Arquivo de etiquetas: Cidadania

Actualités / News, Lectures / Readings

Cidadanai Política e Dignidade Humana- VII

Deixe o seu comentário

Continuando a reflexão sobre o Golpe no Brasil em Abril, um artigo publicado em “O que esperar da sociedade Brasileira”. Trata-se dum artigio interessante pela sua argumentação sobre o Estado de Direito e os limites do poder.

 

Golpe, por definição, é uma estratagema, um ardil, uma manobra ilegítima. Assim, por exemplo, a utilização de um cheque (uma ordem de pagamento prevista na legislação brasileira) é legítima, mas utilizar um cheque sem fundos para lesar o patrimônio de uma outra pessoa é um golpe. Da mesma maneira, a utilização da forma jurídica “impeachment” para derrubar um governante eleito sem que exista um fato concreto que encontre adequação típica entre os “crimes de responsabilidade” é um golpe, por mais que juristas de ocasião (os chamados de “juristas de estimação das corporações midiáticas”), que sempre aparecem em contextos golpistas, busquem justificar aos olhos de uma população desinformada (desinformação, em grande medida, produzida por esses mesmos meios de comunicação) a ruptura com as regras do jogo democrático. Agora, para além do golpe, impõe-se pensar as consequências desse movimento na realidade brasileira, em especial diante da possibilidade, uns dias mais concreta, outros mais distante, do pedido de impeachment ser acolhido.

O jurista e filósofo italiano Luigi Ferrajoli, ao analisar a crise política, social e ética italiana (que se seguiu, como efeito colateral não desejado, à operação “Mãos Limpas”), fez uma importante análise dos riscos à democracia dos “poderes selvagens” na obra Poteri selvaggi – La crisis della democrazia italiana. Procurar-se-á aqui, com as adequações necessárias ao contexto brasileiro, e a partir do que aconteceu na Itália após a operação que serviu de modelo à Lava-Jato (operação de combate à corrupção que acabou instrumentalizada pelos defensores do golpe nos meios de comunicação, nas elites econômicas, no Poder Judiciário, no Poder Executivo e no Poder Legislativo), apresentar um prognóstico do que espera a sociedade brasileira no pós-golpe.

Da desconstitucionalização do poder

De início, salta aos olhos a desconstitucionalização tanto do sistema político, quanto das esferas social e cultural. O que, sobretudo, se revela fatal para o paradigma do Estado Democrático de Direito, do sistema de justiça, que a partir do desenvolvimento do processo golpista deixou claro o abandono do sistema de vínculos legais impostos a qualquer poder, inclusive ao próprio poder jurisdicional. Pelos mais variados motivos, que não cabe aqui desenvolver, instaurou-se uma espécie de “vale tudo” argumentativo e utilitarista, no qual os fins afirmados pelos atores jurídicos – ainda que distantes da realidade – justificam a violação dos meios estabelecidos na própria Constituição da República, bem como das formas e das substâncias que constituem o Estado Democrático de Direito. Em linhas gerais, pode-se afirmar que ao longo desse processo ficou constatada a progressiva desconsideração, ou mesmo a eliminação, dos valores constitucionais das consciências de grande parcela do povo brasileiro, inclusive dos atores jurídicos. Abriu-se as portas para os chamados “poderes selvagens”, poderes sem limites ou controles.

Abandonou-se o paradigma do Estado Democrático de Direito (democracia constitucional), no qual existem limites instransponíveis ao exercício do poder e à onipotência das maiorias de ocasião. As maiorias, no Estado Democrático de Direito, seja a maioria parlamentar, seja a maioria da população, estão submetidas a limites e vínculos substanciais (conteúdos previstos na Constituição da República), ou seja, existem coisas que as agências estatais (legislativo, executivo e judiciário) e o cidadão estão proibidos de fazer e outras coisas que eles estão obrigados a fazer, independentemente dos beneficiários e dos prejudicados com essas ações e omissões ditadas pela Constituição da República.

Infelizmente, o desenvolvimento do processo de impeachment em desacordo com o regramento constitucional acabou por revelar que ações e omissões em contrariedade aos direitos e garantias constitucionais estabelecidos foram praticadas ou, ao menos, toleradas pelo Poder Judiciário, que, no modelo do Estado Democrático de Direito, deve(ria) atuar como garante da democracia constitucional. No pós-golpe, portanto, não há razão para confiar no funcionamento constitucionalmente adequado do Poder Judiciário e das demais instituições públicas no controle dos poderes econômicos ou políticos.

Messianismo e demonização

Em meio ao empobrecimento subjetivo, que se caracteriza pelo modelo de pensamento bélico-binário (que ignora a complexidade dos fenômenos e divide as pessoas entre amigos e inimigos), bem como em razão da ausência de reflexão (não raro gerada pelos meios de comunicação de massa que apresentam “verdades” que não admitem problematizações), deu-se uma espécie de regressão pré-moderna e, com ela, o fortalecimento de fenômenos como o “messianismo” e a “demonização”.

Se a crise política brasileira que culminou com o pedido de impeachment, por um lado, revelou tanto a descrença na democracia representativa quanto a tradição autoritária em que a sociedade está lançada (a crença em resposta de força e a desconfiança em relação aos direitos e garantias fundamentais, vistos como obstáculos aos desejos da maioria), por outro, escancarou a receptibilidade de novos messias ou salvadores da pátria, em especial dentre aquela parcela da população que apoia a queda do governo eleito.

Manifestações populares deixaram claro que grande parcela da população brasileira deseja identificar entre os diversos atores sociais aqueles que encarnem a vontade popular (na verdade, a vontade e a visão de mundo dessa parcela da sociedade), mesmo que para isso tenham que atuar sem limites jurídicos ou éticos. O Messias age em nome do povo sem mediações políticas ou jurídicas (como percebeu Marcia Tiburi, “quem se apresenta como Messias não precisa mais de padres e nem de seguir o evangelho”). Esse “salvador da pátria” pode ser um juiz midiático (“messianismo jurídico”, para utilizar a expressão da cientista política espanhola Esther Solano) ou um militar saudosista dos regimes de exceção (messianismo bélico), não importa: entre pessoas autoritárias, os heróis sempre serão autoritários. Correlato à identificação de um messias, está a demonização daqueles que pensam diferente. Estes, transformados em inimigos, não merecem direitos e devem ser eliminados.

Esse fenômeno, que aposta em um Messias para liderar a luta/guerra contra o mal, é propício à eliminação das regras do jogo democrático, pois aposta em um “governo de pessoas” (de um Messias) em detrimento do modelo constitucional de um governo submetido a leis adequadas ao projeto constitucional, pois o Messias age sem mediações ou limites ao poder, não há mais que se falar em “separação de poderes” ou  em “direitos fundamentais”. No pós-golpe abre-se espaço para lideranças carismáticas e pouco democráticas, em especial em sociedades como a brasileira, fortemente inserida em uma tradição autoritária.

Mudança no regime da corrupção      

Com a queda da presidenta Dilma, a sucessão implicará em um novo governo protagonizado pelo PMDB. Assim, muda-se também a relação entre a esfera pública e a esfera privada. Isso porque o PMDB, ou pelo menos a parcela hegemônica do PMDB, representa explicitamente ou, o que é ainda mais preocupante, é formada pelos próprios detentores do poder econômico. Com isso desaparece a própria ideia de conflito de interesses entre os projetos do poder político e os interesses privados dos detentores do poder econômico. O poder político tornar-se-á subordinado, sem mediações, ao poder econômico: o poder econômico tornar-se-á o poder político.

Pode-se, ainda, afirmar que a aproximação, quase identidade, entre o poder político e o poder econômico (um complexo de interesses econômicos, financeiros, midiáticos, etc.) produz o aumento da corrupção, mas dificulta sua identificação, isso porque muda o paradigma do próprio sistema de corrupção, bem como desaparecem ou são drasticamente reduzidos os mecanismos de controle dos atos do governo.

Antes, o corruptor (geralmente, o detentor do poder econômico) comprava o corrupto (detentor de parcela do poder político) para alcançar um objetivo distinto daquele que se daria no exercício legítimo do poder político. Havia, então, uma relação oculta entre política e economia. Agora, quando o detentor do poder econômico assume diretamente o poder político, desaparece qualquer distinção entre o poder político e o poder econômico, os interesses privados passam a ser tratados, sem qualquer mediação (nem sequer o recurso à corrupção vulgar) como “interesses públicos”, isso em corrupção do sistema econômico, do princípio da livre concorrência, do sistema de proteção trabalhista e dos demais direitos sociais, do sistema de direitos e garantias liberais, da liberdade de informação, enfim, corrompe-se o próprio Estado Democrático de Direito.

Uma boa notícia

A crise potencializada com o pedido de impeachment da presidenta Dilma fez muita gente despertar para a política. Alguns, para a política identificada com os seus próprios interesses econômicos. Dentre esses, muitos despertaram para a política, mas com concepções autoritárias de sociedade. Todavia, outros despertaram para a alegria política de atuar juntos para a defesa da legalidade democrática e a manutenção de conquistas sociais. Multidões foram às ruas. No pós-golpe, os golpistas não dormirão tranquilos.

Rubens Casara é Doutor em Direito, Mestre em Ciências Penais, Juiz de Direito do TJ/RJ, Coordenador de Processo Penal da EMERJ e escreve a Coluna ContraCorrentes, aos sábados, com Giane Alvares, Marcelo Semer, Marcio Sotelo Felippe e Patrick Mariano.
Actualités / News, Lectures / Readings

Cidadania, Política e Dignidade Humana VI

Deixe o seu comentário

Abordamos no postal anterior os pontos necessários para a construção duma agenda de gestão do poder na política com base na participação cidadã.  Os sistemas de representação implicam a delimitação do tempo de legitimidade. Nem sempre os tempos societais e políticos são coincidentes. É portanto necessário criar uma agenda de intervenção social, com base na participação.  Essa agenda social pode ser construída em três domínios.

O tal triângulo formado pela educação, cultura e inovação. A agenda democrática tem que responder ao desafio a liberdade da igualdade na diversidade e da solidariedade. É necessário compreender o que está em jogo e definir um caminho. A agenda a participação é um caminho da cidadania. Na educação, pela aprendizagem do saber que existe na sociedade, na cultura pela prática do encontro e na inovação para avançar, com o conhecimento e com a economia.

A nova agenda de participação tem que ser construída em torno do equilíbrio entre o indivíduo (na sua liberdade) o outro (a gestão da igualdade na diversidade) e a sociedade (o assegurar a produção dos bens essenciais à sobrevivência), com base no princípio de que todos tem que esta incluídos. A cultura é o que faz avançar a sociedade.

 

 

Cultura e o que permite avançar.

Actualités / News, Lectures / Readings

Cidadania, Política e Dignidade Humana IV

Deixe o seu comentário

A propósito da questão sobre a relação entre representação e participação, abordamos no postal anterior a questão da crise económica a partir da crise política no Brasil. Nele colocamos a hipótese  de que, a crise económica e política é também uma crise da cidadania.

Os sistemas democráticos, com base no Estado Social, apresentaram como solução para o conflito social entre o capital e o trabalho, a Ideia do Estado Social. Isto é, a economia livre gerava a riqueza. parte dessa riqueza é apropriada pelo estado, que a redistribui para efeitos de apoio aos setores sociais mais vulneráveis.

Essa redistribuição, nas economia de casino está comprometida. Em linhas gerais a erosão do valor do capital pelo aceleramento da sua circulação não gerou aumento no investimento produtivo. E sem mais produção, o sistema tende a colapsar. A tendência de colapsar leva a que a regulação política tenda a ser mais aguda e se recomponha.

Como é que a querela entre representação e participação contribui para o entendimento de que há um processo político em curso. Há naturalmente a necessidade a aumentar os lugares e espaços de participação.  A participação é um processo de cidadania que emerge em torno de um “triângulo virtuoso” chamemo-lhe assim: Educação, Cultura e Inovação.

O investimento na sociedade é um investimento na educação, na cultura e na ciência. Na educação para criar homens livres e críticos, na cultura para facilitar processos de participação cidadã, ou de aplicação da consciência crítica, e na Ciência, na produção de Inovação.

Assim a uma crise da democracia e na sociedade, deveria corresponder um conjunto de novas prioridades. um conjunto de prioridades a serem estabelecidas com base na correção das desigualdades (para equilibrar a lei de Pareto), para manter as liberdades, para assegura a dignidade humana e facilitar o estabelecimentos de solidariedades.

 

Actualités / News

Cidadania, Política e Dignidade Humana II

Deixe o seu comentário

Vamos neste postal abordar a questão do Estado de Direito na sua relação com a Dignidade Humana

Fundamentos

É necessário recordar que o Estado de direito resulta de um longo caminho. Um percurso feito de graves tensões, guerras e violências diversas que levaram à moderna democracia que hoje conhecemos. Uma democracia que está baseada na representação dos cidadão. A legitimidade advém do poder conferido pelos cidadãos. A base do poder são os cidadãos.

A Democracia é também o primado da lei. A lei confere direitos ao cidadão. A sociedade democrática é uma sociedade de cidadãos portadores de direitos. E as guerras do Estado de direito foram guerras em que os direitos dos cidadãos se contrapunham aos deveres dos súbitos. O Estado de direito acrescenta o Direito como como estado primordial de existência do cidadão. A formulação do direito implica a existência dos deveres. Os deveres são como um contraponto do direito. Uma balança em que a sociedade apenas funciona em equilíbrio.

A direito é para todos os cidadãos. É o direito formulado como uma obrigação abstracta para todos que fundamenta a liberdade e a igualdade e a solidariedade (a coesão social).

Advindo a legitimidade da lei da representação dos cidadãos, impõe-se também a limitação desse poder. Limitação no tempo e na extensão. É essa limitação do poder que dá origem à separação dos poderes, tal com Montesquieu fórmula nas suas “Cartas Persas”. A separação dos poderes procura o equilíbrio entre o corpo que faz a lei, que a aplica e que a julga. Corpos autónomos que, a partir de um determinado tempo, exercem esse poder. A limitação do espaço e do tempo determinam a aplicação da Política

A Política é também um valor ético O Estado ao exercer o poder, tem que garantir a justiça da sua aplicação aos cidadãos. Tem garantir entre outras questões que não privilégios e que o rendimento é distribuído, equidade.

Se a arquitectura da política e do Estado de Direito, com base na liberdade, igualdade, e  na solidariedade, se encontra estabilizado, conferindo uma estrutura de direitos e deveres aos cidadão e o poder de administração da cidade (da polis) através do mecanismo da representação que se encontra limitado no tempo; a globalização introduz novos e difíceis desafios a essa representação. Se o poder é exercido em representação, o que fazer quando a vontade dos representados muda?

Efectivamente as modernas sociedades enfrentam o desafio da representação dos poderes através da emergência da participação. O sistema de representação está baseado no princípio da vontade geral. A vontade geral é expressa num determinando momento, funcionando, no sistema de representação, como legitimação do poder. Quando os cidadão verificam que a sua vontade não está a ser representada, ou quando a vontade geral se altera, ainda no interior do tempo de representação, verifica-se uma crise da representação. Quando os cidadão, através da sua ação procuram formas alternativas de expressar a sua vontade, gera-se uma vontade de participação, que parcialmente colide com o poder de representação.

Lectures / Readings

Human Rights and Gender Equality II

Deixe o seu comentário

Major UN Covenants and Declarations

Values underpin sustainable development, and one kind of value approach is the human rights approach. The idea that every human being on the planet within any political system has human rights, and human rights of five sorts as I have mentioned. Civil rights as citizens. Political rights to participate in governance.

721Economic rights that define the right of individuals to meet basic needs. Social rights the right to live in secure families and communities. And cultural rights, the right to participate in one’s culture. And that human rights approach while not universally subscribed to by each person on the planet, has been found compelling across the world by individuals, by activists, by many different kinds of groups, by most governments. And it has become enshrined in a very important way in international law and in the norms of the international political and diplomatic system under the United Nations. When the United Nations was formed at the end of World War Two, one of the first great steps of the United Nations a few years after its founding in 1948 at the urging of Eleanor Roosevelt, the former first lady of the United States and a great champion of human rights, was the adoption by the member states of the United Nations of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It is a wonderful, remarkable document. A very powerful one that was adopted in the wake of World War Two at a time of hope and also remembrance of the devastation of World War Two and the idea that by meeting the basic rights and needs of all people in the world one would not only ensure their dignity improve their economic well being, but also help to prevent another global war and global disaster. The Universal Declaration is in essence the moral charter of the United Nations. The UN has it’s legal charter which defines it’s institutions, it’s functioning, the selection of the Secretary General, the operations of the security counsel and the General Assembly. It is itself an extremely important document of international law and practice. But the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is the moral s, heart and soul of the United Nations. And when the UN takes actions in the area of economic development or protecting the environment, or protecting refugees or addressing natural disasters almost always it’s to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights that the eyes are drawn and that the attention is placed. Because that provides an inspiration and a guidance that continues more than half a century later. Well over half a century after the adoption of the Universal Declaration. Coming out of the Universal Declaration were two more detailed international covenants that also helped to implement The Universal Declaration. One is the International Covenant on Political and Civil Rights, the other is the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights. So between those two covenants, one covers the five main areas of human rights. Most of the governments subscribed to both of those covenants. Interestingly, the United States did not subscribe to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Political rights and it’s interesting to know why. While many, many Americans including myself certainly agree with the International covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the libertarian streak in the United States which goes back to the founding of the U.S. as it broke away from from Great Britain. The libertarian streak which takes the view that government’s main role is to provide defense, security and and private property, but not to do more than that because of the risks to liberty. That libertarian streak in part of American politics we don’t want to guarantee or to underpin or to encourage the idea of economic rights because economic rights means economic responsibilities to, especially for the rich. And the libertarians say, don’t go there, let markets, let individuals transact. It’s not the role of the state in their view to implement an ethical framework beyond that of the protection of the individual and, and private property. So the US did not sign that, though most of the world’s governments did. Later on, that was in 1966 when those two international covenants were adopted the UN has adopted many more specific ambitious goals around meeting the basic needs. The most important by far we’ve noted have been the Millennium Development Goals adopted in the year 2000. And I’ll note in just a few minutes that those two took their inspiration from the Universal Declaration and from the international covenants, because the Millennium Development Goals were taken from the start as a way to implement, in essence, the human rights to a decent economic life helping the poor to break free at the poverty trap. Let’s go back to the 1948 Universal Declaration that is so important and it is a very moving document which I hope will continue to be honored, respected, read embraced and improved upon in the 21st century. So in 1948 the governments of the world agreed to the following. They said the General Assembly, Proclaims this Universal Declaration of Human Rights as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society, keeping this declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures, the progressive realization of the rights, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance, both among the peoples of Member States themselves and among the peoples of territories under their jurisdiction. So that is the preamble more or less to the Universal  Declaration. Saying that all of the Member States should strive to teach, advocate and honour and progressively achieve all of the rights of the Declaration itself. Well there are many rights and it’s a a document that bears study. But I wanted to highlight just a few of them. Article 22 calls for the right to social security. In other words, to a guaranteed base so that human dignity and the most basic needs of water, shelter, clothing and so forth can be met. Article 23 of the Universal Declaration calls for the right to work, to a livelihood, to be able for individuals to support themselves and their families. Article 24 calls for the right to rest and leisure so that one can’t demand work of around the clock and in burdensome and crushing ways. Article 25 says that there is universal right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of the individual himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widow, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control. Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. What a remarkable bold statement. How unmet that remains today we know with more than one billion people still living in extreme poverty. These goals even according to the founders of the Universal Declaration would not be achieved instantly. They would only be realized progressively. But progressive might mean time is time is up. Time to meet these needs and we know as we’ve discussed, that meeting the basic needs of all is within reach. The end of poverty in its extreme form is itself within reach in our generation. Article 26 says that everyone has a right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. A merit good should apply to everyone in the world. And Article 28 I find very, very interesting, it says that everyone is entitled to a social

and international order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration can be fully realized. In other words, this is not just an empty statement of wishes. This is a call for a political order and a social order in which these rights can be progressively realized. And I think that this is a key point. One could still by cynical and say, doesn’t matter, it’s just words on a page. Governments don’t have to do this. But it really does say more than that, and the effects are more powerful than, just the cynical view that they can easily be discarded. What the document is saying is that only do individuals have rights, but individuals in our collectivity in our nations,and in a grouping of nations at the United Nations, also has the right to a system of government, a system of taxation and spending and delivery of services in which the rights and freedoms set forth in the Declaration can be fully realized. To implement this Universal Declaration, of course, is mainly the responsibilities of each society, but the international covenants which came in 1966 are more detailed documents that describe more specifically the various rights and more specifically how they are to be realized.

The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights focuses naturally on the rights of citizenship and the protection from abuses of the state. And let me just mention a few of the key points of the civil and political rights that are defined in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Article 6, for example, says that the right to life is protected by law. Government cannot willfully end without a due process, take a life. And of course, in many countries of the world capital punishment has been made illegal and has been eliminated long ago. Yet we do know that governments continue to kill their people that is not realizing the rights of this covenant. Article 7 says that no one can be subjected to torture. Here again we know that governments have violated this willfully. The United States itself engaged in water boarding so called after 9/11 until that was discontinued by the Obama Administration. Or at least we hope and and it was said by the administration that it has been discontinued. But torture, of course, remains a terrible scourge practiced in many parts of the world. Article 8 says that nobody can be held in slavery. And while slavery is illegal throughout the world, we know that there is human trafficking and that people are held in slavery though illegally. Governments have the responsibility to fight to resist that and to free people that are held against their will. Article 9 says that there’s a right to liberty and security of individuals, that government cannot violate the liberty and security of their citizens. Article 16 says there’s a right of citizenship defined as the recognition of all persons before the law. Article 18 declares the freedom of thought. Article 24, the protection of children. And Article 26, the equal protection of the law from discriminatory application. So you can see that these are rights that are not realized to the extent that they need to be. But our rights that are widely accepted, widely regarded, at least on paper, that’s a start and in application, but to be realized and to, to to be struggled for.

Now the companion to the civil and political rights, are the economic, social and cultural rights adopted at the same time in the complimentary international covenant. And let me mention some of those economic and social and cultural rights. And again, as in the Universal Declaration[2], Article 6 calls for the right to work. Article 7 for just and favorable conditions of work decent remuneration and safe working environment. Article 8 declares the right of individuals to form and to join trade unions. Article 9 as in the Universal Declaration, the right to social security. Article 11, the right to an adequate standard of living, to be able to meet basic needs. Article 12, very interesting and very important, very relevant for the Millennium Development Goals and for the sustainable development goals that will follow is the highest attainable, the right to I should say, the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health. Very interesting. At first one can’t grant the right to health, per se. People are ill they may suffer from conditions that are not preventable or treatable. So the standard is the highest attainable level of health. Importantly, physical health and mental health, because we know that mental illness is a terrible scourge for individuals and quantitatively a very heavy burden on societies around the world. Article 13, the right to education. And Article 15, the right to take part in cultural lives. And again as in the original Universal Declaration the Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights realizes this isn’t all at once. This is a framework, it’s a moral and ethical framework, it is a commitment. And the way that it is defined, is that each state party to this covenant undertakes steps individually, and through international assistance and cooperation, and to the maximum extent of its available resources to, to honor these rights and then quote, with a view to achieving progressively the full realization of the rights recognized in this covenant. So, this is a call on us. It’s to turn values into practice. And while cynics may say, so what, practice shows differently. These values do reach the heart. They do move governments. They can make a big difference, and I think this has been nowhere more clear than in the Millennium Development Goal effort. Initiated in September 2000, you’ll recall, by the world leaders gathered at the United Nations, and providing a motivation to meet these basic needs in health, in education, in gender equality, in at least a minimum standard of living. And when the MBG’s were launched in September 2000 in the Millennium Declaration which framed them and which looked to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the government said, we will spare no effort to free our fellow men, women, and children from the abject and dehumanizing conditions of extreme poverty to which more than a billion of them are currently subjected. We are committed to making the right to development a reality for everyone, and to freeing the entire human race from want. Human rights at the core of this development agenda, a motivation, a set of legal agreements and a moral heart of the United Nations, and of the sustainable development efforts in the years ahead.

[1]

Values underpin sustainable development, and one kind of value approach is the human rights approach. The idea that every human being on the planet within any political system has human rights, and human rights of five sorts as I have mentioned. Civil rights as citizens. Political rights to participate in governance. Economic rights that define the right of individuals to meet basic needs. Social rights the right to live in secure families and communities. And cultural rights, the right to participate in one’s culture. And that human rights approach while not universally subscribed to by each person on the planet, has been found compelling across the world by individuals, by activists, by many different kinds of groups, by most governments. And it has become enshrined in a very important way in international law and in the norms of the international political and diplomatic system under the United Nations. When the United Nations was formed at the end of World War Two, one of the first great steps of the United Nations a few years after its founding in 1948 at the urging of Eleanor Roosevelt, the former first lady of the United States and a great champion of human rights, was the adoption by the member states of the United Nations of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It is a wonderful, remarkable document. A very powerful one that was adopted in the wake of World War Two at a time of hope and also remembrance of the devastation of World War Two and the idea that by meeting the basic rights and needs of all people in the world one would not only ensure their dignity improve their economic well being, but also help to prevent another global war and global disaster. The Universal Declaration is in essence the moral charter of the United Nations. The UN has it’s legal charter which defines it’s institutions, it’s functioning, the selection of the Secretary General, the operations of the security counsel and the General Assembly. It is itself an extremely important document of international law and practice. But the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is the moral s, heart and soul of the United Nations. And when the UN takes actions in the area of economic development or protecting the environment, or protecting refugees or addressing natural disasters almost always it’s to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights that the eyes are drawn and that the attention is placed. Because that provides an inspiration and a guidance that continues more than half a century later. Well over half a century after the adoption of the Universal Declaration. Coming out of the Universal Declaration were two more detailed international covenants that also helped to implement The Universal Declaration. One is the International Covenant on Political and Civil Rights, the other is the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights. So between those two covenants, one covers the five main areas of human rights. Most of the governments subscribed to both of those covenants. Interestingly, the United States did not subscribe to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Political rights and it’s interesting to know why. While many, many Americans including myself certainly agree with the International covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the libertarian streak in the United States which goes back to the founding of the U.S. as it broke away from from Great Britain. The libertarian streak which takes the view that government’s main role is to provide defense, security and and private property, but not to do more than that because of the risks to liberty. That libertarian streak in part of American politics we don’t want to guarantee or to underpin or to encourage the idea of economic rights because economic rights means economic responsibilities to, especially for the rich. And the libertarians say, don’t go there, let markets, let individuals transact. It’s not the role of the state in their view to implement an ethical framework beyond that of the protection of the individual and, and private property. So the US did not sign that, though most of the world’s governments did. Later on, that was in 1966 when those two international covenants were adopted the UN has adopted many more specific ambitious goals around meeting the basic needs. The most important by far we’ve noted have been the Millennium Development Goals adopted in the year 2000. And I’ll note in just a few minutes that those two took their inspiration from the Universal Declaration and from the international covenants, because the Millennium Development Goals were taken from the start as a way to implement, in essence, the human rights to a decent economic life helping the poor to break free at the poverty trap. Let’s go back to the 1948 Universal Declaration that is so important and it is a very moving document which I hope will continue to be honored, respected, read embraced and improved upon in the 21st century. So in 1948 the governments of the world agreed to the following. They said the General Assembly, Proclaims this Universal Declaration of Human Rights as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society, keeping this declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures, the progressive realization of the rights, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance, both among the peoples of Member States themselves and among the peoples of territories under their jurisdiction. So that is the preamble more or less to the Universal  Declaration. Saying that all of the Member States should strive to teach, advocate and honour and progressively achieve all of the rights of the Declaration itself. Well there are many rights and it’s a a document that bears study. But I wanted to highlight just a few of them. Article 22 calls for the right to social security. In other words, to a guaranteed base so that human dignity and the most basic needs of water, shelter, clothing and so forth can be met. Article 23 of the Universal Declaration calls for the right to work, to a livelihood, to be able for individuals to support themselves and their families. Article 24 calls for the right to rest and leisure so that one can’t demand work of around the clock and in burdensome and crushing ways. Article 25 says that there is universal right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of the individual himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widow, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control. Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. What a remarkable bold statement. How unmet that remains today we know with more than one billion people still living in extreme poverty. These goals even according to the founders of the Universal Declaration would not be achieved instantly. They would only be realized progressively. But progressive might mean time is time is up. Time to meet these needs and we know as we’ve discussed, that meeting the basic needs of all is within reach. The end of poverty in its extreme form is itself within reach in our generation. Article 26 says that everyone has a right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. A merit good should apply to everyone in the world. And Article 28 I find very, very interesting, it says that everyone is entitled to a social

and international order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration can be fully realized. In other words, this is not just an empty statement of wishes. This is a call for a political order and a social order in which these rights can be progressively realized. And I think that this is a key point. One could still by cynical and say, doesn’t matter, it’s just words on a page. Governments don’t have to do this. But it really does say more than that, and the effects are more powerful than, just the cynical view that they can easily be discarded. What the document is saying is that only do individuals have rights, but individuals in our collectivity in our nations,and in a grouping of nations at the United Nations, also has the right to a system of government, a system of taxation and spending and delivery of services in which the rights and freedoms set forth in the Declaration can be fully realized. To implement this Universal Declaration, of course, is mainly the responsibilities of each society, but the international covenants which came in 1966 are more detailed documents that describe more specifically the various rights and more specifically how they are to be realized.

The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights focuses naturally on the rights of citizenship and the protection from abuses of the state. And let me just mention a few of the key points of the civil and political rights that are defined in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Article 6, for example, says that the right to life is protected by law. Government cannot willfully end without a due process, take a life. And of course, in many countries of the world capital punishment has been made illegal and has been eliminated long ago. Yet we do know that governments continue to kill their people that is not realizing the rights of this covenant. Article 7 says that no one can be subjected to torture. Here again we know that governments have violated this willfully. The United States itself engaged in water boarding so called after 9/11 until that was discontinued by the Obama Administration. Or at least we hope and and it was said by the administration that it has been discontinued. But torture, of course, remains a terrible scourge practiced in many parts of the world. Article 8 says that nobody can be held in slavery. And while slavery is illegal throughout the world, we know that there is human trafficking and that people are held in slavery though illegally. Governments have the responsibility to fight to resist that and to free people that are held against their will. Article 9 says that there’s a right to liberty and security of individuals, that government cannot violate the liberty and security of their citizens. Article 16 says there’s a right of citizenship defined as the recognition of all persons before the law. Article 18 declares the freedom of thought. Article 24, the protection of children. And Article 26, the equal protection of the law from discriminatory application. So you can see that these are rights that are not realized to the extent that they need to be. But our rights that are widely accepted, widely regarded, at least on paper, that’s a start and in application, but to be realized and to, to to be struggled for.

Now the companion to the civil and political rights, are the economic, social and cultural rights adopted at the same time in the complimentary international covenant. And let me mention some of those economic and social and cultural rights. And again, as in the Universal Declaration, Article 6 calls for the right to work. Article 7 for just and favorable conditions of work decent remuneration and safe working environment. Article 8 declares the right of individuals to form and to join trade unions. Article 9 as in the Universal Declaration, the right to social security. Article 11, the right to an adequate standard of living, to be able to meet basic needs. Article 12, very interesting and very important, very relevant for the Millennium Development Goals and for the sustainable development goals that will follow is the highest attainable, the right to I should say, the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health. Very interesting. At first one can’t grant the right to health, per se. People are ill they may suffer from conditions that are not preventable or treatable. So the standard is the highest attainable level of health. Importantly, physical health and mental health, because we know that mental illness is a terrible scourge for individuals and quantitatively a very heavy burden on societies around the world. Article 13, the right to education. And Article 15, the right to take part in cultural lives. And again as in the original Universal Declaration the Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights realizes this isn’t all at once. This is a framework, it’s a moral and ethical framework, it is a commitment. And the way that it is defined, is that each state party to this covenant undertakes steps individually, and through international assistance and cooperation, and to the maximum extent of its available resources to, to honor these rights and then quote, with a view to achieving progressively the full realization of the rights recognized in this covenant. So, this is a call on us. It’s to turn values into practice. And while cynics may say, so what, practice shows differently. These values do reach the heart. They do move governments. They can make a big difference, and I think this has been nowhere more clear than in the Millennium Development Goal effort. Initiated in September 2000, you’ll recall, by the world leaders gathered at the United Nations, and providing a motivation to meet these basic needs in health, in education, in gender equality, in at least a minimum standard of living. And when the MBG’s were launched in September 2000 in the Millennium Declaration which framed them and which looked to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the government said, we will spare no effort to free our fellow men, women, and children from the abject and dehumanizing conditions of extreme poverty to which more than a billion of them are currently subjected. We are committed to making the right to development a reality for everyone, and to freeing the entire human race from want. Human rights at the core of this development agenda, a motivation, a set of legal agreements and a moral heart of the United Nations, and of the sustainable development efforts in the years ahead.

 

museologia informal, Sociodrama

Participação Cidadã – os cafés Europa e o “Estarmos Atentos”

Deixe o seu comentário

Nos últimos dias participei em dois eventos sobre participação e cidadania.

O primeiro, Portugal Participa, organizado pela InLoco e  CES em colaboração com a Câmara Municipal de Cascais e o Instituto de Inovação social. Ainda não tivemos tempo de coligir as notas dessa oficina neste diário, o que faremos em breve, pois suscitam-nos notas interesantes notas. Para quem tem  curiosidade pode ir ao portal que foi lançado nessa sessão aqui.

Hoje participamos numa outra iniciativa de apelo à participação cidadã. Esta sobre Uma nova narrativa para a Europa. Trata-se duma iniciativa da comissão europeia e Parlamento Europeus que em Portugal conta com o apoio do Centro de Informação Jacques Dellors e é animada pela associação Sete Pés.

Deixaremos para outra ocasião a questão dos princípios da nova narrativa proposta que propões discutir num evento a realizar no Porto a 23 de janeiro uma proposta sobre o ” NOVO RENASCIMENTO E NOVO COSMOPOLITISMO”

“A Europa precisa de uma mudança de paradigma para a sua sociedade – na realidade,
precisa de nada menos do que um “Novo Renascimento”, lê-se na Declaração do Comité
Cultural do Projeto Uma Nova Narrativa para a Europa. Ao evocar aquele período
europeu do séc. XV e XVI em que a sociedade, a arte e a ciência abalaram a ordem
estabelecida e criaram os fundamentos e a dinâmica para a atual era da Sociedade do
Conhecimento, os autores daquela Declaração reivindicam a necessidade de um novo
paradigma para a sociedade europeia do séc. XXI, assente num “Novo Renascimento”.
Precisa também de um novo cosmopolitismo para os seus cidadãos “que englobe
ambientes urbanos dinâmicos e criativos […]. As cidades europeias devem ser algo
mais do que centros urbanos. Devem procurar tornar-se capitais de cultura […].Porque
não começar a imaginar a Europa como uma enorme megalópode, interligada por
meios de transporte e de comunicação?”.
De que modo podemos reajustar as prioridades no quadro da entidade política que é a
Europa, à luz destes ideais que nos são propostos pelos autores daquela Declaração, um
“Novo Renascimento” e um “Novo Cosmopolitismo?

Neste evento em Lisboa trabalhamos sobre a metodologia do Europa Café. Continuar a lerParticipação Cidadã – os cafés Europa e o “Estarmos Atentos” →

Páginas: 1 2 3