Chapter 1: Introduction
Timatatanga
Human rights are of vital importance for every person in New Zealand. They underlie
our expectations about life, education, health, work, our personal security,
equal opportunity and fair treatment, and our system of government. Respect for
each other’s human rights is a prerequisite for harmonious relations among
the diverse groups that make up New Zealand.
Human rights are equally vital to peace, security and sustainable development
worldwide. In recent decades, a significant proportion of humankind has benefited
from the extraordinary technical developments of our time and increasing living
standards. Yet in these first years of the 21st century war, terrorism, pervasive
poverty and epidemic disease threaten prospects for peace, security and sustainable
development. Distance is no longer sufficient to protect New Zealand from the
consequences of these threats. Internationally, human rights are increasingly
recognised as ‘at the core of every major challenge facing humanity’ (Annan,
1998, p.1). Sources of the growing global terrorism, for example, are to be found
in those places where respect for human rights is minimal and violations a daily
occurrence (Ignatieff, 2004).
Fifty-six years ago, in the immediate aftermath of the horrors of the Holocaust
and of world war, the nations of the world came together in Paris to adopt the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights. They did so because they believed that ‘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’ (UDHR,
1948, p.1), and that there needed to be a common understanding of those rights
and freedoms.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR,
1948) sums up the fundamental
values and principles that most New Zealanders would endorse as essential to
a decent life and a fair and just society.
In a powerful statement to the 1948 United Nations General Assembly in Paris
that voted to adopt the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, New Zealand’s
representative Colin Aikman emphasised the equal importance that we as a country
attached to all its articles. He went on to explain New Zealand’s ‘particular
satisfaction at the place which is given in the Declaration to social and economic
rights’:
There can be no difference of opinion as to the tyranny of privation and want.
There is no dictator more terrible than hunger. And we have found in New Zealand
that only with social security in its widest sense can the individual reach his
full stature. Therefore it can be understood why we emphasise the right to work,
the right to a standard of living adequate for health and well-being, and the
right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood
and old age. Also … the right to education, the right to rest and leisure,
and the right to freely participate in the cultural life of the community.
These social and economic rights can give the individual the normal conditions
of life which make for the larger freedom.
In 2003, New Zealanders told the Human Rights Commission that economic, social
and cultural rights are still as important to them as civil and political rights.
In this report, the Commission reviews how well the rights so passionately acclaimed
in 1948 are recognised and respected here in 2004, and examines their relevance
and value to 21st century New Zealand. The report includes a specific focus on
the contribution of human rights to a culture of harmonious race relations.
While there will always be legitimate disagreement about how best to realise
specific human rights, the international human rights framework provides the
basis for dignity, equality and security for every person, and standards by which
to measure the impact of the actions of the State and of others on people’s
lives.
An action plan for human rights – Mana ki te tangata
Top
This report is the first comprehensive assessment of the status of human rights
in New Zealand. It is one stage in the development of a national plan of action
for the promotion and protection of human rights in New Zealand.
Under the mandate established by amendments to the Human Rights Act in 2001,
the Human Rights Commission has two primary functions – to advocate respect
for human rights and to encourage harmonious relations in New Zealand society.
The mandate also includes specific responsibility for developing a national human
rights action plan; promoting better understanding of the human rights dimensions
of the Treaty of Waitangi, and providing leadership on equal employment opportunities
(Human Rights Act 1993).
The Action Plan will draw on the conclusions of this report. It will also draw
on the work being undertaken by the Commission on the human rights aspects
of the
Treaty of Waitangi – Te Mana I Waitangi, and on Framework for the Future
(2004 June),
the Equal Employment Opportunity Framework project, which assesses the status
of equality at work.
The Action Plan will identify and celebrate those areas where New Zealand is
already meeting and surpassing international standards. Where New Zealand’s
performance is weak, the plan will identify priorities and propose strategies
and actions for improvement.
Why are human rights important? He aha te hohonutanga o nga tika tangata?
Top
When the Commission asked New Zealanders about what they understood by human
rights, it became clear that – while they endorsed human rights as important
and had a strong general sense of what human rights are (most consistently identifying
rights with giving everyone a ‘fair go’) – most people (including
public officials) had limited knowledge about human rights in any formal sense.
Before his untimely death in Iraq last year, Sergio Vieira de Mello, then UN
High Commissioner for Human Rights, wrote:
…
human rights are about dignity, equality and security for all human beings everywhere … Dignity,
which reflects both autonomy and responsibility, concerns the individual. Equality
is the cornerstone of effective and harmonious relationships between people;
it underpins our common systems of ethics and rights, whether we are talking
about equality before the law or the need for equity in how states and international
systems conduct their affairs. Neither dignity nor equality, of course, can take
root in the absence of basic security (ESCWA,
2002, p.1).
Every human being is entitled to be treated with dignity simply because of their
humanity, regardless of status or position. A uniquely New Zealand statement
of the very essence of human dignity is expressed in the word mana. In respecting
a person’s mana, we recognise the humanity, prestige, dignity and wairua,
or spirit, of that person. Mana also applies to groups. Manakitangata is the
act of enhancing the mana of others, so that the mana of all is enhanced.
Human rights deal with relationships among and between individuals, groups and
the State. They are about how we live together: about our responsibilities to
each other. In particular they set a basis for the relationship between the individual
and the State, between the governed and those who govern.
But responsibility to respect human rights extends well beyond the State, to
regional and local government, to the business and community sectors, to voluntary
groups and organisations. Each and every one of us has a duty to exercise our
rights responsibly and to acknowledge and respect the rights of others. As Article
29 of the Universal Declaration makes clear, personal freedom is not absolute
and rights can be qualified. Further, everyone has duties to the community ‘in
which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible’.
In a democratic society, the extent to which the State fulfils its human rights
obligations generally reflects the extent to which its citizens insist that it
do so. As the introduction to a new edition of Hannah Arendt’s The
Origins
of Totalitarianism states: ‘It is not enough to lament the burden of our
time; we citizens must shape the response. It is only in the public sphere, through
voting, voicing, and mobilizing, that our fates become our own’ (Power,
2004, p.37). This report demonstrates the critical role that individuals and
community groups and other organisations play in creating an environment of respect
for human rights and harmonious race relations.
The human rights set out in the Universal Declaration represent common values
drawn from the world’s diverse spiritual, religious, humanist, political
and cultural beliefs. Despite claims that they reflect mainly Western ideologies,
increasingly there is agreement that cultural factors, along with differing social
and economic contexts, may shape the application of human rights, but not detract
from the rights themselves. While human rights apply to everyone, everywhere,
they impose no uniformity and are instead the basis for acknowledging difference
and enabling diversity to flourish.
The international human rights framework
– Te whare tika tangata o te ao
Top
In the years since 1948, the rights in the Declaration have been codified
in United Nations Covenants and Conventions and have become part of customary
international law. Together with the eight International Labour Organisation
(ILO) conventions on human rights, they form the basis for a robust international
human rights legal framework and one that successive New Zealand Governments
have played an active role in developing. Through ratification of these treaties
and by virtue of membership and obligations under the United Nations Charter
and the ILO Constitution, New Zealand has formally committed to respecting
these rights.
This report provides a basis for assessing the extent to which that commitment
is reflected in the structures, organisations and processes of government as
well as in legislation, policy and practice throughout the wider community.
The international human rights framework provides agreed parameters for determining
both the extent and the limits of human rights, and how these may be distinguished
from ‘wants’ and aspirations. In the various consultations undertaken
for this report it was evident that ‘human rights’ is often used
as a catch-all term for a wide range of issues and perceived injustices (e.g.,
UMR Research, 2003a). Greater visibility and explicit recognition throughout
the community of the international human rights standards will greatly assist
in recognising those rights that are central to dignity, equality and security,
even where people express their reality and needs in other than rights language.
Equally, they will assist in distinguishing among claims where the language
of rights is used to justify any preference.
While rights are not synonymous with wants or preferences, in the development
of economic, social and cultural policy the idea of ‘rights’ complements
the idea of ‘needs’ in a number of respects. As a paper prepared
for the New Zealand Human Rights Commission (Geiringer & Palmer, 2003)
explains, a rights-based approach to policy development stresses:
- the moral importance that is placed on the interests that are
at stake
- the priority that is to be accorded to them when resources are being
allocated
- the status of the rights-holder
- that States have a duty to realise the rights embodied in the
international agreements they have signed; these rights are something to
achieve, not something
simply to aspire to.
