Submissions

Submit your well thought ideas for inclusion here.

Progressive rights

13 November 2009

Currently some civil rights and human rights are restricted based on age. Few people will argue with the value of this, as it protects the young from their own naivety and abuse by others. Further, some rights are rescinded under special circumstances, such as the right to drive when convicted of dangerous driving, or the right to liberty when convicted of murder. Lastly, some people give up the rights voluntarily, for example, the right to speak on certain matters in exchange for some state paid jobs. So it is clear, all rights are not universal at all times, the situation is more subtle than that, and we can all see the reasoning behind that situation.

The question is, should rights be allocated with more sophistication so as to encourage better citizenry, which hopefully we can all agree is worthwhile. Perhaps they are an under-utilised tool in the development of good citizens. Naturally, this kind of approach needs care, but we cannot deny that it is already used effectively and could deliver still more benefits for society in which we would all benefit. The main problems with such a scheme are likely, as usual, to revolve around the misuse of such power, something this site has strong views on and discusses at length elsewhere on this site. To summarise that position, power must be dispersed to avoid corruption and mistakes.

Let us take one example. Public drunkenness is a social problem that blights many communities. Indeed, under extreme circumstances it ends in death, sometimes of the drinker, sometimes others. Perhaps the right to drink in public places should be removed for progressively longer periods on each occasion of misuse. Remember, the principle is under discussion here, not the mechanics of enforcement.