The Universal Declaration of Human Rights entails various privileges that all individuals should enjoy unconditionally. Notably, the declaration incorporates certain rights that are in line with human characteristics, such as ability to speak, socializing, feeling of belonging, , and the ability to think freely. However, the establishments of the various rights imply that society has often violated or infringed on the rights of other individuals. According to the UDHR, these essential human characteristics are not only key to the survival and wellbeing of the individuals, but also their contributions towards nation building. Indeed, these human characteristics include vulnerable groups that also have essential roles to play in the society (The United Nations). For this reason, the UDHR provides a framework that applies to all nations and puts different administrations accountable to their actions on citizens.
The various right entitlements as per the UDHR provisions can either be positive or negative rights. In this regard, negative human rights related to freedom from some aspects. For instance, an individual negative right suggests that the privilege imposes a negative obligation on other people, by doing nothing about it or interfering in any way. For example, Article 6, necessitates that the society must not interfere with an individual’s recognition entitlement in all places since such individuals are under the law. On the other hand, the UDHR offers positive rights that relate to the entitlements to some concepts. Essentially, positive rights always put an affirmative duty on other members of society so that they can act in a particular manner. For example, Article 26 requires the society to offer education to its members to attain their personality developments (The United Nations). Markedly, such a grouping implies humans tend to interfere with the wellbeing of their colleagues while others fail to perform their obligations. For instance, various kinds of people have become victims of torture from their colleagues. Therefore, such human rights provisions can ultimately point to them their forgotten societal roles. Besides, different states have often treated their citizens in a biased way, including subjecting them to torture and interfering with their privacy. To save individuals from such happenings, the UDHR has put in place different human right provisions. Evidently, different nations have often infringed on the rights of its members in various ways.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is considered a global entity since it applies to all states of the world that ascribed to its demands. For instance, the same way that Article 15 requires that the Europeans have a right to nationality, is the same way that Africans must enjoy their entitlement to belong to a given country. Notably, in 1948, representatives from Western nations, China, the Soviet Union come together to see the passing of the declaration. Even though there were individual absentee nations, it was passed without any objections. On the other hand, the provisions are unified in the sense that they are inseparable. For instance, interfering with an individual’s right to health may interfere with their right to get education.On the other hand, the interdependence of the rights advances that even though the rights are distinctive, the enjoyment of one right means that individuals also get to enjoy other rights as well. In this regard, civil rights, such as the freedom of movement, is an essential precondition for the practice of rights, including the right to vote (political), right to work (economic), and freedom of assembly (civil). Despite rights recognizing these categorizations, it does not seek to challenge their existence.
The interrelation aspects of the human rights mean they have a state of mutual connectedness. In specifics, the interrelation aspect recognizes broader categories of rights depending on how they apply to international treaties. Interrelation implies that the rights are familiar since their legal foundations are comparable too. Human rights are interrelated since they share common attributes. In this regard, such rights trace their origin from the UN bodies; they express state obligations and have legal characters as treaties.
According to the preamble, every societal organ is responsible for the promotion of rights. In this regard, all components of society, including institutions and administrations, must always uphold the human rights. For instance, prison facilities must always defend the rights of prisoners – like not subjecting them to tough conditions. Moreover, educational facilities, such as universities, must always uphold human rights, including religious, racial group considerations among all its associates. Even so, workplaces must always encourage the practice of sticking to human rights, for instance, advocate for zero tolerance to discrimination and equal salaries for similar works.
Putting convicts in prison is better than opting for the solitary confinement approach. For instance, prisons should not use solitary confinements since it is a violation of the rights to freedom and a form of torture. Specifically solitary confinements can lead to certain mental and physical conditions that may negatively affect the prisoner, whereas the normal prison approach makes it possible for inmates to interact with each other and learn to change their characters as per the goals of the correctional facilities. In the Guantanamo Bay Prison, for example, Abu Zubaydah received containment in a box of a coffin-size (Rosenberg 1). According to Martin Sostre, solitary confinement was cruel, that is, it is against the rights to prisoners (Symonds 2). Considering the Alabama Prisons, the jail carried out inhuman treatment on prisoners, including murder, sodomy, rape, and torture (The New York Times 1).
Prisoners have a right to work without discrimination of all kinds – a process that is not possible under solitary confinement. Prison option and prison labor are significant in reducing violent activities within prisons, while solitary confinement simply augments violence within the correctional facilities. In this regard, inmates who participate in work programs have low chances of misconduct incidences with increased levels of responsibility. Moreover, the inmates with such opportunities can earn money, which then can be channeled to their deserving families. Importantly, prison labor can enable prisoners to acquire individual skills that will help them when they end their jail terms. There are certain advantages of offering medical services to prisoners, including allowing them to live happily and enjoy their human rights. Notably, they can live to see their release dates through this approach. Even so, prisoners should be able to pursue a religion of their liking as per the requirements of the UDHR. Evidently, the prisoners of Martin Sostre had denied him the right to practice Islam (Symonds 1). To them, he was only recruiting members for anti-white movements. Other treatments, such as rectal examination, are a violation of human rights that must never occur in prisons. Therefore, putting inmates in prison give them the opportunity to live a correctional life; they can interact with each other, practice normal religious activities, and engage in income generating activities, as opposed to solitary confinement, which causes mental illness and consequently, costing the government much money to rehabilitate the confined persons.
Even though it is crucial to uphold the rights of prisoners, specific infringements may be of advantage to both the faculty and the prisoners themselves. In this regard, although solitary confinement violates a prisoner’s freedom, it can ensure safety to other inmates and wardens from an aggressive inmate. Moreover, the method has great potential to reform a prisoner’s character since they can have inner reflections of their selves and tap into their conscious. For example, Martin Sostre was able to transform into a fighter of prisoners’ rights (Symonds 1). Nations should never encourage prison labor since jails are intuitions societal retributions. Thus, labor is inconsistent with the objectives of the society. All though prison labor is good for inmates, it hurts outside businesses. At the Limestone Correctional Facility, prisoners get low wages, $3, which is inadequate for them (The New York Times 4). Evidently, this is a violation of human right provisions. For this reason, free laborers can lose their jobs due to cheap labor from prisons. Even so, the treatment of prisoners cost nations more money for such services, especially the case of major complications. In 2001, the Pentagon considered $88.5 to build a 15-capacity prison to offer hospice care for CIA detainees (Rosenberg 5). Hence, such provisions of prisoners’ rights are costly to the governments.
In my opinion, prisoners are humans who should certainly be accorded their rights. For instance, solitary confinements do not only violate the rights of freedom for the affected individuals, but also translate to high cost of rehabilitation as the confined individuals often develop mental challenges. Therefore, the society should abolish such kinds of harsh treatment. Moreover, prisoners have a right to work as other members of the community as well as interact with fellow inmates. Prolonged isolation causes detrimental impacts on prisoners, especially on the brain. The irreversible damages on the brain are unusual and cruel punishments to prisoners in a correctional facility. Importantly, all prisoners should gain access to medical provisions regardless of their medical conditions. In so doing, the correctional facilities will undoubtedly uphold the UDHR.
The New York Times. “‘No One Feels Safe Her’: Life Inn Alabama’s Prisons.” The New York Times, 29 Apr. 2019, pp. 1-5.
Rosenberg, Carol. “Guantanamo Bay as Nursing Home: Military Envisions Hospice Care as Terrorism Suspects Age.” The New York Times, 27 Apr. 2019, pp. 1-12.
Symonds, Alexandria. “Overlooked no More: Martin Sostre, who Reformed American Prisons from his Cell.” The New York times, 29 Apr. 2019, pp. 1-7.
The United Nations. “Universal Declaration of Human Rights.” The United Nations, 31 Dec. 2018, www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/. Accessed 2 May 2019.