Posted at 10.04.2018
In standard, it's an extremely complicated question, whether we have to consider some individuals rights "more fundamental" than the other ones and to follow this argument.
Disagreements over this subject, whether certain human rights are "more fundamental" than another ones, have took place over past ages between countries with different political ideologies. But, regardless, this argument shouldn't be accepted as abuse towards other ones. This comes from the fact, that these "more important" rights will be the basis of individual rights generally, also the basic for other "less important" protection under the law.
However, each democratic republic should be based on the support of most kind of protection under the law not making a difference between them as "more" or "less" important.
In the range of every person related to this subject I think that it is to be a private theory. And each person, most likely each human being has dignity and value. And a great way that we are able to recognize this fundamental well worth is to recognize and to respect a person's human being rights first of all.
Human rights are concerned with equality and fairness. It's very necessary to identify their freedom to make options about their life and also develop their potential as humans. They are simply about living a life free from fear, harassment or discrimination.
Meanwhile, there's a variety of basic rights that individuals from across the world have decided on, such as the to life, freedom from torture and other cruel and inhuman treatment, rights to a good trial, free talk and freedom of faith, privileges to health, education and an satisfactory standard of living.
These human protection under the law, that are considered to be fundamental, will be the same for all people just about everywhere - male and female, young and old, rich and poor, irrespective of their background where they live, what they think or what they have confidence in.
So, this is the primary reason which makes human protection under the law "universal" and at the same time also important.
Among each one of these fundamental rights, there are a few which have a explanation whether something is lawful or not: for example, some rights may be laid down in regulation. Consequently if one has a legal right to something, so he might have the ability to protect it in the judge.
Besides, in many situations protection under the law exist but are not covered by legislations. In this case we deal with privileges that tend to be called "moral protection under the law" and derive from people's sense of what's fair or just. Quite simply, we can say these "moral protection under the law" are also the part of fundamental human rights. For example, the freedom from torture and other cruel and inhuman treatment can largely be covered as "moral right".
As we know, Human rights are not a new technology. The discussion of the idea can be tracked back again to the historical civilizations of Babylon, China and India.
However, a significant development of in Individual rights occurred in the 18th Century, during a time of revolution and growing national identities. It was the North american Declaration of Independence that was based on the knowing that certain rights, such as "life, liberty and pursuit of happiness", were fundamental to all or any people. At that time indeed we can say, that just these protection under the law could be looked at as "more fundamental". But at the same, taking a look at this notion in the context of other rights, it's obvious that all the rights should be considered as "fundamental".
I would like to talk about, that by stating "fundamental rights" I mainly consider just these privileges, too, in particular the to life and liberty, because these are just the basis of other protection under the law.
Besides, the growth of totalitarian regimes in the 20th Century and the atrocities of World Conflict 2 made the safety of Human protection under the law an international main concern.
This was a substantial opportunity to make an attempt in the sphere of developing a comprehensive statement of Human protection under the law, that was finally made in the Common Declaration of Human being Privileges (The UDHR). The Universal Declaration of People Privileges was unanimously implemented by the people of the United Nations (among those also the Republic of Armenia since 1995), on the 10th of December in 1948.
Human rights, generally, cover every area of individuals life and activity. And that is the reason why we call them important. They include civil and politics protection under the law, such as freedom of conversation and freedom from torture. In addition they include public and cultural protection under the law, like the rights to health insurance and education. Certain rights apply to individuals are known as specific rights. Others apply to groups of people, such as women and children: these are consequently called collective privileges.
This classification above is manufactured in the General Declaration of People Rights. Having a look at the UDHR, we can observe that the protection under the law and freedoms are grouped to three forms. They are simply :
Civil and Politics rights : they attempt to safeguard the average person, alone and in colaboration with others.
Economic, social and social protection under the law : they might need governments to help their people to participate totally in society, such as the to work and education.
Solidarity privileges : they indicate the introduction of growing countries and their require a global redistribution of power and wealth. These rights are the right to political, social and social self-determination and the right to economic and social development.
The classification to three varieties of protection under the law may itself result in a reasonable conflict in the matter, if which of the varieties of rights is considered to be "more fundamental" than the other styles. In particular, it's another question whether one of these forms of protection under the law could take goal over the other ones.
The main thing is the fact that forms of privileges, and appropriately the rights included in them are equally important for all humans. And we ought to not say, that one of these must take main concern over others.
The statistics shows that in recent years there has been a tremendous progress in how exactly we think about and apply individual privileges ideas. Thus, it has had a great deal of excellent results including the knowledge about human protection under the law, which can enable individuals and offer solutions because of their specific problems.
Besides, all kind of human being rights should be considered as fundamental, as they have an important role in the sphere, where people connect to others by any means levels in world - in the family, classes, the work place, etc
Therefore it is essential that people should make an effort to realize what human being rights as fundamental rights are, and the type of role they have got in their life. This surely will help them to promote justice and the well-being of culture.
The main subject matter is the fact whether any privileges are "more fundamental" than the others. The conclusions upon this can't be unanimous, since disagreements over this have took place over passed ages between countries with different political ideologies. These disagreements refer never to particular privileges, but to the types of protection under the law (i. e. the classification of the protection under the law), which is the same.
However, over the last ten years there finally is a broad agreement between users of the United Nations, that human rights are widespread, indivisible, interdependent and interrelated. In other words, all protection under the law are equally fundamental and important, necessary in creating a strong and healthy contemporary society.
So, I'm finally arriving to the conclusion, that all protection under the law are equally fundamental. We should not make a distinction between them, classifying these to "more" or "less" fundamental.
All democratic republics, among which is also the Republic of Armenia, have asserted in their Constitutions, that "a person, his dignity, fundamental protection under the law and freedoms are higher values".
This also is set in the General Declaration of Human Rights. In particular, it says, that "All human beings are given birth to free and similar in dignity and privileges. They can be endowed with reason and conscience and really should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood". We should take into consideration, that the Declaration neither segregates any protection under the law nor stresses the concern of other ones. This means little or nothing, but only that rights are similarly important and fundamental.
This idea is persisted in our Constitution credited to Republic, as he's the one, who's in charge of our rights and will his better to protect them. This is one of the main functions of your Republic - the coverage of our protection under the law!