By Prof Mike Ozekhome SAN
INTRODUCTION
In our first instalment in this treatise, we x-rayed the meaning and concept of integrity and human rights after which we looked at the historical sources of human rights. Today, we shall continue and conclude the historical sources of human rights in Nigeria and other countries. We shall later take a critical look at integrity and protection of human rights, the copenhagen document and then conclusion.
HISTORICAL SOURCES OF HUMAN RIGHTS (Continues)
The UDHR has served as a template for subsequent human rights instruments and has had a positive impact on the legal, political, and cultural evolutions of nations and remains the mirror by which every individual and every organ of society” reflects on human rights.
Since the adoption and promulgation of the UDHR 1948, the United Nations has not wavered in its commitment to the promotion and protection of human rights. This explains the subsequent numerous resolutions, declarations and conventions which have been passed in the area of human rights. So important the issue of human rights that virtually all Constitutions, the world over, make provisions for human rights either in the preamble or in the substantive provisions.
AFRICA
In Africa for instance, except for Tanzania, where reference to human right’? is to be found in the preamble to the Constitution, and Malawi where human rights provisions embodied in substantive provisions of independence Constitution were replaced by the generalised references to human rights in the “Fundamental Principles of Government” section on the adoption of the Republican Constitution of 1966, most African constitutions include In their substantive sections provisions for human rights.
NIGERIA
In Nigerian Constitutions, beginning from the post-independence Constitution, due attention has always been given to the issue of human rights. In the 1960 independence Constitution 1963 Republican Constitutions 1979 Constitution. provisions were made for human rights protection. Further, in the 1999 Constitution (as amended), two Chapters spanning 26 (twenty six) sections are devoted to human rights subject. The need for constitutional provisions for human rights cannot be over-emphasised because, it is the state, with its vinous institutions which is primarily responsible for guaranteeing the implementation and enforcement of these rights in respect of its citizens and all those coming under its jurisdiction.
INTEGRITY AND PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS
To protect human rights is to ensure that people receive some degree of decent, humane treatment. Responsibility to protect human rights resides first and foremost with the states themselves. However, in many cases, public authorities and government officials institute policies that violate basic human rights. Such abuses of power by political leaders and state authorities have devastating effects. What can be done to safeguard human rights when those in power are responsible for human rights violations?
This is where the importance of integrity cannot be over-emphasised. John Rawls identified the virtues of integrity as “truthfulness and sincerity, lucidity and commitment. Therefore, a democratic government has an obligation arising from its democratic nature to practice authenticity towards citizens, those to whom it is responsible Government, to carry out the protection of human rights in truthfulness and sincerity, lucidity and outmost commitment, since integrity ranks among a democratic government’s primary virtues. Sincere and effective protection of human rights therefore, depends on the compliance of a state and its government, with its human rights obligations.
Establishing a constitutional model in which all human rights are effectively protected is not an easy task. It requires elaborate legislation, effective control over state institutions such as the law enforcement agencies and continuous efforts on the part of numerous other state organs.
The struggle of many countries in Eastern Europe and Africa, which changed from absolutist rule to democracy, to comply with the requirements of democracy and protection of human rights – especially regarding questions of multiparty democracy and effective remedies before national courts – demonstrates the enormous efforts and time that may be needed to ensure effective domestic compliance.
THE COPENHAGEN DOCUMENT
For instance, the 1990 Copenhagen document of the CSCE spells out in detail what internal compliance and integrity in human rights protection may require, inter alia:
• Free elections that will be held at reasonable intervals by secret ballot or by equivalent free voting procedure, under conditions which ensure in practice the free expression of the opinion of the electors in the choice of their representatives.
• A form of government that is representative in character, in which the executive is accountable to the elected legislature or the electorate.
For instance, in the case of I.G.P. v. A.N.P.P (2007) 18 NWLR (Pt. 1066) 457 at 496, paras. C – E (CA)” it was held, that: “The rights to freedom of assembly and freedom of expression are the bone of any democratic form of government. Besides their embodiment in the supreme law of the land, the 1999 Constitution, and the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights adopted as Ratification and Enforcement Act Cap. 10, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 1990, a plethora of decisions of Nigerian courts have endorsed same. A government which owe its tenure of office to the pleasure of the electorate will always take the issue of protection of human right seriously. Knowing very well that failure to do so will spell its political doom unlike an autocratic or other authoritarian forms of government where the government places itself above the people, rights are bound to be violated ‘with reckless abandon.
• The duty of the government and public authorities to comply with the Constitution and to act in a manner consistent with law;
• The activity of the government and the administration as well as that of the judiciary will be exercised in accordance with the system established by law; respect for that system must be ensured;
• Human rights and fundamental freedoms will be guaranteed by law and in accordance with their obligations under international law; All persons are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to the equal protection of the law; the law will prohibit any discrimination and guarantee to all persons equal and effective protection against discrimination on any ground;
• Everyone will have an effective means of redress against administrative decisions, so as to guarantee respect for fundamental rights and ensure legal integrity;
• Administrative decisions against a person must be fully justifiable and must as a rule indicate the usual remedies available; and
• The independence of judges and the impartial operation of the public judicial service will be ensured. Principles of fair trial are guaranteed and access to justice, to effective remedies, is secured.
Furthermore, to comply with human rights obligations, a state must establish foundations for the rule in accordance with the Constitution will simply display integrity by respecting human rights as enshrined in the Constitution.
• An executive branch that does not abuse discretionary power and seeks to promote the enjoyment of human rights by all under its jurisdiction.
This is in line with the doctrine of Separation of powers as espoused Philosophers and Jurists such as Aristotle, Saint Augustine, John Calvin, Hans Kelsen., John Locke, A.V. Dicey, and of which the fore-most proponent is the French Jurist, Baron de Montesquieu. Montesquieu, argued in the Spirit of Law. that the division between the executive (the legislative institution, which represents the will of the people, and is chosen by free elections held at reasonable intervals under conditions which ensure in practice the free expression of the opinion of the electors in the choice of their representatives. The legislative body should legislate in compliance with international human rights commitments.
A judiciary that protects the human rights of individuals and groups against arbitrary legislative power and guarantees effective remedies and fair trial.
The Spirit of the Laws (De l’esprit des lois, also sometimes called The Spirit of Laws) is a treatise on political theory first published anonymously by Charles de Secondat, Baron de Montesquieu in 1748 with the help of Claudine Guerin de Tencin. Originally published anonymously partly because Montesquieu’s works were subject to censorship, its influence outside of France was aided by its rapid translation into other languages. In 1750 Thomas Nugent published the first English translation. In 1751 the Catholic Church added L’esprit des lois to its Index
Librorum Prohibitorum (“List of Prohibited Books”). Yet Montesquieu’s political treatise had an enormous influence on the work of many others, most notably: Catherine the Great, who produced Nakaz (Instruction); the Founding Fathers of the United States Constitution; and Alexis de Tocqueville, who applied Montesquieu’s methods to a study of American society, in Democracy in America. Macaulay offers us a hint of Montesquieu’s importance when he writes in his 1827 essay entitled “Machiavelli” that “Montesquieu enjoys, perhaps, a wider celebrity ‘than any political writer of modern Europe.” Montesquieu spent nearly twenty years researching and writing L’esprit des lois (The Spirit of the Laws), covering many things like the monarch) and the legislature (parliament), which itself was divided between the House of Lords (the aristocracy) and the House of Commons (the people) should, in theory, helps to secure the integrity of the institutions, prevent a concentration of power and promote liberty because the making and enforcing of laws are separated and inexpedient laws or dangerous actions are prevented.
Montesquieu had his greatest influence on the founding fathers of the US, and in particular on James Madison. Madison famously noted that the accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny. Where tyranny reigns, human rights take back stage.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, I submit, most respectfully, that in the protection of human rights by any form of government, integrity is a sine qua non. Leaders must imbibe the tenets of integrity in the application of the Constitution, laws and rules. A Leader must understand and appreciate the fact that every human being reserves a great level of autonomy which should not be tampered with in furtherance of selfish aggradisement. Where leaders of a law, social life, and the study of anthropology and providing more than 3,000 commendations.
In this political treatise Montesquieu pleaded in favor of a constitutional system of government and the separation of powers, the ending of slavery, the preservation of civil liberties and the law, and the idea that political institutions ought to reflect the social and geographical aspects of each community.
Thought for the week
“One of the truest tests of integrity is its blunt refusal to be compromised”. (Chinua Achebe).
