As I read Gibbs' article on the LCJ and his address to the American Bar Association, I wondered "is Human Rights respected as fundamental to each and every individual or is it just another strategy against fundamentalist tendencies and eruptions?"
Sure, a policy and a strategy will undoubtedly at times serve different purposes for the benefit of society. But why was the HRA enacted? Was it because of pressure from the EU or the commitment made to honour obligations made in that forum by the EC Act of 1972? I believe that our approach to HR should not lie in what benefits it holds for the preservation of society, albeit I am not disputing the indispensability of that notion. It should be founded on the realization that as humans, as inhabitants of this land, each and every breathing individual is entitled to such privileges.
Just my airhead view anyway.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment