue that the three generations are in fact deeply interdependent. For example,
Twiss argues that no single generation can be emphasized to the exclusion of others without jeopardizing
personas and communities over time, including jeopardizing the very interests represented in the type or
generation of rights being privileged. (1998: 276). He offers examples of self-defeating imbalances that
would result from the excessive prioritization of any one generation over another:
to emphasize civil-political rights to the exclusion of socioeconomic and collective-developmental rights
runs the risk of creating socially disadvantaged groups within a society to the degree of triggering
disruption, which, in turn, invites the counterresponse of repression. To emphasize socioeconomic rights
to the exclusion of civil-political rights runs the risk of ironically creating a situation where, without the
feedback of political participation, the advancement of socioeconomic welfare comes to be hampered or
inequitable. To emphasize collective-developmental rights to the exclusion of other types runs the risk of
not only fomenting a backlash against civil-political repression but also of under-cutting the equitable
distribution of the socioeconomic goods needed for the continuing solidarity of the society. (1998: 276)
Twiss rejects alleged incompatibilities between the three generations of rights. He asserts that, at worst,
there may by tension between such rights in specific societies and at periods of socio-historic transition,
but this does not mean tensions cannot be solved in a way that respects all three generations of rights.
Human rights are so thoroughly interconnected that it is difficult to conceive of them as operating properly
except in an interdependent and mutually supportive manner (1998: 276). 2
Although the three generations framework is a valuable conceptual tool for thinking about rights, it is
worth questioning some of its assumptions. Does the notion of a progression of rights and the metaphor
of age it is based on make sense? Do second generation rights create the background conditions
necessary for the exercise of first generation rights, as certain sections of the International Bill of Rights
suggest, or are it the other way around? Should second and third generation rights be viewed as
simultaneous? Does one generation take precedence over another, or are all equally important? Should
second and third generation rights even be considered rights, or are they something fundamentally
different?
The three generations framework contains within it room for many of the key debates about the nature of
rights. It also encourages us to take a critical approach in challenging our own assumptions about rights
as we begin to think about some of the real-world problems involved in the application of human rights in
the sections ahead.
First-generation human rights[edit]
First-generation human rights, often called "blue" rights, deal essentially with liberty and participation in
political life. They are fundamentally civil and political in nature: They serve negatively to protect the
individual from excesses of the state. First-generation rights include, among other things, the right to
life, equality before the law, freedom of speech, the right to a fair trial, freedom of religion and voting
rights. They were pioneered by the United States Bill of Rights and in France by the Declaration of the
Rights of Man and of the Citizen in the 18th century, although some of these rights and the right to due
process date back to the Magna Carta of 1215 and the Rights of Englishmen, which were expressed in
the English Bill of Rights in 1689.
They were enshrined at the global level and given status in international law first by Articles 3 to 21 of the
1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and later in the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights. In Europe, they were enshrined in the European Convention on Human Rights in 1953.
Second-generation human rights[edit]
Second-generation human rights are related to equality and began to be recognized by governments
after World War II. They are fundamentally economic, social, and cultural in nature. They guarantee
different members of the citizenry equal conditions and treatment. Secondary rights would include a right
to be employed in just and favorable condition, rights to food, housing and health care, as well as social
security and unemployment benefits. Like first-generation rights, they were also covered by the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights, and further embodied in Articles 22 to 28 of the Universal Declaration, and
the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights.
In the United States of America, President Franklin D. Roosevelt proposed a Second Bill of Rights,
covering much the same grounds, during his State of the Union Address on January 11, 1944. Today,
many nations, states, or groups of nations have developed legally binding declarations guaranteeing
comprehensive sets of human rights, e.g. the European Social Charter.
Some states have enacted some of these economic rights, e.g., New York State has enshrined the right
to a free education,[2][3] as well as "the right to organize and to bargain collectively,"[4] and workers
compensation,[5] in its constitutional law.
These rights are sometimes referred to as "red" rights. They impose upon the government the duty to
respect and promote and fulfill them, but this depends on the availability of resources. The duty is
imposed on the state because it controls its own resources. No one has the direct right to
housing and right to education. (In South Africa, for instance, the right is not, per se, to housing, but rather
"to have access to adequate housing,"[6] realised on a progressive basis.[7])
The duty of government is in the realization of these positive rights.
Third-generation human rights[edit]
Third-generation human rights are those rights that go beyond the mere civil and social, as expressed in
many progressive documents of international law, including the 1972 Stockholm Declaration of the United
Nations Conference on the Human Environment, the 1992 Rio Declaration on Environment and
Development, and other pieces of generally aspirational "soft law". Because of the present-day tilting
toward national sovereignty and the preponderance of would-be offender nations, these rights have been
hard to enact in legally binding documents.[citation needed]
The term "third-generation human rights" remains largely unofficial, just as the also-used moniker of
"green" rights, and thus houses an extremely broad spectrum of rights, including:
Group and collective rights
Right to self-determination
Right to economic and social development
Right to a healthy environment
Right to natural resources
Right to communicate and communication rights
Right to participation in cultural heritage
Rights to intergenerational equity and sustainability
The African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights ensures many of those: right to self-determination,
right to development, right to natural resources and right to satisfactory environment. [8] Some countries
also have constitutional mechanisms for safeguarding third-generation rights. For example, the
Hungarian Parliamentary Commissioner for Future Generations,[9] the Parliament of Finlands Committee
for the Future, and the erstwhile Commission for Future Generations in the Knesset in Israel.
Some international organizations have offices for safeguarding such rights. An example is the High
Commissioner on National Minorities of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe.
The Directorate-General for the Environment of the European Commission has as its mission "protecting,
preserving and improving the environment for present and future generations, and promoting sustainable
development."
A few jurisdictions have enacted provisions for environmental protection, e.g. New York's "forever wild"
constitutional article,[10] which is enforceable by action of the New York State Attorney General or by any
citizen Ex rel with the consent of the Appellate Division.[11]
Commentary[edit]
Maurice Cranston argued that scarcity means that supposed second-generation and third-generation
rights are not really rights at all.[12] If one person has a right, others have a duty to respect that right, but
governments lack the resources necessary to fulfill the duties implied by citizens' supposed second- and
third-generation rights.
Charles Kesler, a professor of government at Claremont McKenna College and senior fellow of
the Claremont Institute, has argued that second- and third-generation human rights serve as an attempt
to cloak political goals, which the majority may well agree are good things in and of themselves, in the
language of rights, and thus grant those political goals inappropriate connotations. In his opinion, calling
socio-economic goods "rights" inherently creates a related concept of "duties", so that other citizens have
to be coerced by the government to give things to other people in order to fulfill these new rights. He also
has stated that, in the US, the new rights create a "nationalization" of political decision-making at the
federal level in violation of federalism.[13] In his book Soft Despotism, Democracy's Drift, Paul Rahe, the
Charles O. Lee and Louise K. Lee Chair in Western Heritage at Hillsdale College, wrote that focusing on
equality-based rights leads to a subordination to the initial civil rights to an ever-expanding government,
which would be too incompetent to provide for its citizens correctly and would merely seek to subordinate
more rights.[14]
19th century philosopher Frederic Bastiat summarized the conflict between these negative and positive
rights by saying:
M. de Lamartine wrote me one day: "Your doctrine is only the half of my program; you hav
Economist F. A. Hayek has argued that the second generation concept of "social justice" cannot have any
practical political meaning:
No state of affairs as such is just or unjust: it is only when we assume that somebody is re
means, of course, that we can only have it at the price of the complete abolition of person
New York University School of Law professor of law Jeremy Waldron has written in response to critics of
the second-generation rights:
In any case, the argument from first-generation to second-generation rights was never supposed to be a
matter of conceptual analysis. It was rather this: if one is really concerned to secure civil or political liberty
for a person, that commitment should be accompanied by a further concern about the conditions of the
person's life that make it possible for him to enjoy and exercise that liberty. Why on earth would it be
worth fighting for this person's liberty (say, his liberty to choose between A and B) if he were left in a
situation in which the choice between A and B meant nothing to him, or in which his choosing one rather
than the other would have no impact on his life?" [17]
Hungarian socialist and political economist Karl Polanyi made the antithetical argument to Hayek in the
book The Great Transformation. Polanyi wrote that an uncontrolled free market would lead to repressive
economic concentration and then to a co-opting of democratic governance that degrades civil rights. [18]
World Conference on Human Rights opposed the distinction between civil and political rights (negative
rights) and economic, social and cultural rights (positive rights) that resulted the Vienna Declaration and
Programme of Action proclaiming that "all human rights are universal, indivisible, interdependent and
interrelated".[19]
Preamble
Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the
human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,
Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged
the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of
speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the
common people,
Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion
against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law,
Whereas it is essential to promote the development of friendly relations between nations,
Whereas the peoples of the United Nations have in the Charter reaffirmed their faith in fundamental
human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and women
and have determined to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,
Whereas Member States have pledged themselves to achieve, in co-operation with the United Nations,
the promotion of universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms,
Whereas a common understanding of these rights and freedoms is of the greatest importance for the full
realization of this pledge,
Now, Therefore THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY proclaims THIS UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN
RIGHTS as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every
individual and every organ of society, keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching
and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures, national
and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance, both among the
peoples of Member States themselves and among the peoples of territories under their jurisdiction.
Article 1.
All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and
conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Article 2.
Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any
kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin,
property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political,
jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be
independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.
Article 3.
Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.
Article 4.
No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their
forms.
Article 5.
No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
Article 6.
Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.
Article 7.
All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All
are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any
incitement to such discrimination.
Article 8.
Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the
fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law.
Article 9.
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.
Article 10.
Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in
the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.
Article 11.
(1) Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty
according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.
(2) No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or omission which did not
constitute a penal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor
shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the penal offence was
committed.
Article 12.
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor
to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against
such interference or attacks.
Article 13.
(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state.
(2) Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.
Article 14.
(1) Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution.
(2) This right may not be invoked in the case of prosecutions genuinely arising from non-political crimes or
from acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.
Article 15.
(1) Everyone has the right to a nationality.
(2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.
Article 16.
(1) Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to
marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its
dissolution.
(2) Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses.
(3) The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society
and the State.
Article 17.
(1) Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others.
(2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.
Article 18.
Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to
change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or
private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.
Article 19.
Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions
without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and
regardless of frontiers.
Article 20.
(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.
(2) No one may be compelled to belong to an association.
Article 21.
(1) Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen
representatives.
(2) Everyone has the right of equal access to public service in his country.
(3) The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in
periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret
vote or by equivalent free voting procedures.
Article 22.
Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security and is entitled to realization, through
national effort and international co-operation and in accordance with the organization and resources of
each State, of the economic, social and cultural rights indispensable for his dignity and the free
development of his personality.
Article 23.
(1) Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work
and to protection against unemployment.
(2) Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.
(3) Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his
family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social
protection.
(4) Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.
Article 24.
Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic
holidays with pay.
Article 25.
(1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of
his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right
to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of
livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.
(2) Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or
out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.
Article 26.
(1) Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and
fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education
shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of
merit.
(2) Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening
of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and
friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities of the United
Nations for the maintenance of peace.
(3) Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.
Article 27.
(1) Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to
share in scientific advancement and its benefits.
(2) Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any
scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author.
Article 28.
Everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in this
Declaration can be fully realized.
Article 29.
(1) Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality
is possible.
(2) In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are
determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and
freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare
in a democratic society.
(3) These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the
United Nations.
Article 30.
Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to
engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set
forth herein.
UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS
Simplified Version
This simplified version of the 30 Articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights has been created
especially for young people.
1. We Are All Born Free & Equal. We are all born free. We all have our own thoughts and ideas. We
should all be treated in the same way.
2. Dont Discriminate. These rights belong to everybody, whatever our differences.
3. The Right to Life. We all have the right to life, and to live in freedom and safety.
4. No Slavery. Nobody has any right to make us a slave. We cannot make anyone our slave.
5. No Torture. Nobody has any right to hurt us or to torture us.
6. You Have Rights No Matter Where You Go. I am a person just like you!
7. Were All Equal Before the Law. The law is the same for everyone. It must treat us all fairly.
8. Your Human Rights Are Protected by Law. We can all ask for the law to help us when we are not
treated fairly.
9. No Unfair Detainment. Nobody has the right to put us in prison without good reason and keep us
there, or to send us away from our country.
10. The Right to Trial. If we are put on trial this should be in public. The people who try us should not let
anyone tell them what to do.
11. Were Always Innocent Till Proven Guilty. Nobody should be blamed for doing something until it is
proven. When people say we did a bad thing we have the right to show it is not true.
12. The Right to Privacy. Nobody should try to harm our good name. Nobody has the right to come into
our home, open our letters, or bother us or our family without a good reason.
13. Freedom to Move. We all have the right to go where we want in our own country and to travel as we
wish.
14. The Right to Seek a Safe Place to Live. If we are frightened of being badly treated in our own
country, we all have the right to run away to another country to be safe.
15. Right to a Nationality. We all have the right to belong to a country.
16. Marriage and Family. Every grown-up has the right to marry and have a family if they want to. Men
and women have the same rights when they are married, and when they are separated.
17. The Right to Your Own Things. Everyone has the right to own things or share them. Nobody should
take our things from us without a good reason.
18. Freedom of Thought. We all have the right to believe in what we want to believe, to have a religion,
or to change it if we want.
19. Freedom of Expression. We all have the right to make up our own minds, to think what we like, to
say what we think, and to share our ideas with other people.
20. The Right to Public Assembly. We all have the right to meet our friends and to work together in
peace to defend our rights. Nobody can make us join a group if we dont want to.
21. The Right to Democracy. We all have the right to take part in the government of our country. Every
grown-up should be allowed to choose their own leaders.
22. Social Security. We all have the right to affordable housing, medicine, education, and childcare,
enough money to live on and medical help if we are ill or old.
23. Workers Rights. Every grown-up has the right to do a job, to a fair wage for their work, and to join a
trade union.
24. The Right to Play. We all have the right to rest from work and to relax.
25. Food and Shelter for All. We all have the right to a good life. Mothers and children, people who are
old, unemployed or disabled, and all people have the right to be cared for.
26. The Right to Education. Education is a right. Primary school should be free. We should learn about
the United Nations and how to get on with others. Our parents can choose what we learn.
27. Copyright. Copyright is a special law that protects ones own artistic creations and writings; others
cannot make copies without permission. We all have the right to our own way of life and to enjoy the good
things that art, science and learning bring.
28. A Fair and Free World. There must be proper order so we can all enjoy rights and freedoms in our
own country and all over the world.
29. Responsibility. We have a duty to other people, and we should protect their rights and freedoms.
30. No One Can Take Away Your Human Rights.