In this extensive world where every other individual is mumbling about animal rights, having a person beaten and killed is something we all humans should be ashamed of. But who do we actually point our fingers to? The lawmakers who have been ratifying conventional laws to its domestic legislation since decades or us for not being able to rescue ourselves and burdening the parent like state for something the state doesn’t even have capacity to deal with it. I believe we blame the implementation procedure that is equivalent to the whole concept of good governance. It is usually said that in order to sincerely measure a country’s development mechanism, we need to focus our minds on three key factors. Those three factors comprise of the government itself at first, secondly the laws and then most importantly its implement procedure. Well as for my understanding, these three factors in a combined manner are considered to be called good governance. The term good governance is a vague term that shields a large extent and that solely relies on those key factors.
Human Rights are the inalienable rights that every human is entitled to. These rights historically entered through religious textbooks that later enlightened and got recognized as natural rights. However, the existence of World wars and attacks made it seem as if those natural rights were just to be limited as a jurist formulated concept in those torn pages. Whatsoever by avoiding the trend and tending to ensure such rights, League of Nations came into existence which later on its downfall ensured its expanse and therefore got recognized as the United Nations. Hence the sole reasoning for the construction of United Nations was to ensure basic rights that every human deserved by influencing the states through treaties and conventions and therefore making them to encompass such rights in their legal procedure. Since 193 members are a member of UN till date, I believe UN has been able to achieve its goals.
Good governance is generally linked with various grounds. However, since the actuality of the state exclusively depends on its citizens, good governance in the turf of human rights is the foremost subject that the state holders require to be attentive on as that statistics of it provides a approximated view of the country’s situation. Being able to ensure human rights to every citizen and therefore be able to act against the culprits who involve themselves in crimes is an example of good governance in human rights. Human Rights entirely depends on its state actors. State actors in this context means individuals who are given the authority to protect the citizens and their rights. This emerged concept gives a raw idea of what a state performer should be like. The state thespians should be uncorrupted, sincere and fair. Uncorrupted and sincere with his work and therefore fair enough to be able to provide justice. These three aspects embrace of the three main stakes of discipline. I believe that these three potentials are the root where good governance stands.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights came into existence on 10 Dec 1948 that ensured 30 human rights. Since then a lot of treaties and conventions came into existence that tried its level best to endure human rights as mentioned in UDHR. Many states ratified those treaties and introduced them in their law books. Although this act seems to be mesmerising and hopeful, the reality is somewhat different as some of those states aren’t able to fulfil its promises and that those endurance have just been enclosed as a mere agreement. Treaties such as ICCPR, ICESCR and other 7 core treaties have been ratified by most of the states, but international platform being just a moral obligation without any actual penalties, these aren’t taken seriously. To provide a reasoning towards my statement, I would like to take an example of our so-called neighbouring country India. India has ratified ICCPR. However, the armies and policemen are being involved in violence against the protestors of the bias amendment of the citizenship bill against Muslims. India being a democratically evolved independent country, people are allowed to protest against the bills passed by the lawmakers. However, indulging in such activities comprises of a severe violation of human rights of the people of India and that if the judicial body won’t be able to take measures and provide penalties, the laws ratified would just turn out to be a huge failure. In addition, the verdict given in Pakistan with the subject to torture even after the death is humiliating and in core violation of human rights.
Similarly, with respect to endurance of human rights in Nepal, the situation has worsened. National Human Rights Commission was formulated 2000 and came into existence in the year 2002. However as per the report, National Human Rights Commission hasn’t been able to meet the expectations of the people. It has still not been able to solve cases that were about 12-13 years back and as the phrase justice delayed is justice denied, National human rights commission has failed to pave its way. Sadly, in today’s date, National Human Rights Commission consists of nothing but just a handful of cases that are also enclosed in bulky files. In addition, the Nepalese government has still not been able provide the basic requisites such as education, health, shelter, food, clean drinking water, equality that are a must to ensure human dignity. Therefore, by not being able to abide by its promises, the existence of international platform seems to be useless.
Good Governance is something that depends on the state itself. An international platform can at maximum provide obligations for a state to fulfill but however we can’t deny the fact that the situations of humans in the states relied on the legal nature of laws of the state and that nothing can be done to alter this internationally. This is the reason as to why the situation of the humans from a person living in US differs from the person living in North Korea. This is a harsh reality and that we are bound to accept this and that if the situation doesn’t take a drastic change, in no time democracy will just be a synonym of multi-lateral autocracy. Laws are just a handful of writings if they don’t get implemented. Hence for a better country, the state is compelled to take necessary measures and that I hope one fine day every human will stand on the same grounds with respect to the area of human rights.
By : Alangkrita Upadhayay