Hierarchies of Rights Claims

Abstract

Makers and interpreters of international law have, at various times, sought to adjudicate among competing valid human rights claims by trying to establish a definitive hierarchy among those rights values. The hope is that an agreement upon a static ranking of human rights in order of importance will provide an objective tool for solving future conflicts. Despite growing bodies of legislation, no such hierarchy has been created. This chapter will show that principles internal to human rights law effectively prevent any such ranking. While this may be to the good, preventing an inflexible ladder of value and importance between actual rights norms, it is also the case that some contests between the right to free expression of religion and to discreet rights issues will remain unresolvable. Furthermore, the vagueness, imprecision, and indecisiveness of the language of human rights legislation leaves so many loopholes of interpretation that discriminatory religious practices are able to remain unaddressed. In its legal manifestations, then, the human rights construct is frequently unhelpful in ensuring the human rights of religious women because of its compromised effectiveness. As a result, attempts to resolve some conflicts with heavy reliance on greater implementation of existing human rights law are ill-advised.

What they call human rights is nothing but a collection of corrupt rules worked out by Zionists to destroy all true religions.

Ayatollah Khomeini