1

Unit-1
(Introduction)
A)

Meaning of Globalisation

Globalization is a process of interaction and integration among the people, companies, and
governments of different nations, a process driven by international trade and investment and
aided by information technology. This process has effects on the environment, on culture, on
political systems, on economic development and prosperity, and on human physical well-being in
societies around the world.
Globalization is not new, though. For thousands of years, peopleand, later, corporationshave
been buying from and selling to each other in lands at great distances, such as through the famed
Silk Road across Central Asia that connected China and Europe during the Middle Ages.
Likewise, for centuries, people and corporations have invested in enterprises in other countries.
In fact, many of the features of the current wave of globalization are similar to those prevailing
before the outbreak of the First World War in 1914.
But policy and technological developments of the past few decades have spurred increases in
cross-border trade, investment, and migration so large that many observers believe the world has
entered a qualitatively new phase in its economic development. Since 1950, for example, the
volume of world trade has increased by 20 times, and from just 1997 to 1999 flows of foreign
investment nearly doubled, from $468 billion to $827 billion. Distinguishing this current wave of
globalization from earlier ones, author Thomas Friedman has said that today globalization is
farther, faster, cheaper, and deeper.
This current wave of globalization has been driven by policies that have opened economies
domestically and internationally. In the years since the Second World War, and especially during
the past two decades, many governments have adopted free-market economic systems, vastly
increasing their own productive potential and creating myriad new opportunities for international
trade and investment. Governments also have negotiated dramatic reductions in barriers to
commerce and have established international agreements to promote trade in goods, services, and
investment. Taking advantage of new opportunities in foreign markets, corporations have built
foreign factories and established production and marketing arrangements with foreign partners. A
defining feature of globalization, therefore, is an international industrial and financial business
structure.
Technology has been the other principal driver of globalization. Advances in information
technology, in particular, have dramatically transformed economic life. Information technologies
have given all sorts of individual economic actorsconsumers, investors, businessesvaluable

new tools for identifying and pursuing economic opportunities, including faster and more
informed analyses of economic trends around the world, easy transfers of assets, and
collaboration with far-flung partners.
Globalization is deeply controversial, however. Proponents of globalization argue that it allows
poor countries and their citizens to develop economically and raise their standards of living,
while opponents of globalization claim that the creation of an unfettered international free
market has benefited multinational corporations in the Western world at the expense of local
enterprises, local cultures, and common people. Resistance to globalization has therefore taken
shape both at a popular and at a governmental level as people and governments try to manage the
flow of capital, labor, goods, and ideas that constitute the current wave of globalization.

Significance of Globalisation
1. Improvement of International Trade. Because of globalization, the number of countries
where products can be sold or purchased has increased dramatically.
2. Technological Progress. Because of the need to compete and be competitive globally,
governments have upgraded their level of technology.
3. Increasing Influence of Multinational Companies. A company that has subsidiaries in
various countries is called a multinational. Often, the head office is found in the country where
the company was established.
An example is a car company whose head office is based in Japan. This company has branches in
different countries. While the head office controls the subsidiaries, the subsidiaries decide on
production. The subsidiaries are tasked to increase the production and profits. They are able to do
it because they have already penetrated the local markets.
The rise of multinational corporations began after World War II. Large companies refer to the
countries where their subsidiaries reside as host countries. Globalization has a lot to do with the
rise of multinational corporations.
4. Power of the WTO, IMF, and WB. According to experts, another effect of globalization is
the strengthening power and influence of international institutions such as the World Trade
Organization (WTO), International Monetary Fund (IMF), and World Bank (WB).
5. Greater Mobility of Human Resources across Countries. Globalization allows countries to
source their manpower in countries with cheap labor. For instance, the manpower shortages in

Taiwan, South Korea, and Malaysia provide opportunities for labor exporting countries such as
the Philippines to bring their human resources to those countries for employment.
6. Greater Outsourcing of Business Processes to Other Countries. China, India, and the
Philippines are tremendously benefiting from this trend of global business outsourcing. Global
companies in the US and Europe take advantage of the cheaper labor and highly-skilled workers
that countries like India and the Philippines can offer
7. Civil Society. An important trend in globalization is the increasing influence and broadening
scope of the global civil society.
Civil society often refers to NGOs (nongovernment organizations). There are institutions in a
country that are established and run by citizens. The family, being an institution, is part of the
society. In globalization, global civil society refers to organizations that advocate certain issue or
cause.
There are NGOs that support women's rights and there are those that promote environment
preservation. These organizations don't work to counter government policies, but rather to
establish policies that are beneficial to all. Both the government and NGOs have the same goal of
serving the people.
The spread of globalization led to greater influence of NGOs especially in areas of great concern
like human rights, the environment, children, and workers. Together with the growing influence
of NGOs is the increasing power of multinational corporations. If the trend continues,
globalization will pave the way for the realization of the full potential of these two important
global actors.

B)

Concept of Global Justice

Human well-being is dependent on the preservation and promotion of human dignity and that
human dignity is directly linked to global justice. In order to achieve global justice, eight
minimum criteria must be met. These are 1) dialogue, 2) effective and representative multilateral
institutions, 3) representative decision-making structures, 4) fair treatment, 5) empathy, 6)
accountability, 7) transparency, and 8) adherence to international law.
Global justice is the paramount to global security, because injustice can lead to feelings of anger,
humiliation, and alienation, which can undermine human dignity. Al-Rodhan argues that humans
are primarily driven by emotional self-interest and that protecting humans emotional needs is
fundamental to human well-being and human dignity. When people feel that they have been the
victim of unjust decisions, they may try and seek justice by less conventional means such as
violence. This, in turn, can promote insecurity. Therefore, justice and not just military power, is
essential to maintaining global security. Some obstacles might however arise. Al-Rodhan
identifies the disparity in power that exists between states in the current global order as a major
obstacle in achieving global justice. Calls for greater global justice are thus likely to continue
from disadvantaged societies because they often feel that they are unjustly subjected to the rules
set by more powerful players. However, dominant states that benefit from the current status quo
are unlikely to want to alter established institutions or governance structures.
Al-Rodhan therefore recommends that fairness in terms of the participants in dialogue is a
prerequisite for the promotion of universal justice. Similarly, he argues that diplomacy must be
based on openness to hearing and acknowledging the concerns and positions of others. Empathy
and an acknowledgement of the grievances and past pains of others are crucial, as is giving all
stakeholders a voice in the decision-making process. Finally, Al-Rodhan argues that all states, no
matter how powerful, must be bound by international law and its obligations

Main positions
Five main positions realism, particularism, nationalism, the society of states tradition, and
cosmopolitanism -have been taken by contributors to the global justice debate.

Realism
Realists, such as Charles Yeo, Hashim Tilab argue that there are no global ethical standards, and
that to imagine that there are is a dangerous fantasy. States are the main actors in an international
anarchy, and they either will or should always attempt to act rationally in their own interests. So,
in response to the three central questions above: moral universalism is either false, or merely
says that nothing is forbidden to any state in pursuit of its interests. There is no obligation to help
the poor, unless doing so helps to further a states strategic aims. And the state system is taken as
the fundamental and unchallengeable global institutional arrangement.

Particularism
Particularists argue that ethical standards arise out of shared meanings and practices, which are
created and sustained by discrete cultures or societies. Moral and social criticism is possible
within the boundaries of such groups, but not across them. If a society is egalitarian, for instance,
its citizens can be morally wrong, and can meaningfully criticise each other, if they do not live
up to their own egalitarian ideals; but they cannot meaningfully criticise another, caste-based
society in the name of those ideals. "A given society is just if its substantive life is lived in a
certain way that is, in a way faithful to the shared understandings of [its] members. It is unjust
if not. Each society has its own, different standards, and only those inside it are bound by those
standards and can properly criticise themselves. So, moral universalism is false, because
objective ethical standards vary between cultures or societies. We should not apply the same
criteria of distributive justice to strangers as we would to compatriots. Nation-states that express
their peoples' shared and distinctive ethical understandings are the proper institutions to enable
local and different justices.

Nationalism
Nationalists argue that demanding mutual obligations are created by a particular kind of valuable
association, the nation.[11] We may have humanitarian duties to aid the particularly badly off
worldwide, but these are much less stringent and pressing than our duties to our fellow-citizens.
Nationalism has traditionally included this assumption of differing moral obligations to those
within and those outside the nation, reflected for example in the fact that the benefits of the
welfare state are not available to citizens of other countries. So, moral universalism is too simple,
because the ethical standards that apply between compatriots differ from those that apply
between strangers (although some nationalists argue for the universal ethical standard that
nations should have their own states). Distributive justice is an issue within nations but not
necessarily between them. And a world-system of nation-states is the appropriate organiser of
justice for all, in their distinct associational groups.

Society of states
In the society of states tradition, states are seen as individual entities that can mutually agree on
common interests and rules of interaction, including moral rules, in much the same way as
human individuals can. Often, this idea of agreement between peers is formalised by a social
contract argument.
One prominent exemplar of the tradition is John Rawls. In The Law of Peoples, Rawls extends
the method of his A Theory of Justice to the question of global justice. His argument is that we
can justify a global regime by showing that it would be chosen by representatives of Peoples in
an imagined original position, which prevents them knowing which particular People they
represent. This decision-in-ignorance models fairness because it excludes selfish bias. When
Rawls applied this method in the case of domestic justice, with parties in the original position
representing individual members of a single society, he argued that it supported a redistributive,
egalitarian liberal politics. In contrast, Rawls argues that when his method is applied to global
justice, it supports a quite traditional, Kantian international ethics: duties of states to obey treaties
and strict limits on warmaking, but no global repossession of private property. So, different
justices apply to the domestic and international cases. Even if justice requires egalitarianism
within states, it does not do so between them. And a system of cooperating but independent states
is the just global institutional arrangement. Rawls describes this ideal as a 'realistic utopia'. [12]
Apart from Rawls, other notable exponents of this position include Hedley Bull.

Cosmopolitanism
Cosmopolitans argue that some form of moral universalism is true, and therefore that all humans,
and not merely compatriots or fellow-citizens, fall within the scope of justice. Their arguments
typically appeal to consistency, as follows:
1. The moral standing of individuals is based on some morally significant characteristics.
2. These characteristics are shared by all humans (and not only by the members of some
nation, culture, society, or state).
3. Therefore, all humans have moral standing (and the boundaries between nations, cultures,
societies and states are morally irrelevant)

Demands of global justice

None of the five main positions described above imply complete satisfaction with the current
world order. Realists complain that states that pursue utopian moral visions through intervention
and humanitarian aid, instead of minding their own strategic interests, do their subjects harm and
destabilise the international system.[16] Particularists object to the destruction of traditional
cultures by cultural colonialism, whether under the guise of economic liberalism or defence of
human rights.[17] Nationalists deplore the fact that so many people are stateless or live under
inefficient and tyrannical regimes.[18] Advocates of the society of states are concerned about

rogue states and about the imperial ambitions of the powerful.[19] Cosmopolitans believe that the
contemporary world badly fails to live up to their standards, and that doing so would require
considerable changes in the actions of wealthy individuals and states. [20] It might, for instance,
require them to transfer most of their wealth to the poor. It might require the building of
international institutions able to limit, or even replace, the self-interested action of powerful
states and corporations. It might require each of us to do much more than most now do.

c)

Social, Political and Economic Dimension of Globalisation

Globalization is a complex and multifaceted phenomenon. It is the process of

internationalintegration as a product of exchange of world views, products, ideas and other
aspects of culture in which worldwide exchange of national and cultural resources occurs in the
process.Many factors contributed for the growth of globalization major being advancement
intransportation and communication. The current wave of globalization is nothing but the result
of Schumpeterian evolution in technology along with interaction of many actors at
differentlevels of the economy. Globalization means different for different people. For some it
createspositive political, economic and technological progress.
The term globalization is used to describe the economic, political, social and cultural changes
of the world in the last odd fifty years, which was accelerated by the scientific revolution to the
diminishing of national and geopolitical boundaries in an expanding transnational movement
of goods, services and capital.
The proponents of globalization claim that it will lead to convergence of income, access
toknowledge and technology, consumption power, living standards and political ideas. Adding

onto that, integration of economies would lead to increase in economic growth and wealth.
Theyalso argue that more people would be able to enjoy the fruits of modernization and
civilization.Critics of globalization argue that it is hegemonic, antagonistic to the poor and
vulnerable and is weakening local and national economic communities and the environment.
Thereforeglobalization has both positive and negative impacts. Therefore, it is necessary to
discuss the Economic, Political, Social and Cultural dimensions of globalization.
Economic dimension of globalization:
According to Deepak Nayyar, Globalization is expansion of economic activities across the
boundaries of nation states. Globalization is marked with increasing economic integration and
growing economic interdependence between countries of the world. There is an increased cross
border movement of goods, technology, people, information etc.
Globalization brings new potentials for development and wealth creation. But there are divergent
views on the economic impact of globalization. Few argue that the present model
of globalization has increased the problems of unemployment, inequality and poverty,
whileothers contend that globalization helped to reduce these aspects. The goal of globalization
is to meet the need of people thereby increasing their standard of living, freedom and liberty and
thereby a prosper life. But today, globalization has increased the gap between rich and poor and
has lead to the marginalization of certain sections of the society. The developed countries are the
one much benefited out of the entire process as there was an increase in exports, increased trade
between developing countries where they always had a comparative advantage, increased
presence of western based multinational companies which squeeze the labor and wealth from
these countries etc. Basically the optimistic
predictions do not apply here as neither employment creation nor the decreases in within
country inequality are automatically assured by increasing trade and FDI.The developing
countries on the other side, injecting the western idea of capitalism their own economy without
considering the basic foundations required for the stability of such a mode of economic
production,, had to pay greatly in this business. The changed strategy of economic transaction
and trade with the rest of the world has obviously helped the developing countrieswith many
investments from other countries which provided labor and income for a goodnumber of
populations. But at the same time, we saw the huge gap between the rich andpower plus
concentration of wealth among few which lead to economic inequality in thesociety there by
proliferating to other aspects of political and social impacts.When we talk about the economics
of globalization it consider largely the internal costs and
ignores the external cost involved in it like environmental aspect. The MNCs are concerned
only with profit making which is driven by capitalism ignoring the cost that society has to payfor
it. The global climate change along with extinction of many species can be attributed to the
globalization to a great extent. Though the international organizations have fixed the limits
of carbon emission and other pollutants, it is still pro developed countries that hamper the growth
of developing countries. Thus the economic impacts of globalization can be very diverse in
different areas of the worldgiving rise to concentration and marginalization phenomena. As there
is a skill biasedtechnological change, the increased import of capital goods will lead to increased

inequality.Increased trade was meant to foster economic growth but today what we see is a one
sidedbenefitting deal.

Political Dimension of Globalization:

One of the major impacts of political globalization is that it reduces the importance of nation
states. Many have organized themselves into trade blocs. Emergence of supranational institutions
such as the European Union, the WTO, the G8, and The International Criminal Court etc
replaced or extended the national functions to facilitate international agreement. This has reduced
the sovereignty of nation states in taking important decisions with respect to their country where
we see massive intervention of these organizations in all fields. It should benoted that the
executive body of all these organizations are from USA and European countries which was
reflected in their decisions as all of them were pro West legislations. Another major impact of
globalization is the increased influence of Non Governmental Organizations in public policy like
humanitarian aid, developmental efforts etc. Many organizations have come forward with the
mission of uplifting the most unprivileged societies of the world where there s massive funding
of millions of dollars. Globalization has also lead tothe growth of terrorism. Terrorism can be
seen as a response from certain groups of people who were neglected and humiliated for
centuries which lead to the wide spread terrorist networks across world which was accelerated
with the ultra modern technology helping to strengthen their network and activities. Democracy
is seen as the ultimate form of political stability by the world. This can be linked to the western
intellectual propaganda where they highlighted the enlightenment values of freedom, liberty,
tolerance etc. Under the pretext of establishing democracy in those countries where there was
autocratic rule for years, United States intervened in many Middle East Asian countries recently.
The whole idea was on extracting oil mines for which they took the economic, political, social
and cultural control of these oil rich countries. This can be seen as a gradual movement to World
Government.
The rise of global civil society is one of the major contributions of globalization. The
multivariate groups make up civil society which often protests against capitalism. This shows the
existence of a social sphere above and beyond national, regional or local societies. Thus the
political impacts of globalization are immense and wide across the nation state. The modern
concepts of one government and showcasing democracy as the ultimate deign for a stable
government etc has lead to massive scale of corruption, inefficiency and lack of transparency in
these developing countries.

Social Dimension of Globalization:

The combination of increasingly advanced technology and complex social structure which were
sustained by the ideas of change as desirable progress accelerated social change being one of the
major spheres of impacts of globalization. The social dimension of globalization refers to the
impact of globalization on the life and work of people, families and societies. There are more
social aspects for globalization beyond the employment, working dimensions, income, social
protection etc. the idea of social justice is been now been a distant dream to be accomplished.
The increased political and economic movement of globalization has left the major aspect of
society, i.e. people. The idea of social justice aims at creating a society based on the idea of

10

equality and solidarity, the values of human rights, the dignity of every human being. When we
talk about the gender aspect with reference to globalization, we can see increased participation of
women in all fields of life. But evidences prove that women still work more as a casual labor.
Though globalization has expanded womens access to employment it has not
done much considerable to reduce the gender inequality. Also, due to the influence of media and
other socio-political- cultural aspects, the crimes against women have increased considerably.
Another major social aspect is that globalization ahs deeply influenced the social structure
of different societies. Every society used to have its own unique culture with respect to
thelanguage, social norms, morality, civic sense etc. with the advent of media which has
thisspecial capability to influence millions at the same time has challenged the social institutions
of the society mainly family. A particular society following their style of living without being
much influenced by the western culture is now seen as uncivilized which was a very cunningly
designed propaganda of the west to inculcate their culture into the rest of the world and thereby
dominating the globe. Globalization involves the process of stretching or extension and
intensification of humanactivities, relations and networks across globe. Since globalization is a
work in progress, the endresult cannot be predicted. But it is obvious that globalization has a
major impact on social realm of society across the world.

Unit 2
(Historical and Central Chalanges To Global Justice)

A)

Global poverty

11

Meaning of Poverty :
Poverty refers to a Condition where people's basic needs for food, clothing, and shelter are not
being met. Poverty is generally of two types: (1) Absolute poverty is synonymous with
destitution and occurs when people cannot obtain adequate resources (measured in terms of
calories or nutrition) to support a minimum level of physical health. Absolute poverty means
about the same everywhere, and can be eradicated as demonstrated by some countries. (2)
Relative poverty occurs when people do not enjoy a certain minimum level of living standards as
determined by a government (and enjoyed by the bulk of the population) that vary from country
to country, sometimes within the same country. Relative poverty occurs everywhere, is said to be
increasing, and may never be eradicated.

Measuring Global Poverty

Traditionally, poverty has been measured by the lack of a minimum income (or consumption
level) necessary to meet basic needs. Measuring poverty on a global scale requires establishing a
uniform poverty level across extremely divergent economies, which can result in only rough
comparisons. The World Bank has defined the international poverty line as U.S. $1 and $2 per
day in 1993 Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) 1, which adjusts for differences in the prices of goods
and services between countries. The $1 per day level is generally used for the least developed
countries, primarily African; the $2-per-day level is used for middle income economies such as
those of East Asia and Latin America. By this measure, in 2005 there were 982 million people
out of the developing world's 4.8 billion people living on $1 per day, while another 2.5 billion
(40% of the world's population) were living on less than $2 per day2. In 2005, The poorest 40%
of the world population accounted for 5% of global income. The richest 20% accounted for 75%
of world income, and the richest 10% accounted for 54%.
The $1- and $2-per-day measures offer a convenient, albeit crude, way to quantify global
poverty. In the last several decades, poverty research has adopted a broader, multidimensional
approach, taking into account a variety of social indicators in addition to income. The UN's
Human Poverty Index, for example, factors in illiteracy, malnutrition among children, early
death, poor health care, and poor access to safe water. Vulnerability to famine or flooding, lack
of sanitation, exposure to disease, a diet poor in nutrients, and the absence of education are as
much the signs of poverty as material deprivation. Providing the poor with basic social services
and infrastructure would in many cases alleviate poverty to a greater extent than simply a rise in
income level.
1. Purchasing power parity (PPP), as defined by the World Bank, is a method of measuring the relative
purchasing power of different countries currencies over the same types of goods and services. Because

12
goods and services may cost more in one country than in another, PPP allows us to make more accurate
comparisons of standards of living across countries.
2. The original $1 per day was based on 1985 PPP estimates; currently the poverty line is based on 1993
PPP estimates, which has raised the amount from $1.00 to $1.08. As a convention, $1 a day is still
widely used when discussing income poverty.

Poverty eradication has been identified as the largest challenge facing international society in its
quest for a peaceful, prosperous, and just world. The response to this challenge is a global
poverty eradication principle. Grounded in John Rawlss account of human rights and assistance
for the law of peoples, the global poverty eradication principle applies regardless of causal
patterns that may obtain in a given case. The relationship between persons affected by poverty
and their governments has implications only for the selection of appropriate means, but never
undermines the goal of poverty eradication itself. The duties of human rights and assistance that
establish the global poverty eradication principle apply even to societies that may reject them,
because they are institutional reaffirmations of the natural duties of persons in the context of
international society, without whose affirmation no domestic society can be considered wellordered.

13

14

Of absolute poverty, and on what moral grounds.

Absolute poverty causes about one third of all human deaths, some 18 million annually, and blights
billions of lives with hunger and disease. Developing universalizable norms aimed at tackling absolute
poverty and the complex and multilayered problems associated with it, this book considers the levels,
trends and determinants of absolute poverty and global inequality. Examining whether much faster
progress against absolute poverty is possible through reductions in national and global inequalities that
produce economic growth for poor countries and households, this book suggests that diverse moral views
imply that international agencies as well as the citizens, corporations and governments of affluent
countries bear a moral responsibility to reduce absolute poverty. In considering strategies of eradication
through specific policies and structural reforms it is argued that because of its moral importance and
requirement for only modest efforts and resources, the goal of overcoming absolute poverty must be given
much higher political priority by international agencies and governments of affluent countries. It is
suggested that these agencies should be encouraged to facilitate and promote new initiatives,
Today it is widely held that one cannot consider only the economic part of poverty. Poverty is also social,
political and cultural. Moreover, it is considered to undermine human rights - economic (the right to work
and have an adequate income), social (access to health care and education), political (freedom of thought,
expression and association) and cultural (the right to maintain one's cultural identity and be involved in a
community's cultural life). 3 The Millennium Development Goals - global targets that the world's leaders
set at the UN Millennium Summit in September 2000 - are an agenda for reducing poverty, its causes and
manifestations. As part of the goal of eradicate extreme poverty and hunger, United Nations Development
Programme (UNDP) seeks to halve, between 1990 and 2015, the proportion of people whose income is
less than 1 $US a day.

15

B)

Armed Conflict

International humanitarian law distinguishes two types of armed conflicts, namely:

international armed conflicts, opposing two or more States, and

non-international armed conflicts, between governmental forces and non-governmental

armed groups, or between such groups only. IHL treaty law also establishes a distinction
between non-international armed conflicts in the meaning of common Article 3 of the
Geneva Conventions of 1949 and non-international armed conflicts falling within the
definition provided in Art. 1 of Additional Protocol II.

Where wars erupt, suffering and hardship invariably follow. Conflict is the breeding
ground for mass violations of human rights including unlawful killings, torture, forced
displacement
and
starvation.
In conflicts across the globe, governments and armed groups routinely attack civilians and
commit
war
crimes
and
terrible
abuses
of
human
rights.

16

And yet, even in war there are rules that all sides are legally bound to obey. International
humanitarian law (IHL), also known as the laws of armed conflict or the laws of war, has
developed in order to mitigate the effects of such conflict. It limits the means and methods of
conducting military operations. Its rules oblige combatants to spare civilians and those who no
longer participate in hostilities, such as soldiers who have been wounded or have surrendered.
IHL applies only during armed conflict; human rights law applies in war and peace.
But powerful nations have shown a sinister willingness to manipulate international institutions or
apply double standards, often arming forces known to commit mass abuses while disclaiming
responsibility
for
the
carnage.
Although international organizations such as the United Nations have advanced in their capacity
to monitor and report on human rights in conflict situations, few perpetrators of mass abuses
against
civilians
are
held
accountable.
Continuing violence feeds on unresolved grievances arising from years of destructive conflict
and
this
failure
to
hold
perpetrators
of
grave
abuses
to
account.
Amnesty International does not take sides in conflicts and has no opinion on borders. Our work
in situations of armed conflict concentrates on documenting and campaigning against human
rights abuses and violations of IHL, no matter who commits them.

Internal conflicts
The vast majority of armed conflicts today are internal. Many internal conflicts have persisted
for decades, despite significant international efforts
to find solutions.
These conflicts are often triggered by issues of identity, ethnicity, religion and competition for
resources,
particularly
oil
and
mineral
wealth.
In Afghanistan, the escalating conflict has resulted in death and injury to thousands of civilians.
War crimes have been committed by all parties to the conflict, including international and
Afghan security forces, and the Taleban.

Perpetuating violence
In Iraq, security forces are committing rather than preventing sectarian violence. The Iraqi justice
system is woefully inadequate and the worst practices of Saddam Hussein's regime torture,
including rape, extra-judicial executions, unfair trials and capital punishment continue.
There have been frequent allegations of human rights violations by US and UK soldiers but few
prosecutions
and
convictions.

17

At least a dozen countries in Africa have been affected by armed conflict over the last year,
despite numerous peace and international mediation processes. In all of them civilians suffered
human rights abuses, and the most affected were women, children and elderly people.
Islamic State militants in Iraq have committed gross human rights abuses that may amount to
war crimes or crimes against humanity, including the forced recruitment of children and the
abduction of girls to be sold as sex slaves, according to a U.N. report released Thursday.
The report by United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq (UNAMI) and the Office of the United
Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) is based off of interviews with
witnesses and displaced Iraqis.

Human Rights violation by ISIS in Iraq

As of August 2014, an estimated 1.8 million Iraqis have been displaced due to ongoing violence
involving ISIS, the reports says, and at least 4,692 civilians were killed between June and August
alone.
UNAMI/OHCHR has received reports of serious violations of international humanitarian law
and gross abuses of human rights that have been perpetrated by ISIL and associated armed
groups, with an apparent systematic and widespread character, the report states.
"These include attacks directly targeting civilians and civilian infrastructure, executions and
other targeted killings of civilians, abductions, rape and other forms of sexual and physical
violence perpetrated against women and children, forced recruitment of children, destruction or
desecration of places of religious or cultural significance, wanton destruction and looting of
property, and denial of fundamental freedoms."
Witnesses in Mosul said ISIS militants made orphaned children pose with flags, while others
were seen wearing similar attire as fighters and carrying weapons too big for them to handle.
The report also says that ISIS has been particularly harsh in regards to the treatment of women,
as the group has attacked and killed female doctors and lawyers.
On 3 August, ISIL herded approximately 450500 women and girls to the citadel of Tal Afar in
Ninewa where, two days later, 150 unmarried girls and women, predominantly from the Yezidi
and Christian communities, were reportedly transported to Syria, either to be given to ISIL
fighters as a reward or to be sold as sex slaves, the report said.

What Amnesty International is doing

18

AI calls on all warring parties to respect IHL and human rights, and emphasises to state forces
and
armed
groups
that
targeting
civilians
can
never
be
justified.
Amnesty International campaigns for an end to impunity for war crimes and crimes against
humanity.
We are campaigning to curb the proliferation of small arms fuelling conflict and abuses,
including lobbying for the adoption of a global Arms Trade Treaty.
Amnesty International campaigns for international peacekeepers to protect civilians in Darfur
and eastern Chad, and has urged its supporters across the world to write to Sudanese MPs,
calling on them to take a stand against the atrocities happening in their country.
Amnesty International is also actively campaigning to end the recruitment of child soldiers and
to
ensure
that
they
are
demobilized
and
reintegrated
into
society.
We are lobbying the UN for strengthened protection of civilians, including strict adherence to
human rights and humanitarian law in peacekeeping efforts.

Progress on accountability
The International Criminal Court (ICC) was established in 2002 to prosecute people accused of
genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. It offers the hope that some of the
perpetrators of the worst crimes committed in armed conflicts will be brought to justice. It has
been hailed by governments, legal experts and civil society as the most significant development
in international law since the adoption of the United Nations Charter. Amnesty International has
been actively involved in all stages of the establishment of the Court.
The ICC has issued arrest warrants for people accused of war crimes and crimes against
humanity committed in armed conflicts in Democratic Republic of Congo, Sudan (Darfur), and
Uganda.
International tribunals established to try serious crimes committed in Former Yugoslavia,
Rwanda, and Sierra Leone have brought to justice leaders who have committed war crimes,
crimes
against
humanity
and
genocide.
In December 2006, an overwhelming majority of states voted at the UN General Assembly to
consider the question of a universal and legally binding Arms Trade Treaty, a landmark step
towards greater accountability of the arms trade..

19

C)

Crime Against Humanity

Crimes against humanity, as defined by the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court
Explanatory Memorandum, "are particularly odious offences in that they constitute a serious
attack on human dignity or grave humiliation or a degradation of human beings."[1] They are not
isolated or sporadic events, but are part either of a government policy (although the perpetrators
need not identify themselves with this policy) or of a wide practice of atrocities tolerated or
condoned by a government or a de facto authority. Murder; massacres; dehumanization;
extermination; human experimentation; extrajudicial punishments; military use of children;
kidnappings; unjust imprisonment; slavery; cannibalism, torture; rape; political, racial, or
religious persecution; and other inhumane acts reach the threshold of crimes against humanity
only if they are part of a widespread or systematic practice. Isolated inhumane acts of this nature

20

may instead constitute grave infringements of human rights, or depending on the

circumstances war crimes, but are not classified as crimes against humanity.[2]
Abolition of the slave trade

There were several bilateral treaties in 1814 that foreshadowed the multilateral treaty of Final
Act of the Congress of Vienna (1815) that used wording expressing condemnation of the slave
trade using moral language. For example the Treaty of Paris (1814) between Britain and France
included the wording "principles of natural justice"; and the British and United States
plenipotentiaries stated in the Treaty of Ghent (1814) that the slave trade violated the "principles
of humanity and justice".[3]
The multilateral Declaration of the Powers, on the Abolition of the Slave Trade, of 8 February
1815 (Which also formed ACT, No. XV. of the Final Act of the Congress of Vienna of the same
year) included in its first sentence the concept of the "principles of humanity and universal
morality" as justification for ending a trade that was "odious in its continuance".[4]
First use

On May 24, 1915, the Allied Powers, Britain, France, and Russia, jointly issued a statement
explicitly charging for the first time ever another government of committing "a crime against
humanity". An excerpt from this joint statement reads:
In view of these new crimes of Turkey against humanity and civilization, the Allied
Governments announce publicly to the Sublime Porte that they will hold personally responsible
for these crimes all members of the Ottoman Government, as well as those of their agents who
are implicated in such massacres.[5]
At the conclusion of the war, an international war crimes commission recommended the creation
of a tribunal to try "violations of the laws of humanity". However, the US representative objected
to references to "law of humanity" as being imprecise and insufficiently developed at that time
and the concept was not pursued.[6]
Nuremberg trials

In the aftermath of the Second World War, the London Charter of the International Military
Tribunal was the decree that set down the laws and procedures by which the post-War
Nuremberg trials were to be conducted. The drafters of this document were faced with the
problem of how to respond to the Holocaust and grave crimes committed by the Nazi regime. A
traditional understanding of war crimes gave no provision for crimes committed by a power on
its own citizens. Therefore, Article 6 of the Charter was drafted to include not only traditional
war crimes and crimes against peace, but in paragraph 6 (c) Crimes Against Humanity, defined
as

21

Murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation, and other inhumane acts committed against
any civilian population, before or during the war, or persecutions on political, racial or religious
grounds in execution of or in connection with any crime within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal,
whether or not in violation of the domestic law of the country where perpetrated.[7][8]
In the Judgment of the International Military Tribunal for the Trial of German Major War
Criminals it was also stated:
The Tribunal therefore cannot make a general declaration that the acts before 1939 were crimes
against humanity within the meaning of the Charter, but from the beginning of the war in 1939
war crimes were committed on a vast scale, which were also crimes against humanity; and
insofar as the inhumane acts charged in the Indictment, and committed after the beginning of the
war, did not constitute war crimes, they were all committed in execution of, or in connection
with, the aggressive war, and therefore constituted crimes against humanity.[9]
Tokyo trials

The International Military Tribunal for the Far East (IMTFE), also known as the Tokyo Trial,
was convened to try the leaders of the Empire of Japan for three types of crimes: "Class A"
(crimes against peace), "Class B" (war crimes), and "Class C" (crimes against humanity),
committed during the Second World War.
The legal basis for the trial was established by the Charter of the International Military Tribunal
for the Far East (CIMTFE) that was proclaimed on 19 January 1946. The tribunal convened on
May 3, 1946, and was adjourned on November 12, 1948.
A panel of eleven judges presided over the IMTFE, one each from victorious Allied powers
(United States, Republic of China, Soviet Union, United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Provisional
Government of the French Republic, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, British India, and the
Philippines).
In the Tokyo Trial, Crimes against Humanity (Class C) was not applied for any suspect. [10]
Prosecutions related to the Nanking Massacre were categorised as infringements upon the Laws
of War.[11]
War crimes charges against more junior personnel were dealt with separately, in other cities
throughout Far East Asia, such as the Nanjing War Crimes Tribunal and the Khabarovsk War
Crimes Trials.
Apartheid

22

The systematic persecution of one racial group by another, such as occurred during the South
African apartheid government, was recognized as a crime against humanity by the United
Nations General Assembly in 1976.[12] The Charter of the United Nations (Article 13, 14, 15)
makes actions of the General Assembly advisory to the Security Council. [13] In regard to
apartheid in particular, the UN General Assembly has not made any findings, nor have apartheidrelated trials for crimes against humanity been conducted.
United Nations

The United Nations has been primarily responsible for the prosecution of crimes against
humanity since it was chartered in 1948.[14] The International Criminal Court (ICC) was
organized by the Rome Statute and the UN has delegated several crimes against humanity cases
to the ICC.[15] Because these cases were referred to the ICC by the UN, the ICC has broad
authority and jurisdiction for these cases. [citation needed] The ICC acting without a UN referral lacks
the broad jurisdiction to prosecute crimes against humanity, and cannot prosecute many cases,
particularly if they occur outside of ICC-member nations. The most recent 2005 UN referral to
the ICC of Darfur resulted in an indictment of Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir for genocide,
crimes against humanity and war crimes in 2008.[16] The first person to be handed over to the ICC
was Thomas Lubanga.[17] He was convicted on 14 March 2012 and on 10 July 2012 was
sentenced to 14 years imprisonment, pending appeal.[1] The ICC is still seeking Joseph Kony.[17]
When the ICC President reported to the UN regarding its progress handling these crimes against
humanity case, Judge Phillipe Kirsch said "The Court does not have the power to arrest these
persons. That is the responsibility of States and other actors. Without arrests, there can be no
trials.[18] The UN has not referred any further crimes against humanity cases to the ICC since
March 2005.[citation needed]
A report on the 2008-9 Gaza War by Richard Goldstone accused Palestinian and Israeli forces of
possibly committing a crime against humanity.[19] In 2011, Goldstone said that he no longer
believed that Israeli forces had targeted civilians or committed a crime against humanity.[20]
UN Security Council

UN Security Council Resolution 1674, adopted by the United Nations Security Council on 28
April 2006, "reaffirms the provisions of paragraphs 138 and 139 of the 2005 World Summit
Outcome Document regarding the responsibility to protect populations from genocide, war
crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity". [21] The resolution commits the Council to
action to protect civilians in armed conflict.
In 2008 the U.N. Security Council adopted resolution 1820, which noted that rape and other
forms of sexual violence can constitute war crimes, crimes against humanity or a constitutive act
with respect to genocide.

23

D)

Environment And Health

Economic reforms and the globalization trend in the Western Hemisphere have generated debate
regarding implications on different sectors, including environmental health. In order to
understand the implications of trade and globalization on environmental health, it is necessary to
review the possible links between different transactions driven by globalization and
environmental health policies at the national, regional, and global level.
Environmental health refers to the relationship that exists between the environment and human
life and, more specifically, to how environmental factors physical, biological, social,
psychosocial directly impact on human health. In the Americas, human health is increasingly

24

threatened by the continued environmental degradation in the region. Recent estimates suggest
that premature death and illness due to major environmental health risks account for one-fifth of
the total burden of disease in the developing world . Traditional risks such as lack of access to
drinking water, domestic air pollution, contamination of food with pathogenic substances and
what many characterize as modern or emerging health risks linked to industrial and agricultural
processes, as well as transportation increasingly contribute to the potential years of life lost4 in
the region. In the early 1990s, 11.0 percent of non-accidental deaths were attributed to
environmental health risks; by 2002 this percentage had risen to 18.0 percent.
The Millennium Declaration states that one of the central challenges is to ensure that
globalization becomes a positive force for all the worlds people. Developing countries and
countries with economies in transition face special difficulties in responding to this central
challenge; in order to make globalization fully inclusive, efforts must be made to include polices
and measures, at the global level, which correspond to the needs of developing countries and
economies in transition (United Nations, 2004).
Addressing key developing country concerns is an indispensable and imperative step towards
more equitable globalization. The environmental health challenges in the region are many, and
their impacts are often disproportionately borne by children, the elderly, the impoverished and
other vulnerable groups. It is a known fact that every year 11 million children die before reaching
their fifth birthday, mostly from easily preventable or treatable causes; more than 250,000 of
those deaths are related to environmental conditions.
Health depends on the interaction between environmental influences, lifestyles and human
nature. The impact that human activities have had on water, soil, and air has not always been
positive. Some of these activities have caused environmental changes which in turn increased
sickness and fatalities from infectious diseases prevalent in developing countries. By 1990,
chronic or degenerative diseases accounted for 86 percent of all deaths, while only 6.0 were
caused by communicable (or transmissible) diseases.7 That same year, in developing countries,
chronic diseases caused 47 percent of deaths, and transmissible diseases 42 percent. At the end of
that decade, non-transmissible diseases accounted for 49.7 percent of adult deaths in the
Americas. Degraded environmental conditions have resulted in millions of deaths all around the
globe, particularly affecting children, with 11.0 percent of potential life years lost in the region
that can be directly attributed to poor water supply and sanitary services, urban air pollution,
agro-chemical and waste, indoor air pollution, and vector-borne illnesses.
As a response to the threats that degraded environmental conditions pose to human life, a number
of countries have put forward constitutional guarantees to a safe or healthy environment. These
guarantees are echoed in legislation and in jurisprudence throughout the region.8 In addition,
declarations such as the Inter-American Democratic Charter treat environmental concerns as
essential to integral development.
The Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) has worked, since its inception, to prevent and
mitigate illness and death from harmful environmental exposures. Years of work dedicated to
sanitation, water management, chemical control, and other health threats have benefited the
region as countries have undergone health sector reform. PAHO has also conducted regional

25

assessments and developed a regional strategy to improve environmental health of children such
as Healthy Environments: Healthy Children (2002), and assisted countries in developing national
profiles of childrens environmental health and embark in national action planning to improve
national and local environmental circumstances and thereby the status of childrens health and
well-being.
Article 25 of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights proclaims that everyone has the right
to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family
Although there may not yet be consensus on the formal legal existence of a substantive right to a
healthy environment, it is self-evident that there is causal relationship between environmental
quality on the one hand and human health, welfare, well-being, and quality of life on the other.
Where environmental degradation is not managed and minimized, it can threaten living
conditions and even life itself. International conventions
and declarations have linked human welfare to the environmental conditions that promote food
security10 and safe drinking water.11 As an example, the World Banks new environmental
strategy establishes three fundamental objectives, including improving the quality of life
peoples health, livelihood and vulnerability affected by environmental conditions.
Multilateral Environmental Agreements
Approximately 200 Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs) have been signed by
governments at the global level. In addition, an estimated 800 environmental agreements exist at
the regional or bilateral level. These agreements address a number of transnational or global
environmental issues, many of which are linked to the protection of human health and
environmental health. Among the more prominent MEAs are those that address different aspects
of environment-human health issues. An example includes:
Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer (1987), which establishes a
regime to reduce and eliminate the production, consumption and trade of certain ozone
destroying substances (such as chlorofluorocarbons) in order to protect the stratospheric ozone.
The Basel Convention on the Control of Trans boundary Movement of Hazardous Wastes and
their Disposal (1989), establishes a regime to control the international trade and final disposal of
hazardous wastes.
The Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) (2004), establishes a
regime to control the consumption, production and trade of 12 POP chemicals (aldrin, chlordane,
DDT, dieldrin, endrin, heptachlor, mirex, toxaphene, polychlorinated biphenols or PCBs,
hexachlorobenzene, dioxins and furans). Finally, the Cartagena Protocol of the UN Convention
on Biological Diversity establishes a regime to control the transfer and release of living modified
organisms.
Among the tools contained in these agreements are specific trade obligations (STOs), which act
in tandem with other measures, such as information exchange, technology transfer, and financial
transfers, to achieve the objectives of the agreement. Examples of STOs include prior informed
notification and consent procedures, export quotas or restrictions on trade among parties to the

26

agreements, ban in trade for specified products, and the prohibition in trade between parties and
non-parties to the MEAs. The issue of the relationship between STOs applied in MEAs and trade
rules in general has been examined for more than a decade at the GATT, in the WTO Committee
on Trade and Environment (CTE), at the OECD, UNEP, and the UNCTAD. In recent years,
efforts have increased to ensure the effective exchange of information between the CTE and the
individual Secretariats to a number of MEAs. Moreover, this exercise is widely regarded as
enhancing coordination between the MEAs and trade.

Unit-3
Role and Reformation of Global Institution.
A)

State Sovereignty and Transnational Laws

Perspectives of Globalization

As noted earlier, globalization is the term used to describe one of the most
contemporary phenomena of our time; involving the diffusion of ideas, practices and
technologies through the various now available means of communication and interraction. It has
led to internationalization of most issues in human and state existence. It is not merely

27

liberalization of markets, though in many cases that has been the result. The definition by
Anthony Giddens19 aptly describes this phenomenon: the intensification of worldwide social
relations which link distant localities in such a way that local happenings are shaped by events
occurring many miles away and vice versa. This involves a change in the way we understand
geography and experience localness. As well as offering opportunity, it brings with it
considerable risks linked, for example, to technological change. Globalization, thus, has
powerful economic, political, cultural and social implications for sovereignty.
Globalization and Political Sovereignty
One of the major impacts of political globalization is that it reduces the importance of nation
states. Many have organized themselves into trade blocs. Emergence of supranational institutions
such as the European Union, the WTO, the G8, and The International Criminal Court etc
replaced or extended the national functions to facilitate international agreement. This has reduced
the sovereignty of nation states in taking important decisions with respect to their country where
we see massive intervention of these organizations in all fields. It should benoted that the
executive body of all these organizations are from USA and European countries which was
reflected in their decisions as all of them were pro West legislations.
Globalization has led to a decline in the power of national governments to direct and influence
their economies (especially with regard to macroeconomic management); and to determine their
political structures. There is a strong indication that the impact of globalization is most felt
through the extent to which politics everywhere are now essentially market-driven. It is not that
governments are now unable to run their states, but to survive in office; they must increasingly
"manage" national politics in such a way as to adapt them to the pressures of trans-national
market forces. The institutionalization of international political structures has led to political
globalization. Since the early nineteenth century, the European interstate system has been
developing both an increasingly consensual international normative order and a set of
international political structures that regulate all sorts of interaction. This phenomenon has been
termed global governance by Craig Murphy20. It refers to the growth of both specialized and
general international organizations. The most dominant of the general and global organizations
that had emerged was the League of Nations and now succeeded by the United Nations. At the
regional levels, the African Union, European Union, Organization of American States, the Arab
League, etc exist. The impact of these organizations is to create of a process of institutionbuilding, where the organizations are able to determine and dictate what happens in the
governance of member states. This is the trend of political globalization. Non member states find
themselves outside this cooperation and are regarded as deviants. The future would see more
states edging to conform to the norms laid down by these organizations. Already, the impact is
being felt in the area of human rights. Due to the internationalization of human rights, a state is
no longer free to treat its nationals and aliens the way it pleases. It must conform to international
standards laid down in the various human rights treaties, most of which are now regarded as
customary law.
Redefining the role of the State in an era of globalization

28

With the advance of globalization, the State has an important role to play in the establishment
and preservation of an "even playing field" and an enabling environment for private enterprise,
individual creativity and social action. It can also contribute to the establishment and
maintenance of social safety nets; promote as well as facilitate social dialogue at the subnational, national, and international levels; establish and maintain mechanisms for mediation of
disputes, mitigation of conflicts and reconciliation of rival cultures or interests in the increasingly
diversified contemporary societies. Last, but not least, strong democratic States are necessary to
protect the children, the sick, the elderly and other vulnerable segments of society, combat the
social exclusion of minority groups, and ensure a more equitable distribution of the benefits of
globalization.
A democratic State, which is proactive and strategic, is required to arrest and, in the mediumterm, reverse poverty and underdevelopment. Combating poverty both nationally and
internationally, represents an essential dimension of a strategy of restoring public trust and
rebuilding human capital, which is necessary not merely for development, but also for the
effectiveness of democratic governance. More than ever before what is needed today is a strong
democratic State endowed with institutions that are capable of coping with both domestic and
international problems, and challenges.
Strong democratic institutions are vital in providing a solid framework of political, economic and
social rules, and in creating an enabling environment for people's prosperity. In order to seize the
benefits of globalization, developing countries need to strengthen and modernize their
democratic institutions and public administration. "Our runaway world does not need less, but
more government - and this, only democratic institutions can provide"
.
The hallmarks of an intelligent, democratic State can be summarized as follows: (i) strong
institutions of governance and the rule of law; (ii) credible and independent judicial institutions;
(iii) effective legal frameworks for economic activity; (iv) an open and competitive economic
environment; (v) price stability and fiscal responsibility; (vi) an equitable tax system; (vii)
developed and competitive labour, financial and capital markets; (viii) adequate steering,
regulatory and enforcement capacities, together with judicious privatization and outsourcing of
services to private providers; (ix) public and private sector partnerships in the promotion of
business, with emphasis on microindustries and small and medium-size enterprises; (x) access to
information; and (xi) promotion of technological and infrastructure development.

29

B)

Economic and Trade Institutions- MNCs

MNCs and TNCs: Emergence, Stakes and Strategy

Emergence: Trade between nations has existed since ancient times but its scope used to be
limited. With the Industrial Revolution and the introduction of fast means of communication and
transportation, transnational trade has expanded at great speed. Subsequently, the MNCs have
emerged.
Collaboration with Media: In recent times, the emergence of media giants with increasing
power and influence over human minds, and their collaboration with other MNCs, driven by
mutual interest of the two, has profoundly intensified MNCs influence. The process has evolved
and developed with modern ways and means that have added to its significance as well as its
speed, scope and quantum.

30

Lobbying: Given their huge capital resources and production capacities, MNCs are able to
dictate their own terms in economic dealings. For the sale of their enormous production, MNCs
require access to large markets; tariff issues, access restrictions and similar barriers to trade are
hurdles in this access. What MNCs need is a global system for the free flow of their goods. They
therefore use their sheer economic weight to influence international trade rules. With their huge
resources, they employ lobbyists with the highest expertise and influence at international trade
organizations. In all, there are approximately 15,000 lobbyists based in Brussels, or roughly one
for each staff member of the European Commission, the executive body that negotiates on the
European Unions behalf in the WTO. Some 70 percent of these lobbyists represent business
interests. Their expenditures in Brussels alone are estimated to be between 750 million and 1
billion. Moreover, an estimated 17,000 lobbyists representing different MNCs are working in
Washington, DC. The pharmaceutical industry alone spent US$ 1 billion on lobbying in the US
in 2004. The rich North, influenced by such lobbying, makes decisions in favor of the MNCs,
irrespective of the economic, social or cultural consequences for the poor of the world.
Entry in Host Countries: Having poor economic infrastructure and little capital, developing
countries very easily agree to host MNCs. At times, their weak regulatory positions are
subsequently
exploited
by
MNCs.
Pushing Local Producers Out: MNCs either buy out the local companies of the host countries
or push them out of the markets by offering cheaper and better quality goods for some time.
Where aggressive marketing is needed, MNCs can, in the initial phase, even provide their
products free of cost to coax the public into developing appropriate consumption habits.
Inducing Buyers and Capturing the Market: MNCs capture the market using a variety of
strategies and tools, including social and market research, opinion building, developing interest
groups, lobbying, sponsorship, etc. The media plays an important role in this campaign.

MNCs Impact on Host Societies

MNCs carry out research to identify human needs, problems and lifestyles and come up with
multidimensional responses, including the development of products and services. What causes
them to conduct such researches and produce goods accordingly? Is it for the good of public or
maximizing their own profits? This puts the whole process of globalization in question as its
generally proclaimed goal is the good of common people. Before examining what happens when
MNCs enter host societies to achieve their commercial objectives, it is pertinent to discuss the
problems and strengths of the host societies.

31

Weaknesses and Strengths of Host Societies

When MNCs take their operations to the developing world, the host societies generally suffer
from weak infrastructures, poor governance, widespread poverty, illiteracy, health care problems,
and disparities in income distribution.
Their strengths lie in their traditional and strong social structures where the family system
provides strong bonds of relationship, a caring environment, a family-based social security
system, simple living, and inherited traditional or conventional knowledge and wisdom. The host
societies are mainly agricultural economies where food security has not been a problem in
ordinary circumstances.

The Positive Impact

When MNCs enter host societies, there are some benefits, which are outlined below:
Financial and Technological Resources and Expertise: MNCs provide immense resources and
investments, technology, innovation and expertise to the host societies. A culture of research and
development is encouraged and human resources are developed, at least within the organization.
MNCs also contribute significantly to the national exchequer by paying taxes.
Good Business Practices: Good governance, organizational transparency, clear command
structures, and performance-based evaluation and incentives programs for employees encourage
the merit system. MNCs introduce a professional working environment and culture for local
organizations to emulate, thereby promoting sound management and business education.
Comforts of Life: In some cases, large-scale economies, quality control and a healthy
competition lead to price cuts and other benefits for the end-user. People have more access to the
comforts of life with a large variety of choices.
Infrastructure Improvement: Many MNCs help in improving the infrastructure and provision
of basic needs in their specific areas of operation. They either do so directly or provide funds for
this purpose to civil society organizations. This also improves business conditions within and in
the vicinity of the areas where they are operating.
Pluralism: MNCs help boost cross-boundary interaction among people. Even education,
particularly, business education, has taken on a global perspective. The global perspectives and
opportunities for cross-cultural understanding increase the adaptability of students to alien

32

environments. This leads to the mixing of cultures and practices and encourages pluralism as
well as competition.

The Challenges posed by MNCs

Nevertheless, MNCs can also pose problems for host societies in the spheres of social and
economic development and cultural diversity. How this happens is outlined below.
Conflicts of Interest: MNCs are commercial organizations and their only interest is to gain
maximum return on their invested capital, occupy market shares and ensure their long-term
competitiveness. This leads to conflict of interests between the MNCs and host societies on
issues like repatriation of profits, patents, and major operational decisions. Host countries would
want MNCs to work in a manner that is harmonious with the social and political needs of their
societies and communities, whereas the MNCs make their choices based purely on economic
criteria. This conflict of interests leads to conflict within societies.
Increasing Materialism and Consumerism: MNCs promote a culture of conspicuous
consumption, in which presentation and cosmetic changes matter the most. The product models
change very fast and the older ones lose relevance in a short span of time. Consumerism has an
overwhelming impact on societies. For example, departmental stores and shopping malls/plazas
are mushrooming everywhere both as an outcome of and an impetus to further consumerism.
Eating habits are also changing, with increasing consumption of processed, instant, fast and junk
food, especially products of international brands. The emphasis is on instant access and quick
relief. Many products also glamorize life in the fast lane, leading to increased consumption of
faster communication products, cars, as well as stimulants such as cigarettes, and alcohol. As
outward looks become central in the vision of success, a vibrant fashion industry is changing the
dress and outlook of ordinary people. Spending priorities have changed.
Contrary to the conventional view, taking loans is now considered a status symbol. The
availability of easy credit, consumer financing, credit cards and personal loans by the banks to
the middle class is promoting a culture of people living beyond their means.
Simplicity is losing currency and people strive to live in luxury. This trend makes the disparity of
resources among people, groups and even regions look wider. Previously, education was aimed at
developing a balanced personality and ethical and social values and character building were
emphasized. Now, however, materialism has taken over.

33

Corruption and Crime: In the race for maximum profit, the MNCs deem their ends to
sometimes justify the means: they use their considerable buying power to corrupt people to
capture markets.
Healthcare Attitudes: Healthcare attitudes are changing and people expect better health
services. The job is made easier by the new norm of third party cashless payments, where
payment is made via credit cards or health insurance. The focus has now increased on preventive
healthcare. Although it is good for those who can afford these facilities - and they are the targets
of MNCs- yet it is extremely frustrating for those who cannot afford them. Hectic routines,
targets and deadlines are resulting in stresses and pressures. A destructive lifestyle has led to a
host of medical crises: sexual problems from over-performance at work, stress, mid-life crisis,
ulcers, nervous disorders, hypertension, obesity, cardiac disease, diabetes, etc., are all lifestylerelated ailments that are on the rise.
Brain Drain: The term brain drain is commonly used for the situation when talent goes out to
other countries. The MNCs are involved in another kind of brain drain. Their lucrative salaries
attract talent that might have contributed to the host society to work for their multinational
interests without leaving the country.

Cultural Changes: MNCs use, develop and continually refine their marketing tactics to create
consumers need for their products. They use social marketing and stars from the worlds of
sports and show business to project their products, especially affecting the youth, women and
children as they are generally attracted to glamour. Special events, festivals and campaigns are
organized to create hype. In this atmosphere, ethical and moral considerations have no place, and
corporate interests start determining what is to be celebrated and how.
With the spread of MNCs operations in a society, the importance of foreign languages increases
because these firms mostly operate among the classes equipped with foreign language skills and
hire and promote the people from the same groups.
Promotion of Non-Issues: Importantly, poor people are not the target of MNCs. They target the
middle classes, who have the buying powers, and trying to change their priorities in everyday
life, spending and consumption. MNCs establish close linkages with intellectuals, legislators,
media and some non-government organizations (NGOs) to highlight specific issues that suit their
business interests.
Negative marketing: When introducing their products, MNCs exaggerate the qualities to the
level of cheating and lying. Aggressive campaigns with false claims are launched. Local products
are ridiculed. Children and youth are special targets, while women are treated as commodities to
project the products, affecting the existing value framework of the societies.

34

Business Promotion through Charity: Some MNCs are involved in charitable and welfare
work in the host societies as well. However, the amount given by them in charity is not
comparable to their profits. Moreover, the charitable work revolves around activities that directly
or indirectly result in various kinds of gains for the corporations. Charity is given where the
economies best suit their corporate interests.
Violation of Human Rights: Exploitation of workers by large business corporations is a
common phenomenon. Most workers are exposed to hazardous and inhuman conditions,
overexertion and financial abuse. This happens despite the fact that many of the worlds largest
business associations, including the International Chamber of Commerce, have endorsed the UN
Secretary Generals Global Compact, a mechanism for self-regulation by business companies.
Stresses on the Family: MNCs affect the host societys family fabric in many ways. The new
cultures and lifestyles introduced by MNCs are proving harmful to the family fabric in host
societies. Overspending and living beyond means eventually creates economic pressures and
develops tensions and stresses within families. Various indicators also prove that women working
with MNCs and other big corporations undergo extra stress when entering into marriages and
bearing children. Parents have little time for their families, particularly children. One out of six
women in the world opts out of natural birth, according to the World Health Organization
(WHO). Earlier, this trend was specific to the developed countries but it now prevails in the least
developed world too.

How to Move Forward?

MNCs have both a positive and a negative impact on host societies, even in the developed world.
This is why a strong and vibrant global justice movement is under way to watch and resist the
ongoing process of globalization.
MNCs have contributed a lot in the growth of developed countries and both have progressed side
by side. This has been an evolutionary development and, therefore, there are now strong
institutions, including legislating bodies, regulatory agencies, judicial system, and consumer
societies, to check and maintain the balance from within. In the case of developing host societies,
however, a rather uneven contest is taking place. This needs to be addressed through
interventions at three levels:

At the grassroots level, popular consumer movements need to be

organized to tackle the challenge of facing this unequal contest. MNCs
need to be influenced to conduct social research related to the host
societies problems and to contribute certain portions of their profits to

35

social sector development, particularly education and human resource

development in the host societies.

At the government level, host countries should legislate according to

local needs, ensuring that benefits and burdens are evenly distributed
and favoring lower-income groups. The recently published Asia Pacific
Human Development Report outlines an agenda that emphasizes,
among others, investing for competitiveness, adopting strategic trade
policies, restoring a focus on agriculture, combating jobless growth,
preparing a new tax regime and persistence with multilateralism.

At the global level, the issue needs to be addressed by the UN and its
relevant agencies, such as UNCTAD. So far, this experience has not
been very encouraging. UN officials are now embracing partnerships
with multinationals, partly out of frustration with the considerable
failure of development efforts over the past several decades, and
partly because they think they have no choice.

Although it will not be easy, there is a need to chalk out a global strategy and comprehensive
program for moving towards healthy competition and the 'balance of power' between MNCs and
the developing host societies by removing the present inequalities. In such a scenario, businesses
would be driven to create value not only for shareholders but also for the society and ecological
environment that host them.

36

C)

Structural Reforms of UN Security Council

The United Nations Security Council (UNSC)

UNSC is one of the six principal organs of the United Nations and is charged with the
maintenance of international peace and security. Its powers include the establishment of
peacekeeping operations, the establishment of international sanctions, and the authorization of
military action through Security Council resolutions; it is the only UN body with the authority to
issue binding resolutions to member states. The Security Council held its first session on 17
January 1946.
Like the UN as a whole, the Security Council was created following World War II to address the
failings of another international organization, the League of Nations, in maintaining world peace.
In its early decades, the body was largely paralysed by the Cold War division between the US
and USSR and their allies, though it authorized interventions in the Korean War and the Congo
Crisis and peacekeeping missions in the Suez Crisis, Cyprus, and West New Guinea. With the
collapse of the Soviet Union, UN peacekeeping efforts increased dramatically in scale, and the
Security Council authorized major military and peacekeeping missions in Kuwait, Namibia,
Cambodia, Bosnia, Rwanda, Somalia, Sudan, and the Democratic Republic of Congo.
The Security Council consists of fifteen members. The great powers that were the victors of
World War IIRussia, the United Kingdom, France, China, and the United Statesserve as the
body's five permanent members. These permanent members can veto any substantive Security
Council resolution, including those on the admission of new member states or candidates for
Secretary-General. The Security Council also has 10 non-permanent members, elected on a
regional basis to serve two-year terms. The body's presidency rotates monthly among its
members.
Security Council resolutions are typically enforced by UN peacekeepers, military forces
voluntarily provided by member states and funded independently of the main UN budget. As of
2013, 117000 peacekeeping soldiers and other personnel are deployed on 15 missions around the

37

world. Evaluations of the Security Council's effectiveness are mixed, and calls for its reform
predate the body's first meeting; however, little consensus exists on how its structure should be
changed.

Role of UN Security Council

The UN's role in international collective security is defined by the UN Charter, which authorizes
the Security Council to investigate any situation threatening international peace; recommend
procedures for peaceful resolution of a dispute; call upon other member nations to completely or
partially interrupt economic relations as well as sea, air, postal, and radio communications, or to
sever diplomatic relations; and enforce its decisions militarily, or by any means necessary. The
Security Council also recommends the new Secretary-General to the General Assembly and
recommends new states for admission as member states of the United Nations.[36][37] The Security
Council has traditionally interpreted its mandate as covering only military security, though US
Ambassador Richard Holbrooke controversially persuaded the body to pass a resolution on
HIV/AIDS in Africa in 2000.[38]
Under Chapter VI of the Charter, "Pacific Settlement of Disputes", the Security Council "may
investigate any dispute, or any situation which might lead to international friction or give rise to
a dispute". The Council may "recommend appropriate procedures or methods of adjustment" if it
determines that the situation might endanger international peace and security. [39] These
recommendations are generally considered to not be binding, as they lack an enforcement
mechanism.[40] A minority of scholars, such as Stephen Zunes, have argued that resolutions made
under Chapter VI are "still directives by the Security Council and differ only in that they do not
have the same stringent enforcement options, such as the use of military force".[41]
Under Chapter VII, the Council has broader power to decide what measures are to be taken in
situations involving "threats to the peace, breaches of the peace, or acts of aggression".[18] In such
situations, the Council is not limited to recommendations but may take action, including the use
of armed force "to maintain or restore international peace and security". [18] This was the legal
basis for UN armed action in Korea in 1950 during the Korean War and the use of coalition
forces in Iraq and Kuwait in 1991 and Libya in 2011.[42][43] Decisions taken under Chapter VII,
such as economic sanctions, are binding on UN members; the Security Council is the only UN
body with the authority to issue binding resolutions.[44][45]
The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court recognizes that the Security Council has
authority to refer cases to the Court in which the Court could not otherwise exercise jurisdiction.
[46]
The Council exercised this power for the first time in March 2005, when it referred to the
Court "the situation prevailing in Darfur since 1 July 2002"; since Sudan is not a party to the
Rome Statute, the Court could not otherwise have exercised jurisdiction. [47][48] The Security

38

Council made its second such referral in February 2011 when it asked the ICC to investigate the
Libyan government's violent response to the Libyan Civil War.[49]
Security Council Resolution 1674, adopted on 28 April 2006, "reaffirms the provisions of
paragraphs 138 and 139 of the 2005 World Summit Outcome Document regarding the
responsibility to protect populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes
against humanity".[50] The Security Council reaffirmed this responsibility to protect in Resolution
1706 on 31 August of that year.[51] These resolutions commit the Security Council to take action
to protect civilians in an armed conflict, including taking action against genocide, war crimes,
ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity.

Criticism Of UNSC
Under Article 27 of the UN Charter, Security Council decisions on all substantive matters require
the affirmative votes of nine members. A negative vote or "veto" by a permanent member
prevents adoption of a proposal, even if it has received the required votes. [53] Abstention is not
regarded as a veto in most cases, though all five permanent members must actively concur to
amend the UN Charter or to recommend the admission of a new UN member state. [44] Procedural
matters are not subject to a veto, so the veto cannot be used to avoid discussion of an issue. The
same holds for certain decisions that directly regard permanent members.[53] A majority of vetoes
are used not in critical international security situations, but for purposes such as blocking a
candidate for Secretary-General or the admission of a member state.
As of 2012, 269 vetoes had been cast since the Security Council's inception. [b] In this period,
China (ROC/PRC) used the veto 9 times, France 18, Russia/USSR 128, the UK 32, and the US
89. Roughly two-thirds of Russian/Soviet vetoes were in the first ten years of the Security
Council's existence. Between 1996 and 2012, China vetoed 5 resolutions, Russia 7, and the US
13, while France and the UK did not use the veto
The five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, who are all nuclear
powers, have created an exclusive nuclear club that predominately addresses the strategic
interests and political motives of the permanent membersfor example, protecting the oil-rich
Kuwaitis in 1991 but poorly protecting resource-poor Rwandans in 1994. [93] Since three of the
five permanent members are also European, and three or four are predominantly white Western

39

nations, the Security Council has been described as a pillar of global apartheid by Titus
Alexander, former Chair of Westminster United Nations Association.[94]
The Security Council's effectiveness and relevance is questioned by some because, in most highprofile cases, there are essentially no consequences for violating a Security Council resolution.
During the Darfur crisis, Janjaweed militias, allowed by elements of the Sudanese government,
committed violence against an indigenous population, killing thousands of civilians. In the
Srebrenica massacre, Serbian troops committed genocide against Bosniaks, although Srebrenica
had been declared a UN safe area and was even protected by 400 armed Dutch
peacekeepers.[95] The UN Charter gives all three powers of the legislative, executive, and
judiciary branches to the Security Council.[96]
In his inaugural speech at the 16th Summit of the Non-Aligned Movement in August 2012,
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei criticized the United Nations Security Council as having an "illogical,
unjust and completely undemocratic structure and mechanism" and called for a complete reform
of the body.[97]

Reform of the United Nations Security Council

Proposals to reform the Security Council began with the conference that wrote the UN Charter
and have continued to the present day. As British historian Paul Kennedy writes, "Everyone
agrees that the present structure is flawed. But consensus on how to fix it remains out of
reach."[107]
There has been discussion of increasing the number of permanent members. The countries who
have made the strongest demands for permanent seats are Brazil, Germany, India, and Japan.
Japan and Germany, the main defeated powers in WWII, are now the UN's second- and thirdlargest funders respectively, while Brazil and India are two of the largest contributors of troops to
UN-mandated peace-keeping missions. This proposal has found opposition in a group of
countries called Uniting for Consensus.
Former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan asked a team of advisers to come up with
recommendations for reforming the United Nations by the end of 2004. One proposed measure is
to increase the number of permanent members by five, which, in most proposals, would include
Brazil, Germany, India, Japan (known as the G4 nations), one seat from Africa (most likely
between Egypt, Nigeria or South Africa) and/or one seat from the Arab League.[108] On 21

40

September 2004, the G4 nations issued a joint statement mutually backing each other's claim to
permanent status, together with two African countries. Currently the proposal has to be accepted
by two-thirds of the General Assembly (128 votes).
The permanent members, each holding the right of veto, announced their positions on Security
Council reform reluctantly. The United States has unequivocally supported the permanent
membership of Japan and lent its support to India and a small number of additional nonpermanent members. The United Kingdom and France essentially supported the G4 position,
with the expansion of permanent and non-permanent members and the accession of Germany,
Brazil, India and Japan to permanent member status, as well as an increase in the presence by
African countries on the Council. China has supported the stronger representation of developing
countries and firmly opposed Japan's membership.[109]
India's bid for permanent member of UNSC is backed by all permanent members - bar China namely France,[110] Russia,[111] the United Kingdom[112] and United States,[113] although the United
States initially opposed India's candidacy on grounds of nuclear proliferation, as India has
acquired nuclear weapons and not signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.[114] On 15 April
2011, China officially expressed its support for an increased Indian role at the United Nations,
without explicitly endorsing India's Security Council ambitions.[115][116] However, recently China
has expressed its support for Indian candidacy as a permanent member of the Security Council if
India revoked its support for Japanese candidacy,[117] thus making India the only candidate that
has received support from all permanent members and most other nations as well.

Unit-4
Models To Achieve Global Justice
A)

Social Contract and Social Justice :

Social Contract
In moral and political philosophy, the social contract or political contract is a theory or model,
originating during the Age of Enlightenment, that typically addresses the questions of the origin
of society and the legitimacy of the authority of the state over the individual.[1] Social contract
arguments typically posit that individuals have consented, either explicitly or tacitly, to surrender
some of their freedoms and submit to the authority of the ruler or magistrate (or to the decision

41

of a majority), in exchange for protection of their remaining rights. The question of the relation
between natural and legal rights, therefore, is often an aspect of social contract theory.
Hugo Grotius (1625), Thomas Hobbes (1651), Samuel Pufendorf (1673), John Locke (1689),
Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1762), and Immanuel Kant (1797) are among the most prominent of
17th- and 18th-century theorists of social contract and natural rights. Each solved the problem of
political authority in a different way. Grotius posited that individual human beings had natural
rights; Hobbes asserted that humans consent to abdicate their rights in favor of the absolute
authority of government (whether monarchial or parliamentary); Pufendorf disputed Hobbes's
equation of a state of nature with war.
Thomas Hobbes' Leviathan
Thomas Hobbes famously said that in the "state of nature", human life would be "solitary, poor,
nasty, brutish and short". In the absence of political order and law, everyone would have
unlimited natural freedoms, including the "right to all things" and thus the freedom to plunder,
rape, and murder; there would be an endless "war of all against all" (bellum omnium contra
omnes). To avoid this, free men contract with each other to establish political community i.e.
civil society through a social contract in which they all gain security in return for subjecting
themselves to an absolute Sovereign, one man or an assembly of men.
Though the Sovereign's edicts may well be arbitrary and tyrannical, Hobbes saw absolute
government as the only alternative to the terrifying anarchy of a state of nature. Alternatively,
John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau, have argued that we gain civil rights in return for
accepting the obligation to respect and defend the rights of others, giving up some freedoms to
do so. The central assertion of social contract approaches is that law and political order are not
natural, but are instead human creations. The social contract and the political order it creates are
simply the means towards an end the benefit of the individuals involved and legitimate
only to the extent that they fulfill their part of the agreement.
According to Hobbes (in whose view government is not a party to the original contract) citizens
are not obligated to submit to the government when it is too weak to act effectively to suppress
factionalism and civil unrest. According to other social contract theorists, citizens can withdraw
their obligation to obey or change the leadership, through elections or other means including,
when necessary, violence, when the government fails to secure their natural rights (Locke) or
satisfy the best interest of society (called the "general will" in Rousseau, who is more concerned
with forming new governments than in overthrowing old ones).

Social Justice

42

Social justice is "justice in terms of the distribution of wealth, opportunities, and privileges
within a society".[1] Classically, "justice" (especially corrective justice or distributive justice)
referred to ensuring that individuals both fulfilled their societal roles, [2] and received what was
due from society. "Social justice" is generally used to refer to a set of institutions which will
enable people to lead a fulfilling life and be active contributors to their community. [3] The goal of
social justice is generally the same as human development.[citation needed] The relevant institutions
can include education, health care, social security, labour rights, as well as a broader system of
public services, progressive taxation and regulation of markets, to ensure fair distribution of
wealth, equality of opportunity, and no gross inequality of outcome.
John Rawls
Political philosopher John Rawls draws on the utilitarian insights of Bentham and Mill, the social
contract ideas of John Locke, and the categorical imperative ideas of Kant. His first statement of
principle was made in A Theory of Justice where he proposed that, "Each person possesses an
inviolability founded on justice that even the welfare of society as a whole cannot override. For
this reason justice denies that the loss of freedom for some is made right by a greater good shared
by others."[29] A deontological proposition that echoes Kant in framing the moral good of justice
in absolutist terms. His views are definitively restated in Political Liberalism where society is
seen "as a fair system of co-operation over time, from one generation to the next.".[30]
All societies have a basic structure of social, economic, and political institutions, both formal and
informal. In testing how well these elements fit and work together, Rawls based a key test of
legitimacy on the theories of social contract. To determine whether any particular system of
collectively enforced social arrangements is legitimate, he argued that one must look for
agreement by the people who are subject to it, but not necessarily to an objective notion of
justice based on coherent ideological grounding. Obviously, not every citizen can be asked to
participate in a poll to determine his or her consent to every proposal in which some degree of
coercion is involved, so one has to assume that all citizens are reasonable. Rawls constructed an
argument for a two-stage process to determine a citizen's hypothetical agreement:

The citizen agrees to be represented by X for certain purposes, and, to that extent, X
holds these powers as a trustee for the citizen.

X agrees that enforcement in a particular social context is legitimate. The citizen,

therefore, is bound by this decision because it is the function of the trustee to represent
the citizen in this way.

This applies to one person who represents a small group (e.g., the organiser of a social event
setting a dress code) as equally as it does to national governments, which are ultimate trustees,
holding representative powers for the benefit of all citizens within their territorial boundaries.
Governments that fail to provide for welfare of their citizens according to the principles of

43

justice are not legitimate. To emphasise the general principle that justice should rise from the
people and not be dictated by the law-making powers of governments, Rawls asserted that,
"There is ... a general presumption against imposing legal and other restrictions on conduct
without sufficient reason. But this presumption creates no special priority for any particular
liberty."[31] This is support for an unranked set of liberties that reasonable citizens in all states
should respect and uphold to some extent, the list proposed by Rawls matches the normative
human rights that have international recognition and direct enforcement in some nation states
where the citizens need encouragement to act in a way that fixes a greater degree of equality of
outcome. According to Rawls, the basic liberties that every good society should guarantee are,

Freedom of thought;

Liberty of conscience as it affects social relationships on the grounds of religion,

philosophy, and morality;

Political liberties (e.g. representative democratic institutions, freedom of speech and the
press, and freedom of assembly);

Freedom of association;

Freedoms necessary for the liberty and integrity of the person (viz: freedom from slavery,
freedom of movement and a reasonable degree of freedom to choose one's occupation);
and

Rights and liberties covered by the rule of law.

How Social Contract promotes Social Justice: Rousseaus The Social Contract

Jean-Jacques Rousseaus The Social Contract, or Principles of Political Right (1762) is an

analysis of the contractual relationships that may be necessary for legitimate government, and it
is an explanation of how these relationships may combine principles of justice and utility.
Rousseau argues that civil society is based on a contractual arrangement of rights and duties
which applies equally to all people, whereby natural liberty is exchanged for civil liberty, and
whereby natural rights are exchanged for legal rights. The terms of the contract provide
assurance that civil laws promote the public good rather than the private good of particular
individuals or groups. If the contract is breached by a government which usurps the sovereignty
of its people, then the people are no longer obligated to submit to that government and
consequently regain their natural liberty.

44

According to Rousseau, justice cannot be defined as "the right of the strongest" (le droit du plus
fort) or the power of some individuals to gain advantage over others. If justice were the same as
the power to gain advantage over others, then the most powerful individuals would always be the
most just and morally right. Moreover, if justice were the power to force an individual to yield to
a particular demand, then there would be no obligation for an individual to comply with a lawful
authority unless that authority had the power to force the individual to comply. Thus, the
question of whether justice can be achieved in society may not depend on whether individuals
can be forced to comply with civil authority but on whether individuals and civil authority can
act in harmony with, and fulfill their moral obligations toward, each other. Moreover, there may
be a moral obligation to comply with civil authority only if that authority is legitimate (i.e. if that
authority is based on a fair and just agreement among the members of society).
In order to protect themselves and their property, individuals may agree to a contractual
relationship whereby they combine themselves into an association for the benefit of all. By
means of this contractual relationship, individuals agree to accept various duties or obligations in
exchange for the benefits provided by social cooperation. Thus, a republic may be established on
the basis of a mutual commitment between society and each individual, whereby society has an
obligation to each individual and each individual has an obligation to society.
Each individual may have a particular will (volunt particulire) which is different from the
general will (volunt gnale) of the people, but the particular will of each individual may be
forced to submit to the general will because of the obligations that have been defined for all
individuals by the terms of the social contract. The general will is not the same as the will of all
individuals, because it is not the sum of all individual private interests. 1 Unlike the combined will
of all individuals, the general will is concerned with the public interest rather than with private
interests.
The sovereignty of a republic is manifested by the general will, and the sovereign is the same as
the body politic, says Rousseau. Sovereignty is inalienable and indivisible, in that a republic
which surrenders or divides its sovereignty is no longer a republic and can no longer represent
the public interest of all of its citizens.
The general will always desires the common good, says Rousseau, but it may not always choose
correctly between what is advantageous or disadvantageous for promoting social harmony and
cooperation, because it may be influenced by particular groups of individuals who are concerned
with promoting their own private interests. Thus, the general will may need to be guided by the
judgment of an individual who is concerned only with the public interest and who can explain to
the body politic how to promote justice and equal citizenship. This individual is the "lawgiver"
(le lgislateur). The lawgiver is guided by sublime reason and by a concern for the common
good, and he is an individual whose enlightened judgment can determine the principles of justice
and utility which are best suited to society.

45

If a republic is governed by principles of justice and utility, then each person is required to
surrender only as much of his natural liberty as is necessary for the republic to guarantee the
protection of legal rights for all of its citizens. Equal citizenship in a republic may be established
by means of a social contract, which is a declaration by the general will that civil laws will apply
equally to all individuals.
Rousseau uses the term "republic" to refer to any society that is ruled by law or that is ruled by
the general will of its people. A civil law is an act of the general will, says Rousseau, and the
general will must be obeyed by all people. Thus, obedience to civil law is required of all
individuals by the terms of the social contract. However, the institution of government is not a
contract, but an act of the general will.
As a result of the social contract, civil laws are decided by a majority vote of the magistrates who
are elected to represent the people. The minority which opposes the will of the majority must
accept any acts of the general will, and it cannot refuse to submit to the general will without
violating the terms of the contract. Accordint to Rousseau, the general will is the will of both the
majority and minority, and if a minority of individuals does not approve of a law which has been
approved of by the majority, then that minority must have mistakenly supposed that its own
particular will was the same as the general will. The general will is not a selfish, unjust will and
is truly concerned with the common good.
The social contract involves a total and unconditional surrender by each individual of his own
natural rights in order to gain the rights of citizenship. 2 There is no need for the sovereign
authority to guarantee the civil liberty and legal rights of its subjects, because its interests are
identical to those of the people as a whole. 3 If anyone refuses to comply with the general will,
then he or she may be forced to comply by the whole body politic (and may be "forced to be
free").

46

B)

Sarvodaya Model of Justice

The 'Sarvodaya' is the combination of two words 'Sarba' and 'Udaya'. It denotes the meaning
uplift of all. Its philosophical ideas devotes the meaning uplift and development in all aspects in
the life of individual. It also gives the meaning 'good of all', service to all and wellfare to all, etc.
Sarvodaya, as an ideal, seeks to build a new society on the foundation of the old spiritual and
moral values of India. Its philosophy is integral and synthetic in character. It takes up the
Gandhian synthesis of the ideas of Vedanta, Buddhism, Christianity, Ruskin, Tolstoy, Thoreau
and tries to incorporate his ideas at more critical and analytical levels. Besides Gandhism, it has
also taken some of its ideas from the socialist philosophy. Thus, Sarvodaya represents a synthesis
of Gandhian and socialist philosophy, a synthesis of theoritical abstractions and political and
economic generalisations. Vinoba, a true Gandhian and J.P. Narayan, a true socialist are
the two main leaders associated with Sarvodaya movement.
Feature
(i) Sarvodaya is a strong ideology for prevention of socio-economic ills of the society.
(ii) It is based on 'Advaita Vedanto' doctrine. The main aim is to reconcile the systems of egoism
and altruism.
(iii) It stands for creating high moral character in the society. It is only possible by truth,
nonviolence, self-sacrifice and purity, etc. In short, it stands for the supremacy and absoluteness
of moral values. As J.P. Narayan said, "Sarvodaya represents the highest socialist values. It takes
a balanced or whole view of life. It is naturally opposed to capitalism and stands for
decentralisation of the forces of production."
(iv) It aims at adopting self-sacrifice for the sake of others. Taking and giving, to others. It is the
best principle in Sarvodaya.
(v) Sarvodaya pleads for self-sufficient village communities. It claims to establish a society of
producers. Bhoodan, 'Sampattidan', and 'Gramdan' are some of the basic techniques of
Sarvodaya. Bhoodan and Gramdan are techniques of agrarian revolution based on moral forces,
sampattidan is a technique of transforming Sapitalism into a Sarvodaya society. The two
movements of Bhoodan and Gramdan visualize village ownership of hand as well as individual

47

cultivation by the villagers. They will promote among the villagers a sense of community,
strength, cohesiveness and initiative. The villages will be self-sufficient and self-reliant. It pleads
for what may be termed, 'villagisation'. To the philosophy of village reconstruction, it has added
the gospel of the ownership of all lands of village in the village community and the erection of
decentralised village commonwealth.

(vi) Truth and non-violence are the two main points of Sarvodaya. If everybody practises these
two principles, the social corruptions and irregularities will be checked.
(vii) It is one non-political ideology. It is rather a socio-religious creed. It stands for
selflimitations of human wants.
(viii) It stands for national unity and solidarity. It condemns provincialism and regionalism.
*Shramadana* means sharing work, knowledge, talents, and time. The aim of the Movement is
to use shared work, voluntary giving and sharing of resources to achieve the personal and social
awakening of everyone ~ from the individual, to the village, and continuing up to the
international level.
Awakening means developing human potential, and is a comprehensive process taking place on
the spiritual, moral, cultural, social, economic and political levels. Sarvodaya strives for a model
of society in which there is neither poverty nor excessive affluence. The movements holistic
approach is based on Buddhist principles (including goodness, sympathy, and tranquility) and on
the Gandhian values of truthfulness, nonviolence, and self-sacrifice.

*The five evolutionary stages of a village*

To fulfill its ambitions to develop human potential and to achieve widespread social
effectiveness, the movement is working with a participatory approach in nearly 15,000 villages
on the island. The program is adjusted to the specific social, cultural, and religious conditions in
each region. At the same time, all of the villages go through five stages of evolution or
awakening.
* *Stage 1*: Inquiry from the village and organization of an introductory _shramadana_ camp
for the village, during which problems are analyzed together and needs identified.

* *Stage 2*: Establishment of various groups (childrens, youngsters, mothers and farmers
groups), construction of a child development center, and training of staff.

48

* *Stage 3*: Program for meeting the basic needs and setting up institutions (including the
founding of the Sarvodaya Shramadana Society, which is responsible for the villages
development initiatives);

* *Stage 4*: Measures to produce income and employment; establishment of complete selfreliance and self-financing;

* *Stage 5*: Support for other village communities.

The approach is designed in such a way that ten villages are always grouped around a pioneering
village that has already reached the fifth stage. These villages cooperate, and the groups of ten
are linked to one another in turn at the district and national levels, so as to be able to implement
common projects such as a regional water supply. The aim is that the villages should be able to
manage themselves as a community to be organized, self-reliant, and able to act independently.
*Awakening through meeting basic needs*
The Sarvodaya Movement has identified ten elementary and basic needs. Satisfying those means,
liberating the spirit from its own limitations and from unequal socioeconomic conditions, and
thereby developing human potential in the Buddhist sense.
These basic needs are:

* A clean and beautiful environment

* Adequate provision of clean drinking water

* Minimal supplies of clothing

* Adequate and balanced nutrition

* Simple housing

49

* Basic health care

* Basic communication facilities

* A minimal supply of energy

* Holistic education

* Satisfaction of intellectual and cultural needs

This list illustrates Sarvodayas comprehensive approach to social development. It highlights not
only economic and social needs, but also spiritual, moral, and cultural requirements such as
cultural programs and village libraries.
*Activities involved in village development*
The activities carried out in these three stages of evolution can be divided into ten areas:

# Capacity building in the community

# Early childhood development

# Community Health

# Relief and rehabilitation

# Development of village infrastructure

# Environment and biodiversity

50

# Communication development

# Development of integrated education

# Applied research

# Peace work and youth work

As the first step, measures are carried out jointly that will unify the village community in its
development efforts. Village streets are built, wells are repaired, and information about the
villages general needs is collected on a participatory basis. Further activities then include
training in the areas of management, leadership, and organizational development, both for
nursery school teachers and health-care personnel. In addition, there are seminars on home
economics, nutrition, sexuality and health for young people, and library management.
All of these activities are accompanied by meditative reflection on the problems to be solved and
the solutions to be developed. This reflects the Eastern, Buddhist nature of the movement.
Reflection opens up deeper insights and hidden relationships, encouraging a receptive attitude;
listening and thinking become tools for discovery. A harmonious relationship between
receptiveness and sensitive activity reduces the risk that overlooked, underestimated, or
neglected matters might give rise to counter forces that could later disturb or ruin the efforts
altogether.

*Special aspects of the program*

A factor vital to success is the provision of explicit support both to young people and to older
people. One way in which this can be done is involving young people in the activities and giving
them the corresponding responsibilities. This strengthens their identification with the village
community and their motivation to collaborate with development efforts. It is mainly young
people who are trained to become organizers for village development or members of the Peace
Corps. They receive access at the same time to information in the fields of health (sexuality,
drugs, suicide prevention), communications (Internet, library access), and environmental
protection while cultural and sporting events are also organized.

51

In addition, dialogue between young people and older people is very much encouraged in the
community. This is based on the conviction that comprehensive development requires both the
creativity and energy of young people and the wisdom of older people. Seminars are therefore
held on cooperation between the generations, or on older peoples needs and ways of providing
support for them.
In view of the continuing civil war, Sarvodayas efforts in the field of peace education, conflict
resolution and conflict prevention, as well as international understanding, are highly important.
Here, too, the emphasis is on children and young people, since they are the ones who will soon
be determining the countrys future. In addition to arranging discussions on peace and faith
between villagers and religious communities, young people are trained to become members of a
peace corps that conducts conflict resolution and conflict prevention activities in the villages
particularly between members of different religious communities, such as Tamils and Sinhalese.
Finally, Sarvodayas development efforts are not restricted to meeting basic needs such as clean
drinking water, housing and access to basic education and health services. In the light of social
awakening and the development of human potential, the movement also strives to achieve
social and political participation for the beneficiaries. This goal is seen in the comprehensive
educational and training measures aimed at developing capacities and abilities that can allow
self-determined and responsible development. In addition, the involvement of nearly 15,000
villages means that a certain amount of social and political participation is also taking place at
the national level. This critical mass one-third of all the villages in Sri Lanka are involved in
the Sarvodaya movement favors social change, and therefore has an effect on national
development. The Sarvodaya model has in fact already influenced national policy strategies in
certain areas such as health and education.

52

C) Significance of Human Right Education

Amnesty International believes that human rights education is fundamental for addressing the
underlying causes of human rights violations, preventing human rights abuses, combating
discrimination, promoting equality, and enhancing peoples participation in democratic decisionmaking processes.

What is Human Rights Education?

Amnesty Internationals definition of Human Rights Education:

'Human rights education is a deliberate, participatory practice aimed at
empowering individuals, groups and communities through fostering knowledge,
skills and attitudes consistent with internationally recognized human rights
principles.'

'As a medium to long-term process, human rights education seeks to develop and
integrate people's cognitive, affective and attitudinal dimensions, including critical
thinking, in relation to human rights. Its goal is to build a culture of respect for and action
in the defence and promotion of human rights for all.'
Human rights education is an internationally recognized method for promoting human
rights on a local, national and global level among many levels of stakeholders.
Human rights education can also play a vital role in building social structures that support
participatory democracies and the resolution of conflict, and can provide a common
understanding of how to address political and social differences equitably and celebrate
cultural diversity.
human rights education is all learning that develops the knowledge, skills, and values of
human rights.
The United Nations Decade for Human Rights Education (1995-2004) has defined
Human Rights Education as "training, dissemination, and information efforts aimed at the
building of a universal culture of human rights through the imparting of knowledge and
skills and the molding of attitudes which are directed to:
(a) The strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms;
(b) The full development of the human personality and the sense of its dignity;

53

(c) The promotion of understanding, respect, gender equality, and friendship among all
nations, indigenous peoples and racial, national, ethnic, religious and linguistic groups;
(d) The enabling of all persons to participate effectively in a free society;
(e) The furtherance of the activities of the United Nations for the Maintenance of Peace."
(Adapted from the Plan of Action of the United Nations Decade for Human Rights
Education (1995-2004), paragraph 2)
Importance of Human Rights Education

Human rights education teaches both about human rights and for human rights.

Its goal is to help people understand human rights, value human rights, and take
responsibility for respecting, defending, and promoting human rights. An important
outcome of human rights education is empowerment, a process through which people and
communities increase their control of their own lives and the decisions that affect them.
The ultimate goal of human rights education is people working together to bring about
human rights, justice, and dignity for all.

Education about human rights provides people with information about human rights. It includes
learning

a) about the inherent dignity of all people and their right to be treated with respect
b) about human rights principles, such as the universality, indivisibility, and
interdependence of human rights
c) about how human rights promote participation in decision making and the peaceful
resolution of conflicts
d) about the history and continuing development of human rights
e) about international law, like the Universal Declaration of Human Rights or the
Convention on the Rights of the Child

54

f) about regional, national, state, and local law that reinforces international human
rights law
g) about using human rights law to protect human rights and to call violators to
account for their actions
h) about human rights violations such as torture, genocide, or violence against women
and the social, economic, political, ethnic, and gender forces which cause them
i) about the persons and agencies that are responsible for promoting, protecting, and
respecting human rights

Education for human rights helps people feel the importance of human rights, internalize human
rights values, and integrate them into the way they live. These human rights values and attitudes
include

1) "strengthening respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms"

2) nurturing respect for others, self-esteem, and hope
3) understanding the nature of human dignity and respecting the dignity of others
4) empathizing with those whose rights are violated and feeling a sense of solidarity
with them
5) recognizing that the enjoyment of human rights by all citizens is a precondition to a
just and humane society
6) perceiving the human rights dimension of civil, social, political, economic, and
cultural issues and conflicts both in the US and other countries
7) valuing non-violence and believing that cooperation is better than conflict

Education for human rights also gives people a sense of responsibility for respecting and
defending human rights and empowers them through skills to take appropriate action. These
skills for action include

55

1) recognizing that human rights may be promoted and defended on an individual,

collective, and institutional level
2) developing critical understanding of life situations
3) analyzing situations in moral terms
4) realizing that unjust situations can be improved
5) recognizing a personal and social stake in the defense of human rights
6) analyzing factors that cause human rights violations
7) knowing about and being able to use global, regional, national, and local human
rights instruments and mechanisms for the protection of human rights
8) strategizing appropriate responses to injustice
9) acting to promote and defend human rights

During this Decade, the UN is urging and supporting all member states to make knowledge about
human rights available to everyone through both the formal school system and through popular
and adult education.