Comments on: Gandhi and International Human Rights

By: Mr. boss

Mr. boss — Thu, 24 Oct 2013 00:58:29 +0000

Hello everyone WAS SUP

By: Zack

Zack — Thu, 24 Oct 2013 00:55:18 +0000

Sup

By: jagdishmisra

jagdishmisra — Thu, 14 Mar 2013 10:05:57 +0000

I fully agree with Gandhi .Rights and Duties are the two facets of the same coin.Every human being regardless of of caste, colour, religion or faith, gender,place of birth,etc has undoubtedly some natural rights.But he has some corresponding duties also. For example a child has the right to be loved by the parents,therfore it is the duty of the parents to love the child.similarly the citizens of a country has some civil and political rights against their governments.Therefore, if the government curbs those rights by any means, it beyond doubts violates human rights of the citizens.Hence, right to revolution is also a human right.By doing so the people bring back their government on track.

By: Hans Maier

Hans Maier — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 22:53:59 +0000

Only now (February 5, 2013) I came across your article of October 1, 2010, which so rightly points to Gandhi’s view of human rights: these are to be preceded by human duties. And his emphasis on these notions to be seen from the point of view of an individual human being. What else could have been meant by the drafters of the 1948 Declaration when they justified the granting of rights to humans by their being endowed with reason and a conscience? The drafters sidetracked the – logical – duties issue for fear of the project being held-up by “metaphysical controversies” (cf. John. H. Knox, Opinio Juris, November 6, 2007), but this flaw is now becoming ever more obvious. A proposal to remedy this situation is put forward in http://www.humanduties.com. It proposes the development of a list of human duties by a process of discussion and agreement
within a network of wise women and men representing all cultures of planet Earth. Of course, it is modern technology – the internet – that makes such a process possible. But once it is in progress, the gradual ‘meeting of minds’ that
will be witnessed will lead to an invaluable enhancement of decision-making all
over the world. The important point now is to prove worldwide support for this initiative, and that is what the website is inviting.

By: george.invincible

george.invincible — Mon, 14 Feb 2011 11:52:03 +0000

srry fr this sayings…..

By: george.invincible

george.invincible — Mon, 14 Feb 2011 11:51:07 +0000

he was mad mohan das karamchand gandhi he was a butt ass

By: Nicolas

Nicolas — Fri, 15 Oct 2010 08:59:56 +0000

Greatings, Todo dinбmica y muy positiva!

Nicolas

By: Arghya

Arghya — Sun, 03 Oct 2010 03:54:54 +0000

Hi Sanhita, wonderful piece yet again. I had two quick points on which I would like to know what you think. Duties, as opposed to rights or obligations, I agree provide a wonderful alternative discourse. But, I think (a) it is idealised; (b) it doesn’t change much. When you’re talking about individual duties, it would be wonderful if everyone did what was expected of them. But if external enforcement is required, there is a problem since then the range of duties would have to be fairly small. Of course, enforcement perhaps was outside the Gandhian schema of duties, but given that for actual translation into law enforcement may well be necessary, I find it hard to conceptualise a whole range of duties which are sought to be enforced.
Second, if it’s duties of the state, then I think that’s just a different way of stating the rights discourse. I think there’s a fairly good discussion of this in the context of housing and health in the Constitution of South Africa, whether and to what extent these should be rights of the people and to what extent obligations on the state. And as I think those debates have panned out, the difference between the two is largely symbolic.