The memo is intended to address the following questions: Can the concept of huma

n rights is considered to exist? If the question can answer yes, does the water
to be considered a human right? I will also analyze the business aspect and whet
her the development of society forward. The various protest actions that have ta
ken place, because of the desperate water situation is dealt with from a civil d
isobedience approach, based on Haber's theories. Finally, I will glare out short
of options and possibilities in the solution of the problem of water supply.
Human rights
Much of human rights is rooted in natural law, which rights were adopted abandon
ed by God or the universe and which was recognized through reason. This approach
has been strongly criticized, for what is considered as unscientific, and oppos
ition to the metaphysical impossibility conceptual basis.
The main criticisms are as follows Freeman: Human Rights, is in full designs fro
m us, which lacks natural given basis. They lack, he believes, therefore, entire
ly justification, if they do not follow from a morally persuasive argument basis
. Richard Rory goes a step further and argue that there is no theoretical basis
for human rights, which in itself is valid for all views.
There is also no universal views on what constitutes the good society and what r
ights it gives, but it depends on each unique situation and circumstances. Alrea
dy a philosopher Edmund Burke argued that there can be universal rights, but mer
ely particularistic actually act. Human rights have also been criticized as West
ern Christian ideals presented with universal claims.
A common view is that only negative rights, civil and political rights can be ge
nuine rights, as compliance with them, requires that the state does not interfer
e in its citizens before pregnancy REGARD tex. freedom from political seduction,
and this could be enforced universally across all states and may put forward mo
re, these rights have no expenses, such as social and economic rights often enta
ils.
It is customary to also refer to it that there is no obligation to do the imposs
ible as a state and the economic or social constraints prevent it, has no right
to get needs met. In the view in front of Shue and Donnelly, referring to Freema
n's article that the difference between them is not as significant or clear, but
also civil and political costs may entail costs and also may require active beh
avior by the state.
The conclusion, as also confirmed in the section on Economic Social and Cultural
Rights by Matthew Craven, is that there are no convincing arguments to distingu
ish ESC-rights from the traditionally recognized negative civil and political ri
ghts, or to refuse to give them the status of human rights. The same conclusion
of Gustavson's work, "Taking Social Rights Seriously".
Donnelly rejects completely the idea of human rights, and relates that because t
here is no scientific way to establish a common area that may be considered to c
onstitute human needs. Against this must be argued that food and water may be re
garded as basic universal needs common to all, without covering the medical scie
nces. Steiner says, for its part that it is impossible and becomes arbitrary to
decide the conflict between rights, and suggests that the only theory that is ra
tional, is it not the causes of conflict. He solves the problem rather unconstru
ctive, by only considering private ownership as a right. It must, I see the theo
ry's usefulness beyond the purely economic ownership interests, and act to try t
o curb abuses, from a global humanistic perspective.
It is verging on the tragi-comedy, as a parrot repeating the constant talk of ne
gative rights, when people are starving and dying from contaminated water, it is
 not right to vote and the right to form free trade unions, which should be top
of the agenda. I noted recently in Göteborgs Posten, on the addition of ESC protoco
l that Sweden does not intend to sign this, because they consider it too complic
ated and technically difficult to investigate whether violations of a right has
taken place, and you want to instead work with other roads . It would not approv
e and accept the possibility of making social and economic rights due ", which I
understand has long been a weakness with these rights.
I believe that there are certain basic human values rooted in human nature, whic
h are universal. Just as Freeman acknowledges the human rights section need not
be substantiated with theoretical basis, in order to be successful it is enough,
in fact, that the world is sympathetic to the idea set and willing to follow th
ese rules in theory and practice.
If you come from an honest and unbiased position, one can not escape the fact th
at natural law and the voice of reason, has a hidden strength, despite its unsop
histicated style. In the continuing, I assume that there is indeed a well resear
ched and logical reason to assume human right theoretical concept.
Social and economic rights, the UN Convention, the ICESCR
The right of access to clean water and sanitation is one of the most fundamental
rights, and still today in modern times, these goals are not realized when over
a billion people in the poor world outside. Martha Nussbaum does in his theory
of central functional capacity, the top of the list right to life, not dying pre
maturely, as well as good health as two of the most important and basic function
s, with the help of these societies may be evaluated on their ability to care fo
r citizens needs and quality of life. This includes access to clean water and sa
nitation facilities. Nussbaum also propagate to where these are human rights, ea
ch state covered by the mandatory requirement of natural justice that meet these
basic needs of its citizens and also that the citizen should be able to collect
this against the State.
The problem with social and economic rights in the positive sense that these are
associated with costs and often require redistributive measures in order to ful
fill these requirements.
They have tried in various ways inkooperat these rights including connecting the
m to civil and political rights in society by historical tradition, has strong p
ositions and through them get a stronger legal protection for even the social an
d economic rights, primarily by arguing that there is no basis for distinguishin
g the different rights from others, which are considered non-genuine. Countries
can also implement in national law as required by the Convention Committee, to t
hus obtain practical tillämplingar. It can thus be concluded that water is to be co
nsidered a human right, as defined by the UN convention as above. Then the quest
ion is whether there is a right, against whom is this right chargeable against?
The usual attitude that states recognize the need of the right in general terms
but it is of practical or economically impossible to meet this need, and with it
we have to settle. Under Hohfeld's theory of rights, the right of access to cle
an water to be considered a requirement right of citizens and against the requir
ements is an obligation for the state in each state to meet this requirement.
However, this is problematic in poor countries without, extensive social welfare
that meet even the most basic needs of their citizens, because of financial tec
hnical and other problems in society. The issue of water covered by the interest
theory, where the interest in clean water for billions of citizens are to be re
garded as an important and worthy of protection interests of society.
According to Ronald Dworkin is one trump the rights of commercial consideration,
however, this has a rather small scale. It is usually stated that it will suffi
ce to refer to the UN Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, to be ri
ght there. It should not be necessary argued further about the utility of this o
r the theoretical basis for the privilege. Against this stands Bentam and Utilit
arianism is not willing to give human rights a special status on the grounds tha
t in some situation may be more advantageous from a utility maximization point o
f view that does not comply with these Charter, Welin sid 227th
Business
U.S. and EU push the issue to several countries to privatize water resources. In
one of the items as the basis for this memo expressed the view that water shoul
d not be a commodity subject to profit-making, and there is a reasonable and sen
sible arguments, when water and important natural resources, for example, the ai
r we breathe is worthy of protection and should not be subjected to free market
forces.
In it can be argued that a great profit and business opportunities, allows compa
nies to meet water treatment and distribution at reasonable and affordable price
s to poor countries. Corporate streams where they see opportunities. This articl
e above, this argument says that the price of water supply is too low, which mea
ns that there will be a loss for businesses to operate and develop further, and
with slightly higher prices are transparent and incentive to put the development
of benefit to the most vulnerable and poor in the world. So by letting capitali
sm run wild, it is also the poorest to it. However, if we consider Western socie
ty at large, I would give it deemed not to sue, but the disparities are increasi
ng instead of bridged and reduced.
The second article is to argue against this and mean the way enterprises are not
at all his commitment in a satisfactory manner, and instead represents an explo
itation of the area, where the desperate needs of exploited and forcing poor cou
ntries to privatize, which allows the describing of arbitrary raising prices and
generally control the water supply for their own purposes. It is also clear fro
m the article that businesses benefit from assistance and general support and fo
r this end it is not so interesting anymore.
After natural resources such as water and air is what is fundamental and essenti
al to all human survival, it is clearly questionable idea, because the company o
bjective is primarily everything is and historically has been to maximize their
own profits, and seldom or never been interested in social issues, new than if i
t serves their business to take advantage of this responsibility. Now is therefo
re the Earth's water reserves are also becoming a productive
However, from a different argument perspective ignores us easily from there, whe
n we choose to forcefully argue for global free trade, then the water issues are
quickly reduced to a non-release side-effect, we personally do not need neither
take into account or feel responsible for, nor will hit our ideal global libera
l market economy.
Civil disobedience
When the people in these situations protest, demonstrate and occupy the plant or
illegally taking water, then this is the situation of civil disobedience. Accor
ding to Locke's ideas of social contract, the situation is quite clear, because
the state where individuals are unable to meet their basic needs in society, for
clean water has the individual the full right to revolt to get their legitimate
claims.
According to Habermas, civil disobedience is something that the stable and moder
n state welcomes and sees as a necessary component of political life. However, t
his is nothing here about the real meaning of what one might describe as the rul
e of democracy in many of these countries, where the issue of water is present,
but they are in development stages.
Rawls, Habermas, which retrieves the grounds for his view on civil disobedience,
believes that for civil disobedience to be justified, require that there is a g
ross injustice, which is the situation with water is observed. It may be regarde
d as grossly unfair when billions of people do not have clean water in their hom
es. Citizens are not otherwise under threat of legal rules, but only protest is
directed solely against the water problem, with demonstrations, occupations and
also with the legal means to try to bring about a peaceful solution, to the exte
nt it exists. Individuals also use as much as possible other options and clean o
ccupations account, ultimately, as a desperate resort.
These measures have produced results such as in Bolivia managed population, afte
r several deaths, halt an international corporate contracts for the privatizatio
n of the country's water resources. It is also important to consider legal strat
egies and if necessary, use the courts to question the observed and illuminated,
and a debate, under the right optimistic stance.
Concluding discussions
Welin discusses in his book, page 244, regarding the assistance and aid to third
world whether we should help and make an effort and on their situation at all o
ur concerns and take global distribution issues seriously. He feels a little bit
more fortified, that it can be in our own interest to participate and help to p
revent the situation from escalating and that we ourselves get into trouble. It
is also possible to draw parallels with terrorism, and if it can be is something
in the idea that we own in the West created by this oppression and unequal dist
ribution of resources, which now tends to backfire.
The issue of water affects and deals with the situation of women, and a fundamen
tal equality and the distribution issue. The article is 70% of the affected poor
women in developing countries but virtually no assets, although they together a
ccount for over half of world food production, one only earns 10% of world incom
e, and this is also a sign that something must made, first to highlight the issu
e raise awareness and tackle the problem seriously.
As I see it, the UN and the global community to play a much more active role, wh
ich ideally would be working under the principle of the reflexive law at the int
ernational level, where we, together with relevant experience difficulties as eq
ual partners, in a genuine spirit of justice , peace and freedom, which is longe
r than that seems like a distant utopia back in nature's metaphysical world.