No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Many of the basic ideas that animated the human rights movement developed after World War II and the events of the Holocaust,[6] culminating in the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in Paris by the United Nations General Assembly in 1948. Ancient peoples did not have the same modern conception of universal human rights. [11] The true precursor of human rights discourse was the concept of natural rights, which emerged as part of the medieval tradition of natural law, which became important during the European Enlightenment with philosophers such as John Locke, Francis Hutcheson and Jean-Jacques Burlamaqui and played a prominent role in the political discourse of the American Revolution and the French Revolution. [6] On this basis, in the second half of the 20th century. 12] Perhaps as a response to slavery, torture, genocide and war crimes,[6] as a recognition of inherent human vulnerability and as a prerequisite for the possibility of a just society. [5] Dr. Zahara Nampewo is a Ugandan lawyer, academic and human rights practitioner who teaches at Makerere University`s Faculty of Law. She directs the Centre for Human Rights and Peace (HURIPEC), a research and advocacy centre at Makerere University in Uganda.

She is Editor-in-Chief of the East African Journal on Peace and Human Rights, HURIPEC`s biannual peer-reviewed international scientific publication. The human rights responsibility of international health assistance and cooperation is also attracting attention and has become more urgent during the COVID-19 pandemic. This has often been analysed through the prism of high- and low-income states, as well as multilateral and bilateral trade agreements [25]. The above-mentioned General Comment No. 14 on the right to health [1] lays the foundation for an international commitment to the right to health outside one`s own State. On the basis of their international human rights obligations, States are obliged to respect the enjoyment of the right to health in other countries (paragraph 39). The Committee also clarified that States are obliged to prevent the violation of rights by third parties in other countries if they are able to influence those third parties by legal and political means, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and applicable international law (para. 39). In particular, States should facilitate access to basic health facilities, goods and services in other countries whenever possible and, if necessary, provide the necessary assistance within available resources. The United Nations Human Rights Interpretation Guide entitled „Corporate Responsibility for the Respect of Human Rights“ stresses in this context that „the right to health will be particularly important for pharmaceutical companies“ [47]. However, whether they actually owe such liability as an enforceable legal obligation or as a mere corporate social responsibility, and how the liability of non-governmental bodies and individual enterprises is to be measured in this regard, may vary considerably depending on where they operate and whether national laws impose such an obligation on them. Identifying the duties and role of non-governmental policies on the right to health is one thing, ensuring that they actually play that role is another.

The State, as the principal debtor of obligations, may enact domestic measures and laws to enforce this obligation. However, it remains to be seen how this will translate into practice [48]. To achieve these objectives, the Commission is mandated to „collect documents, conduct studies and research on African problems in the field of individuals and peoples, rights, organize seminars, symposia and conferences, disseminate information, encourage national and local institutions concerned with human and peoples` rights and, where appropriate, to express their views or make recommendations to Governments“. (Charter, s. 45). [38] and also by Singaporean opposition leader Chee Soon Juan, who says it is racist to claim that Asians do not want human rights. [72] [73] The UDHR was conceived by members of the Commission on Human Rights chaired by Eleanor Roosevelt, which began discussing an international bill of rights in 1947. The members of the commission did not immediately agree on the form of such a bill of rights and on whether or how it should be implemented. The Commission continued to shape the UDHR and its accompanying treaties, but the UDHR quickly became a priority. [20] Canadian law professor John Humprey and French jurist René Cassin were responsible for much of the transnational research and structure of the document, with the articles of the declaration interpreting the general principle of the preamble.

The document was structured by Cassin to incorporate the fundamental principles of dignity, liberty, equality and fraternity into the first two articles, followed by the rights of the individual; the rights of individuals among themselves and towards groups; intellectual, public and political rights; and economic, social and cultural rights. According to Cassin, the last three articles place rights in the context of limits, duties, and the social and political order in which they are to be realized. [20] Humphrey and Cassin intended the rights set out in the UDHR to be legally enforceable by all means, as is clear from the third sentence of the preamble:[20] The inclusion of the idea of serious threats is again evident in order to omit trivial threats.