Cultural human rights is considered to be the rights of which generation. Four generations of rights and freedoms

Over the past two centuries, ideas about the natural nature of certain rights that all people formulated by thinkers of early new time as a regulatory ideal have become fundamental principles. international law. Moreover, the volume of such inalienable rights has increased significantly.

The dynamics of ideas about the content of human rights is customary to describe in terms of "generations" of human rights. The appearance of each new generation meant not just a mechanical expansion of the case of recognized rights, but the assimilation of the fundamentally new logic of reasoning and argumentation, which often leads to serious and difficult to solve the "new" rights with "old".

The first generation of human rights is inalienable personal (civil) and political rights.

Civil and political rights are aimed at limiting state powerThey oblige the state not to interfere in the sphere of person's personal freedom (its autonomous life), create conditions for the participation of a citizen in the political life of the country.

Personal (civil) rights are the rights of each, and although they are often referred to as civilians, are not directly related to the state to citizenship of the state, do not flow out of it. They are considered inborn and integral for each person, regardless of his citizenship, gender, age, race, ethnic or religious affiliation. Need to protect the life, dignity and freedom of man.

Personal rights are usually attributed:

· The right to live
· Right to freedom and personal integrity
· The right to the dignity of personality
· The right to privacy
· The right to the inviolability of housing
· Right to national and cultural self-identification
· Freedom of conscience and freedom of thought
· Freedom of movement and choice of residence;
· Freedom of choice of nationality and communication language
· The right to judicial protection, equality before the law, the right to freedom from arbitrary arrest, detention or expulsion, the right to the vowel consideration of the case by an independent and impartial court;
· Freedom of religion (every person can adhere to any religion, or create its own)
· Ownership (some legal entities refers to economic; in France is recognized as one of the main personal rights from the times of the Great French Revolution) and others.

Political rights and freedoms differ from personal, social, economic and other rights, the fact that, as a rule, are closely associated with affiliation to the citizenship of this state. Are one of the groups of basic constitutional rights and freedoms of citizens, as they determine their participation in the public and political life of the country.

Political rights are usually classified:

· Freedom of speech (freedom of information)
· Law of citizenship
· Right to union (freedom of unions)
· Freedom of assembly (the right to gather peacefully and without weapons, hold rallies, demonstrations, processions)
· The right to participate in the management of state affairs and equal access to public service
· Right to participate in the administration of justice
· The right of appeals or petitions (that is, to handle personally, as well as send individual and collective appeals to state bodies and local governments)
· Freedom of media
· Election rights (active and passive subjective suffrage: Element and Be Favorites)

The first generation of human rights can be conducted from the period of establishing legal equality, when the estate framework of the medieval society collapsed. This period is accounted for by the development of bourgeois relations and the approval of the bourgeois society with its legislative acts. Only then equal rights from the ideal category began to be embodied in real reality, having received a constitutional or other legislative design. The principle of legal equality, which has become the basis of the universality of human rights, gave them a truly democratic character.

After World War II, the need to ensure the fundamental human rights was recognized in most developed countries.

These rights are liberal values, the result (mainly) the development of bourgeois relations, bourgeois revolutions. Personal and political rights acquired legal form First, in acts of constitutional national law, but soon and in acts of international law. They found their consolidation, for example, in the French Declaration of Human Rights and Citizen (1789), American Bill on Rights (ratified in 1791), but the "Human Rights" in the field of human rights belongs to England (Great Charter of Valivity 1215, Petition about the right 1628, Habas Corpus Act of 1678, Act on Disposal 1701g.).

Recognition of these rights began with the era of bourgeois revolutions in Europe and America (although in the UK, for example, their "pedigree" is traced from medieval acts who have given some of these rights to individual estates). However, even in those countries where the revolutions were successful, it took a lot of time so that the rights of the first generation began to be considered as truly universal, because various groups of the population were discriminated against (poor, workers, women) or were not considered generally as subjects of human rights (slaves, Dark-skinned). The formation of liberalism was provided to the formation of ideas about the first generation of rights.

A distinctive feature of the first generation rights is that they are all relying on the negative concept of freedom, in which freedom is understood as the lack of coercion, the ability to act on its own choice, without being interfering with others.

The first generation of human rights is the basis of individual freedom and qualifies as a system of negative rights obliging the state to refrain from interference in the sphere governed by these rights.

Those. From the point of view of the negative concept, freedom is directly proportional to the volume of those areas of activity in which a person can legitimately expect that it will not be an object of someone else's intervention and will be able to act at its own discretion. In the role of the main "coercion agent" in this case, the state is definitely, since it has immeasurably greater possibilities to force than individuals and civil associations. And in this sense, the right of the first generation is the rights to protect the freedom of man from the unreasonable intervention of the state (in the process of both administrative and legislative activities).

However, the implementation of freedom in society, where different wills are inevitably collapsed, perhaps only if the obvious, well-known and equal to all legal frameworks, within which a person should not have coercion either by the state or from other people.

The definition of criteria, on the basis of which these frameworks should be established, it turns out to be a rather complicated philosophical task. Usually its decision focuses on the principle of equality of the rights of individuals (the implementation of the right of one person should not violate the rights and freedoms of others). The principle formulated by the English philosopher J. S. Millom in Essay "On Freedom" (1859) was important to determine the criteria for the boundaries of the realization of rights (1859): "The only goal that justifies the legitimate use of power to anyone a member of a civilized society against his will is preventing Harm for other people. " (However, this principle, according to many critics, is not accustomed as due to the uncertainty of the wording and due to the method of argumentation applied by the Millem).

The only agent that can establish a legal framework that makes freedom possible and forced to comply with these frameworks - the state. Another important function is assigned to him: the search for inevitably emerging conflicts between the rights of different individuals (it is appropriate to recall the reasoning J. Locke, who argued the need to conclude a public contract and creating a state by the fact that in the absence of an impartial arbiter it is impossible to protect natural rights, for the sides of the conflict Provide "judges in their own business", which makes it impossible a fair decision). Thus, the functions of the state associated with the protection and provision of the rights of the first generation are, firstly, in the regulation of the boundaries of their implementation, and secondly, in the preparation of disputes on rights. An important feature of the first-generation rights mechanism is that all carriers of these rights are treated as equal; The actions of the state to ensure these rights equally relate to all people (which found an embodiment in the idea of \u200b\u200bequality before the law).

It is believed that the rights of the first generation are the basis of the Institute for Human Rights (Basic Rights). They are interpreted by international documents as indisputable and not subject to restriction (not to be confused with the regulation of the methods of implementing these rights). Some Western specialists tend to consider these rights as actually "human rights", believing that the rights of the second and third generation are only "social claims".

The second generation of human rights is the deepening of personal (civil) and the development of socio-economic and cultural rights.

Social, economic, cultural rights are designed to guarantee a person worthy living conditions, determine the state's responsibility to ensure those who need the minimal means of existence, the obligations on social security necessary to support human dignity, the normal satisfaction of the primary needs and spiritual development of a person.

Socio-economic rights include:

· Freedom of entrepreneurship (the right to entrepreneurial and other economic activities not prohibited by law)
· Right to private property
· Labor rights (right to work and freedom of labor)
· The right to protect family, motherhood, paternity and childhood
· Right to social Security (to protect against unemployment, on vacation, etc.)
· The right to housing
· Right to health and medical care

Cultural rights include:

· Right to education
· Freedom of creativity (freedom of literary, scientific and other types of creativity and teaching)
· Right to participate in cultural life
· Academic freedom

Socio-economic and cultural rights have been formed in the process of struggle of peoples for improving their economic Regulations and improving cultural status. These requirements arose after the First World War, and influenced the democratization and socialization of the constitutional law of the countries of the world and international law after World War II, when, thanks to the rapid development of production, real prerequisites were formed to meet the social needs of citizens.

For the first time, these rights received international recognition in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948), although the initial moment of their occurrence is the beginning of 20 art.

The recognition of these rights was the result of an acute struggle, first in capitalist countries, and then, after the October Revolution and the Second World War, between world social systems. The main "ideological inspirations" of this generation of rights became socialists; At the same time, "New Liberals" (T. Kh. Green, L. T. Hobhauses, J. A. Hobson, in Russia - P. I. Novgorod residents, B. A. Kistyakovsky, S. I. Hesse, etc.), insisted on the need to revise the negative concept of freedom.

A crucial role in recognizing the rights of the second generation was played by the USSR, which is not least from ideological and political considerations - invariably insisted on the inclusion of the rights of the second generation to international legal documents. As a result, the right of the second generation was first reflected in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948), and then enshrined in the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (1966).

Recognition of the rights of the second generation meant significant changes In the concept of human rights. At the heart of these changes lay a positive understanding of freedom as a real possibility of carrying out their will (to do someething worth doing) on \u200b\u200ba par with other people. The possession of the freedom understood in this way suggests not just the lack of coercion from other people, but the presence of certain possibilities, in particular, material resources - otherwise, a person often cannot use its right.

From a philosophical point of view, the rationale for the positive concept of freedom is not an easy task, because the implementation of our will may be limited to a variety of factors; The question is which of these factors require "corrections". The answer to this question assumes that we must adhere to a certain concept of good, allowing us to rank good and bad, distinguishing legitimate (valid) claims from illegal. However, our opponents may have another benefit concept. Rationally prove the superiority of one concept over another is impossible (for it is a matter of values). Act the same on the basis of a certain concept of good, it means to impose their point of view to opponents and inevitably limit their freedom. Approximately so argue its position of criticism of the positive concept of freedom.

Their opponents indicate that some kind of possibilities, however, can and should be equalized on the basis of more or less complete consensus. The basis of this consensus is the idea of \u200b\u200bthe right of a person for a decent life.

The concept of the right to a decent life appeals to the arguments lying on the basis of the very idea of \u200b\u200bnatural human rights (possession of these rights, some authors explained to the presence of special human dignity in all people (DIGNITY)); Thus, the rights of the second generation, from this point of view, can be considered as the expansion and development of the original idea of \u200b\u200bnatural human rights.

At the same time, the rights of the second generation suggest, a completely different mechanism of implementation and establish new tasks for the state. According to the "classic" liberal ideas, state legal regulation follows certain principles: the general "Rules of the game" relate to the mainly public sphere and from a formal point of view equal to all categories of citizens. The requirement to entrust the state to ensure the "right to a decent life" to ensure the radically changed this scheme. On the one hand, methods legal regulation, characteristic of the public sphere, was to a certain extent were transferred to the sphere of private contractual relations (for example, ensuring fair and favorable working conditions), which in itself was perceived as infringement of personal freedom. On the other hand, the distribution functions that the state acquired in the framework of ensuring the rights of the second generation, mean the need for various attitudes to various categories of citizens (which was a violation of the principle of legal equality).

It is not surprising that it caused the resistance of the "old liberals". As the Russian stateman B. N. Chicherin wrote, "the right one for all; humanity also means only the well-known part of society in need of help." The state should not change the right, infrainment of the freedom of the rich for the sake of the poor.

Supporters of the "new" point of view insisted on the need for a "positive" understanding of freedom. "The task and essence of law is really in the protection of personal freedom," P. I. Novgorod residents wrote - but for the implementation of this goal, concern for material conditions of freedom is necessary: \u200b\u200bwithout this, some can remain empty sound. "

The right to a decent life made the way to recognize in acute struggle, and the basis of this struggle was not only "egoistic" class interests, but also various ideas about the right.

Ultimately, the right of the second generation was recognized, in particular, in international documents, as human rights. At the same time, these rights are more relative, rather than the right of the first generation. The international community does not impose any rigid criteria for the implementation of these rights. In particular, Article 2 of "International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights" indicates that "the state participating in this Covenant in this Covenant is obliged ... to take measures to ensure that gradually fulfillment of the rights recognized in this Covenant methods, including, in particular, the adoption of legislative measures. "

The implementation of the rights of the second generation depends on the one hand, on the presence of material resources, on the other, from a variable balance of different points of view regarding acceptable ranges of redistribution. Famous Polish human rights activist Marek Novitsky fairly considers social rights As a result of a public contract, emphasizing that "this is all done on our money, and this is our business, how much money we will give the state so that it guarantees something to us, and which part we want to dispose of themselves."

The second generation of human rights is also called a system of positive rights. They cannot be realized without organizational, coordinating and other forms of state activities for their provision.

Thus, ensuring the rights of the second generation requires another, compared with the first generation, strategies not only from the state, but also from human rights organizations: the volume of their implementation may be the subject of the "negotiations" of the state with taxpayers.

The third generation of human rights can be called solidarized (collective), i.e. The rights of all mankind - human rights, the rights of peoples, the rights of the nation, the rights of generality and association.

To solidarized (collective) rights include:

· Right to the world
· The right of the people for existence, security, independence, self-determination, on social and economic development
· The right to sovereignty over its natural wealth and natural resources,
· The right to favorable environment
· Right to equality with other peoples
· The right to enjoy the economic and cultural potential of humanity, both human and humanity in general.

We are talking about the rights of the individual who are not related to his personal status, but are dictated by affiliation to any generality (association), i.e. They are solidarized (collective), in which the rights of the individual is given the leading place (the right to solidarity, the right to international communication, etc.).

Collective rights ("Solidarity Rights", "Solidarities") are based on the solidarity of people, for the first time designated by the documents adopted under the auspices of the UN in the 80s of the 20th century.

The formation of the third generation of human rights (human rights is part of human rights) is associated with the national liberation movement of developing countries, as well as with the exacerbation of global world problems after World War II. The latter caused the internationalization of human rights law formulations, the creation of international (or continental) human rights capacies, legislative cooperation of countries in human rights issues, the acquisition of a supranational nature of legislation (especially constitutional) those states that have signed international human rights packets. The international recognition of human rights has become a benchmark for the development of all mankind in the direction of creating a community of legal states.

Currently, discussions are underway to recognize the third generation of human rights. The rights of this new group are rather heterogeneous, due to the literature, their specificity is explained in different ways, and discussions associated with their recognition are conducted in different planes. The objects of these discussions, in particular, are the following questions:

· Who is the subject of human rights: exclusively individuals or individuals and groups?
· Are human rights universal or cultural and special, reflecting the specific experience of Western countries?
· Should the cultural specificity of specific countries or groups take into account matters related to human rights?
· Lee is legitimate "positive discrimination", i.e., providing additional opportunities to implement their rights to groups that are in the least favorable conditions? Is it a violation of the very idea of \u200b\u200bnatural human rights? and etc.

In the literature you can meet different points of view regarding the specifics of the third generation of rights. Sometimes they are defined as "solidarity rights", i.e., the rights that individuals possess collectively, by virtue of their belonging to a certain group. Sometimes the rights of the third generation are considered as collective rights, i.e., such that can be carried out not by a separate person, but by the team, generality, nation.

In fact, the right attributable to the third generation is very heterogeneous. On the one hand, these are the so-called "inalienable" collective "rights of peoples", to the number of which include: the right of the people to exist, on self-determination, on development, on sovereignty over their natural wealth and natural resources, the right to a favorable environment, on equality with other peoples, the right to development, etc. The foundations of these rights are laid out in international documents that have fastened the main individual rights (UN Charter, Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Declaration on the Provision of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples of 1960, International Covenants of 1966, etc.).

On the other hand, the third generation includes special rights The so-called marginal layers of the population, which, by virtue of physiological or social reasons, do not have equal opportunities with the rest of the citizens on the implementation of general rights and freedoms and therefore need special support from the national states and the world community. These rights flow out of the right to freedom from discrimination against sexual, racial, national or age principle. Among those categories that can be considered as carriers of such special rights include children, women, youth, elderly, disabled, refugees, representatives of national and racial minorities, and other carriers of such rights are individuals, but only inspired, as they belong to certain social groups. The main objections to their legitimation as human rights are associated with the danger of the erosion of the initial idea embedded in this institute - the ideas of natural rights that all people have equally. Defenders of these rights argue their position with references to the impossibility of protecting these categories in the framework of the existing social structure and the need to ensure their implementation with the help of special legal possibilities.

Between the two first and third generations of human rights there is interdependence, carried out through the principle: implementation collective rights It should not infringe upon the rights and freedoms of the individual.

Although many of these rights have already been reflected in international law, active disputes are conducted around them in different political and cultural planes. In the role of subjects requiring recognition of the rights of the third generation, they act as the "Third World" countries, considering, for example, the right to development as a means of combating Western hegemony and marginal groups in themselves western countriesand also speakers from their face intellectuals. Thus, in the center of these disputes, on the one hand, the problem of "catching up modernization", and on the other hand, the care of a postmodern society concerned about the preservation and "equal recognition" of identity. The philosophical positions of the arguing parties were even more heterogeneous, which makes it difficult to achieve agreement at the level of interpretation and justification of the principles. Apparently, it is necessary to agree with the French philosopher Jacques Marita, who offered to consider human rights as "a certain arch of practical truths concerning the livelihood of people, about which they can come to agreement:" However, it would be in vain to look for a rational substantiation of these conclusions and rights " Since we are talking about the practical consent of people who are opponents in their theoretical views. "

Classification of human rights. "Generations" of human rights

The classification of human rights and freedoms is carried out on the basis of a wide variety of foundations.

I. One of the foundations is the generation (from Lat. Generatio - Birth, reproduction, generation).

In accordance with this approach, there are generations of human rights, under which they understand the main stages of their development, related to the formation of ideas about the content of rights, as well as a change in the mechanisms for ensuring the latter.

Currently, you can allocate four generations of rights.

The first generation of human rights traditionally recognize civil and political rights, conquered as a result of bourgeois revolutions in Europe and America, then concretized in the practice and legislation of democratic states. We are talking about personal (civil) and political rights, which reflect the so-called "negative freedom" - oblige the state to refrain from interference in the sphere of personal freedom and create the conditions for the participation of citizens in political life.

The first generation rights are recognized by international and national documents as inalienable and not subject to restriction. Some Western experts tend to consider these rights as actually "human rights", believing that the rights of the second and third generations are only "social claims", i.e. Not so much with rights as privileges aimed at the "Redistribution of national income in favor of socially weak."

The second generation is the socio-economic human rights - formed in the XIX century.

Huge merit in recognizing the rights of the second generation belongs to the USSR. Thus, in the Constitution of the USSR, 1936, a wide range of "second generation" rights was enshrined - the right to work, rest, education, social security, medical care. Even in spite of the fact that the social security of a citizen in the USSR was minimal, she documented, and it affected the world community. As a result, the right of the second generation was first reflected in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948), and then enshrined in the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (1966). At the same time, it should be noted that these rights are more relative in nature than the first generation right. The international community does not impose any rigid criteria for the implementation of these rights. So, according to Article 2 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, "every participating state in this Covenant is undertaken ... to take measures to ensure that gradually fully implement the rights recognized in this Covenant in the present package, including , in particular, the adoption of legislative measures. "

The third generation of human rights began to form after World War II.

Currently, there is no single understanding of the nature of these rights in legal literature. So, according to E.A. Lukasheva, they are collective and can be carried out with a community (association) 1. This point of view was supported by some other authors, which in general, to the third generation of rights attributed such rights as the right to development, peace, independence, self-determination, territorial integrity, sovereignty, getting rid of colonial oppression, right to a decent life, to a healthy The environment, on the overall heritage of mankind, as well as the right to communicate.

According to S.V. The second, the third generation of human rights covers the special rights of those categories of citizens (children, women, disabled people, refugees, etc.), which, according to various (social, political, physiological and other) reasons, do not have equal opportunities with other citizens the possibilities for all people Rights and freedoms and, by virtue of this, need certain support from both the state and the international community as a whole 2.

The basics of the third generation rights are laid in such international documents as the UN Charter, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and others.

The fourth generation of human rights began to form in the 1990s of the XX century. Moreover, some scientists believe that these rights should protect a person from threats related to experiments in the field of human genetics, discoveries in the field of biology 3, and other fourth generation is called human rights (right to peace, nuclear safety, environmental space, informational rights et al.) 4.

The next reason for the classification of human rights is their content, depending on which human rights can be divided into personal (civil), political, economic, social and cultural.

Personal (civil) rights are natural and inalienable fundamental rights and freedoms belonging to a person from birth and independent of his belonging to a specific state (the right to life, freedom and personal integrity, etc.).

Political rights are legally secured measures of possible behavior that guarantee the freedom of the action of citizens by participating in the formation of state authorities and local self-government. These include the right to gather peacefully, without weapons, to hold meetings, rallies and demonstrations, processions and picketing, to participate in the management of the state's business, both directly and through their representatives, and be elected, etc.

Economic rights cover the freedom of operation in the field of production, exchange, distribution and consumption of goods and services. Such rights are the right to free use of their abilities and property for entrepreneurial and other, not prohibited by law of economic activity, the right of private property, the right to freely dispose of its abilities to work and others.

Social rights are aimed at providing a person with a worthy standard of living and social security. These rights include the right to rest, at home, to protect health and medical care, for a favorable environment, etc.

Cultural rights provide freedom of access to spiritual and material values \u200b\u200bcreated by the human community. This is the right to participate in cultural life, etc.

Depending on the cointhrough Human rights are divided into basic and derivatives (additional) rights.

The main rights are the most general rights man and citizen who make up the basis of the national legal status Personality and are a legal database for derivatives (additional) rights. The main rights can be attributed to: the right to life, freedom and personal integrity, participation in the management of society and the state, etc.

Derivatives (additional) rights are developing, complement and specify the main.

Depending on the degree of distribution, the right may be general and special.

General rights are inherent in all. This is the right to life, the right to inviolability of privacy, etc. Special rights depend on social and official position, gender, age of face and other factors. These rights include the rights of consumers, employees, minors, women, retirees, veterans, refugees, etc.

Depending on the nature of subjects, law is divided into individual and collective.

Individual rights are the rights implemented by each subject of law separately, such as the right to life, freedom and personal integrity; rights guaranteeing human dignity, equality before the law; The right of free movement, etc.

Collective rights are the rights that can be realized only by many subjects. For example, the right to strike, the right to hold meetings, rallies, demonstrations, processions, picketing, etc. These rights can not be carried out by a separate individual.

Depending on the role of the state in the implementation of human rights, they may be negative and positive.

Negative rights protect the identity from unwanted, violating her freedom of interventions and restrictions on the part of the state and other persons. These rights include freedom of speech, inviolability of housing, freedom of conscience, freedom of movement, etc.

Positive rights fix the duties of the state to provide people with certain benefits, carry out certain actions. This group of rights should be attributed to the guaranteed minimum wage, for paid leave, for free medical care, etc.

Depending on the personality belonging to a specific state, human rights are divided into the rights of citizens of the state, the rights of foreign citizens, the rights of persons with dual citizenship (bipartery), the rights of stateless persons (aparter). Thus, political rights are usually recognized only for citizens of a particular state.

1 Lukasheva E.A. Human rights: Textbook for universities. - M., 2003.

2 Polenina S.V. Women's rights in the human rights system: an international and national aspect. - M., 2000.

3 Rudinsky F.M. Civil rights Human: General Research Questions // Right and Life. - 2000. - № 31.

4 Vengerov AB Theory of state and law: a textbook. - M., 2004.

Today it is customary to consider the norm basic rights and freedoms of a person: the right to work, on vacation, to receive education, for free religion, etc. Some of them are included in the category of "natural" rights. This is an opportunity to raise your own children and so on. But only some 400-500 years ago, which is relatively recently by the standards human history, so many could only dream of. The evolution of a person from the "talking tool" in a free and independent person occurred in three generations of human rights. Each of them is characterized by new, qualitative changes in the public uklade. The fact that a generation of human rights will be discussed below.

First mention

First, who for the first time put forward this concept. For the first time, the evolution of the Company was offered to divide the three generations of human rights in 1979 in Strasbourg, International Institute Human rights. The idea put forward the Czech lawyer Karel Phezak.

Theoretical base

Human rights generations are an artificial concept in public sciences. No one "walked" his policy for it. The basis of all three is the slogans of the French Revolution: French has become a theoretical basis for other countries in Europe and America. A similar idea was nominated by the United States in its declaration of independence, many socialist and communist ideologies also took this idea as a basis in political struggle.

The first generation of human rights ("blue rights")

The first generation is recognized by all social commodities, legalists, historians. It is associated with the theoretical understanding of the natural society and:

the right to live;
on free religion;
voting right;
the right to participate in the political life of the country;
on a fair system of legal proceedings;
on free work, etc.

Today, these principles seem natural to us, understandable. If they are violated, then we are most likely starting to continue to drive about arbitrariness, write complaints, contact the media, lay out the violation on the Internet. Sometimes it leads to loud resignations, scandals, exposure. But it was not always so. Only 4-5 centuries ago, many people could not imagine that at birth everyone is equal. It was believed that the highest forces themselves determine fate. Going against public men - it means to unravel God. So far, this tradition is reflected in the folklore. We can remember our proverbs: "Where was born, it was useful,", "obedience is better than respectfulness", "do not speak much in the presence of great souls", etc. Incidentally laid the traditions of inequality from nature.

The collapse of old men

Traditional public foundations were destroyed by the following declarations:

Magna Carta.
English Bill on Rights.
French Declaration of Human Rights and Freedoms.
Bill on the rights of the United States of America.
Declaration of US independence.

All these historical documents that operated at the local level, formed the basis of international legal documents. The concept of three generations of human rights and has emerged thanks to the legal acts listed above. Although they did not have the status for a long time state document. It is not known how the theory of human rights generation was developed if the story developed in a different scenario: the States in America would lose the war for independence, and the royal power in France would cruelly suppress revolutionary speeches. However, we believe that humanity would still achieve that public defendant, which has developed today. And today in some countries there are reaction forces that are trying to stop the development of human consciousness. But they constrain the development of the maximum in one human generation. The genesis of rights and freedoms is moving forward.

Modern international legal norms

Based on the first generation declarations, modern international legal norms were created:

Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948.
International Covenant for the Civil and Political Rights of 1966.
European Convention on Human Rights of 1953.

The second generation of human rights ("Red Rights")

The second generation is also recognized by almost all social commodities. This concept Related to events after World War II. There was collapse of imperialism, the exploitation of some nations over others. In society, economic and social rights were actively obtained.

The difference of the first generation from the second

We grure the distinctive properties of the first generation of human rights and the second in the form of a table:

Distinctive features

Events affected by public consciousness

Requirement for the state

First generation

Political rights.

Natural rights

The struggle for independence in the United States.

Great French Bourgeois Revolution

The requirement to protect the influence of the state in political sphere, give access to all citizens to participate in the political life of the country

Second generation

Economic rights.

Social rights

World War II and, as a result, the collapse of the colonial system

The requirement to oblige the state to fulfill the obligations for all in the social sphere, education, medicine, etc.

Economic inequality levels political rights

In the 20th century, political and natural rights were formally respected. However, they were leveled by other inequalities: social and economic. This meant that a person had the right to life, his no one had the right to kill on the street as a slave, which happened earlier in many slave states. But there was no equality in social and economic rights. For example, in hospitals, some people were denied the first medical careIn schools, many have not had the right to receive education, etc.

Imagine the situation that the director of the municipal school began to selectively allow for classes at its discretion of those who have the right to attend school. Now it seems unlikely, but only 50-100 years ago it was the norm. Education I. medical service It was considered luxury, expensive services that all people cannot afford. You can refer to the fact that there are paid hospitals, educational institutionswho are not affected by many. We will answer that the standards of education and health care are one for all. Only service, incident, external manifestation differs.

Second-generation theoretical base

The second generation is based on the following:

International Pact for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.
Second Bill on Roosevelt Rights.

The second generation of human rights is called "red" rights. They oblige the state to fulfill the main obligations to all citizens in the social sphere, health care, education, etc.

Green Rights - Development of Collective Orthodology

The third generation of human rights is conventionally called "green rights". Unlike the other two, there are few people in science highlighting it. Many the concept of human rights generations is limited to two. However, the majority with them disagree. We will analyze their arguments.

Protective development Forward

So, the generation of human rights and freedoms is given to new qualitative changes in the public consciousness. If in the first generation these are basic natural and political rights, in the second - social and economic, then in the third - the formation of collective rights. It does not focus on any sphere separately. The concept itself proposes to develop the rights of collectives in all spheres of society.

It is based on the fact that the individual in itself can not defend his rights alone. It is necessary to unite. After the Second World War, public organizations are developing: trade unions, public organizations, political parties.

Even large financial companies Create unions: industrialists, road transporters, agricultural producers. All one is one: coordinate your actions in the face of danger.

Combine into large alliances by industry and state. For example, oil exporters united in OPEC in order to work out unified Rules On the market.

If large states, companies create collective security, then the individual, the more needs to be united to jointly defend their interests.

Liberals do not agree with such a point of view. They believe that it is necessary to protect every individual individual, and then the team as a whole will be protected. This position will fail every day. In the 20th century, the struggle for human rights was associated with religion, skin color, political views, labor relations, refusal of traditional family values, marriage, etc. At the end, an understanding has come that only collective protection is able to protect the rights of a separate individual.

RESULTS

We looked at the generation of human rights and freedoms. Let's summarize. To date, our society cannot find the Golden Middle. Always the right of one person leads to a violation of the right of another. Modern integration processes in Europe revealed a clear crisis in the policies of tolerance and violence. West civilization is experiencing the most difficult times. All that she fought, turned out to be ineffective in the face of new danger - terrorism and migration. It is enough to recall the cases of sexual harassment in Berlin, explosions in Paris. This happens because the traditional east does not understand the progressive West. Ways of solutions are needed: either to be protected from the East, or to take its values. The liberal policy did not lead to anything good, since migrants quickly begin to "beat the Europeans by their coin: to call for freedom of movement, violence, equality of labor relations.

Three generations of human rights

Concept« generations» human rights arose in the 70s of the XX century. Human rights, in the time of their occurrence, are divided into three generations:

1. First generation- personal and political rights, proclaimed by the Great French Revolution, as well as American struggle for independence.

The first generation rights are the basis of the Institute of Human Rights. They are interpreted by international documents as inalienable and not subject to restriction (not to be confused with the regulation of the methods of implementing these rights). Some Western specialists tend to consider these rights as actually "human rights", believing that the rights of the second and third generation are only "social claims".

Personal rights and freedomscustoms are also called civilian. Most of them belong to each person from birth, are essential and not subject to any restriction.

Civil rights are designed to provide freedom of individual as a member of society, its legal security from illegal external intervention.

Personal rights include: the right to life; the right to respect for the honor and dignity of man; right to freedom and personal integrity; inviolability of privacy; freedom of movement; freedom to choose nationality and choice of communication language; right to trial; The right to the presumption of innocence, etc.

Political rights and freedomsgive a person the opportunity to participate in socio-political life and government management.

A distinctive feature of political rights is that many of them belong not to people, but exclusively to citizens of a particular state. They begin to act in full since the age of adulthood achievement.

Political rights include: the right to participate in the management of state management; electoral rights; freedom of speech; right to peaceful assembly; The right to create unions and associations, etc.

2. Second generation- socio-economic and cultural rights that appeared as a result of the struggle of the people for improving their position.

The second generation includes part of economic rights (the right to work, for fair and favorable working conditions, to protect against unemployment, on vacation, etc.), as well as social and cultural rights. The recognition of these rights was the result of an acute struggle, first in capitalist countries, and then, after the October Revolution and the Second World War, between world social systems. The main "ideological inspirations" of this generation of rights became socialists; At the same time, "New Liberals" (T.X. Green, L. T. Hobhauses, J. A. Hobson, in Russia - P. I. Novgorod residents, B. A. Kistyakovsky, S. I. Hesse, etc.), insisted on the need to revise the negative concept of freedom.

Recognition of the rights of the second generation meant significant changes in the concept of human rights. These changes were based on a positive understanding of freedom as a real possibility of carrying out their will on a par with other people. The possession of the freedom understood in this way suggests not just the lack of coercion from other people, but the presence of certain possibilities, in particular, material resources - otherwise, a person often cannot use its right.

The rights of the second generation suggest a completely different mechanism of implementation and impose new tasks for the state. According to the "classic" liberal ideas, state legal regulation follows certain principles: the general "Rules of the game" relate to the mainly public sphere and from a formal point of view equal to all categories of citizens. The requirement to entrust the state to ensure the "right to a decent life" to ensure the radically changed this scheme. On the one hand, the methods of legal regulation, characteristic of the public sphere, were to a certain extent were transferred to the sphere of private contractual relations (for example, ensuring fair and favorable working conditions), which in itself was perceived as infringement of personal freedom. On the other hand, the distribution functions that the state acquired in the framework of ensuring the rights of the second generation, mean the need for various attitudes to various categories of citizens (which was a violation of the principle of legal equality).

Socio-economic and cultural rightsconcerning human socio-economic conditions, they determine its position in the field of labor, well-being, social security. The goal is to create conditions under which people can be free from fear and needs.

The socio-economic rights include: the right to work; right to rest; the right to social security; right to housing; right to a decent standard of living; The right to protect health and others.

Cultural rightsguarantee the spiritual development of a person, help each individual become a useful participant in social progress. These include: the right to education; the right to access cultural values; right to freely participate in the cultural life of society; right to creativity; The right to use the results of scientific progress, etc.

As the chairman of the Constitutional Court of Russia, Valery Zorkin, noted, the second generation rights were initially enshrined and adopted in the Soviet Union, which achieved the provisions on socio-economic rights into international documents.

3. Third generation- rights are collective: the right to peace, the right to disarmament, the right to a healthy environment, the right to development and others.

The question of the recognition of the rights of the third generation is controversial. Most specialists believe that within the framework of human rights it is impossible to talk about collective rights. Human rights - these are not the rights of nations, minority or other social groups. These are the rights of individuals, rights« units».

The appearance of the third generation of human rights is predetermined by exacerbation in the second half of the XX century. Global problems, among which the ecological, as well as the entry of the most developed countries, in the era of informatization comes to one of the first places. From here - such rights as the right to a safe environment, the right to access information. The peculiarity of the third generation of rights is that they are collective and can be implemented together.

The rights attributable to the third generation are very inhomogeneous. On the one hand, these are the so-called "inalienable" collective "rights of peoples", to the number of which include: the right of the people to exist, on self-determination, on development, on sovereignty over their natural wealth and natural resources, the right to a favorable environment, on equality With other nations, the right to development, etc. The foundations of these rights are laid in international documents that have enshrined the main individual rights (UN Charter, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Declaration on the Provision of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples of 1960, International Covenants of 1966 and DR .).

On the other hand, the third generation includes the special rights of the so-called marginal segments of the population, which, by virtue of physiological or social reasons, do not have equal opportunities with the rest of the citizens to implement common rights and freedoms and therefore need special support from national states and the world community. These rights flow out of the right to freedom from discrimination against sexual, racial, national or age principle. Among those categories that can be considered as carriers of such special rights include children, women, youth, elderly, disabled, refugees, representatives of national and racial minorities, and other carriers of such rights are individuals, but only inspired, as they belong to certain social groups. The main objections to their legitimation as human rights are associated with the danger of the erosion of the initial idea embedded in this institute - the ideas of natural rights that all people have equally. Defenders of these rights argue their position with references to the impossibility of protecting these categories in the framework of the existing social structure and the need to ensure their implementation with the help of special legal possibilities.

Although many of these rights have already been reflected in international law, active disputes are conducted around them in different political and cultural planes. In the role of subjects requiring the recognition of the rights of the third generation, they act as the "Third World" countries, considering, for example, the right to development as a means of combating Western hegemony and marginal groups in the Western countries themselves, as well as intellectuals from their face. Thus, in the center of these disputes, on the one hand, the problem of "catching up modernization", and on the other hand, the care of a postmodern society concerned about the preservation and "equal recognition" of identity. The philosophical positions of the arguing parties were even more heterogeneous, which makes it difficult to achieve agreement at the level of interpretation and justification of the principles. Apparently, it is necessary to agree with the French philosopher Jacques Marita, who offered to consider human rights as "a certain arch of practical truths relating to the livelihood of people, about which they can come to consent."

Outcome.

The Institute for Human Rights is extremely dynamic and sensitive to changes occurring in societies. In the 1990s, experts started talking about the prospect of the formation of the fourth generation of human rights related to the preservation of genetic identity - the need for such rights is related to the new possibilities of genetic engineering. Perhaps on the horizon - the fifth or sixth generation of rights ...

Obviously, the body of rights requiring protection will inevitably expand. At the same time, this process cannot be estimated unequivocally. On the one hand, the expansion of the circle of recognized rights should strengthen the legal security of the personality. On the other hand, each "generation" brings with it a new logic of legalizing claims called human rights, and the inevitable conflicts of "new" rights with "old", as a result of which the level of security may not increase, but to decrease. It is not surprising that some experts express the doubt that all these claims should be considered as an integral right. Maybe better less, it's better? Undoubtedly, the negative impact on the "extensive" development of international humanitarian law has the desire of many states to use human rights as a tool of political struggle. Unfortunately, the completion of the Cold War did not put an end to such practice. Thus, the field of human rights is now, as before, remains a field of acute ideological, political and even cultural struggle, and its development prospects are still determined by the configuration of many factors.

The French lawyer Carel Vazak introduced the concept of "three generations of human rights", which is important for their classification. It is based on the main slogans of the French revolution: freedom (the first generation of human rights), equality (second generation), fraternity (third generation).

The first generation of human rights Includes proclaimed bourgeois revolutions (17-18 V.V.) Civil and political rights, called "negative", i.e. expressing the independence of the individual in certain actions from the power of the state denoting the limits from its non-interference in the region of freedom and self-expression of the individual to them (the right to life, the freedom and security of the individual, the right to equality before the law, selective law, freedom of speech and press, etc. )

Second generation It is associated with social, economic and cultural rights, which were established by the middle of the 20th century under the influence of the struggle of the people for improving their socio-economic situation and improving cultural status. These rights are called positive because Their implementation requires targeted actions by the state, its positive intervention in their implementation and the creation of the necessary prerequisites for this.

In Russia, the second generation of rights acquires a new content in connection with the transition to a market economy. The Constitution of the Russian Federation is intended only to consolidate the main directions of social security personality, which requires detailed concretization in current legislation. (Basics of legislation Russian Federation About culture, law "On education", the basis of the legislation of the Russian Federation on the protection of the health of citizens, etc.).

Third generation . These are the rights of collective, or solidarized, caused by the global problems of humanity and belonging not to every person, but entire of nations and nations (the right to peace, favorable surrounding natural environment, reliable information, free social and economic development and much more).

International Legal Base of Human Rights.After World War II, the intensive awareness of the world communities of the special importance of human rights problems began. From a purely inner, this problem has become converted to international, as a result of which constitutional right gradually began to fall under the influence of international standards.

The obligation of states to cooperate in the promotion and development of respect for human rights and basic freedoms without any discrimination was recorded in the Charter of the United Nations. However, the long-term wrestling of the Western powers against the resistance of totalitarian states was required before large international legal acts appeared in this area. The first of them was the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the UN General Assembly on December 10, 1948

The universal human rights declaration consists of a preamble and 30 articles. It does not distinguish between human rights and citizen rights, and all rights are interpreted as belonging to all people. Article 1 reads: "All people are born free and equal in their dignity and rights. They are endowed with a mind and conscience and should come in relation to each other in the spirit of Brotherhood." The rights to life, freedom, personal integrity, other personal rights and freedoms are also proclaimed, as well as economic, social and cultural rights that the person has the right to claim as a "member of society".

The norms of this document are declarative, and it does not contain the mechanism of providing these norms. However, the declaration has played and continues to play an important role in approving human rights.

In 1966, the UN General Assembly adopted new important acts - the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ratified by the USSR in 1973). These acts provide a more detailed list of human rights and a citizen, and in addition, the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights provides for the creation of a human rights committee responsible for compliance with and adopting measures to implement the rights recognized in this Covenant.

In 1984, the same committee was established on economic, social and cultural rights. Both Covers consisted of a kind of international human rights code and a citizen, and the participating States committed themselves to adopt the necessary legislative measures to ensure the rights and freedoms provided for in the Covenants.

The most important international legal act on human rights is the European Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, adopted in Rome on November 4, 1950 (Russia ratified March 30, 1998). In the Convention and the associated protocols (there are currently eleven currently), fundamental rights and freedoms are enshrined, criminal procedural guarantees, property and other rights. To protect these rights and freedoms established European Court According to human rights whose jurisdiction applies to all cases concerning the interpretation and application of the Convention. The participants of the Convention are members of the Council of Europe, which is an intergovernmental organization. According to Art. 3 of the charter of this organization, each member of the Council of Europe should recognize the principle of the rule of law and the principle, in accordance with which all persons under its jurisdiction should enjoy human rights and the main freedoms. A member of the Council of Europe can also be a European state, which is considered as capable and seeking to comply with the provisions of Art. 3 (in this status set out in Art. 4 of the Charter, Russia was adopted in 1996).

There are other international legal acts on human rights: the European Convention for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, and others. Serious documents in this area - Convention and Recommendations - specialized organization UN - International Organization, Labor (ILO).

An important channel for the approval of human rights and freedoms and citizen is to organize security and cooperation in Europe (OSCE). In the final act of the Security and Cooperation Meeting in Europe, held in 1975, one of the sections is devoted to human rights and freedoms and contains the obligation of States parties (including Russia and Russia) respect and comply with these rights and freedoms. Any State Party of this organization has the right to attract the attention of other participating States in diplomatic channels to the facts of human rights violations in any state that is its participant.

These international legal acts served as a basis for the relevant chapter in the Constitution of Russia. Part 1 Art. 17 establishes: "The rights and freedoms of a person and a citizen are recognized and guaranteed in the Russian Federation in accordance with the generally recognized principles and norms of international law and in accordance with this Constitution." This formulation means that any of the human rights listed in international legal acts is valid in Russia only if it is recorded in the Russian Constitution.