What Really Shapes the Fight for Human Rights

Factors Affecting the Fight for Human Rights

In today’s increasingly liberal and globally connected world, human rights attract far more attention than ever before. Yet the fight for those rights remains uneven, fragile, and easily compromised. This article explores several key factors that shape, and often undermine, the protection of human rights across different societies.

“…when everyone calls for the protection of human rights, do they only mean to protect those who ‘deserve’ it?”

1. Level of Education

Education plays a crucial role in determining how effectively human rights are recognised and defended.

In countries where educational attainment is low, many people may not realise that their rights are being eroded. Low education often correlates with low political awareness, making populations more vulnerable to manipulation or exploitation.

A clear example is Malaysia.

Proposals to expand the role of Shariah criminal law within the secular legal system were presented as harmless to non‑Muslims. Yet such reforms risk creating a dual criminal justice system, raising questions about which law applies when disputes involve Muslims and non‑Muslims. Many citizens, lacking detailed legal knowledge, were unaware of how these proposals could affect their rights.

Education also shapes cultural attitudes toward rights.

In Pakistan, Malala Yousafzai’s campaign for girls’ education highlighted how entrenched beliefs, rooted in particular interpretations of religion, can deny basic rights. While many Western countries recognise education as a fundamental right, some communities still view schooling as a privilege reserved for boys.

When the majority holds such views, it becomes difficult for governments to enforce rights for minorities who disagree. A law is only meaningful if society accepts and abides by it.

2. Laws That Limit Rights

Human rights can also be restricted through legislation designed to protect political stability or national institutions.

Thailand’s strict lèse‑majesté laws, which criminalise criticism of the monarchy, require both local and international media to heavily self‑censor.

This limits freedom of expression, even though the monarchy plays a significant political role. The point is not that such laws are inherently unjustifiable, but that they illustrate how rights can be curtailed in the name of stability.

Malaysia provides further examples. The Sedition Act has been used to prosecute political dissent, including journalists. Strict laws governing public protests limit citizens’ ability to express dissatisfaction or advocate for their rights. When people cannot speak freely or assemble peacefully, they cannot effectively challenge abuses.

3. National Security

Human rights are often compromised when national security is perceived to be at risk, even in countries with strong human‑rights traditions.

In the United Kingdom, the Anti‑terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 once allowed the indefinite detention of terrorism suspects without trial. This represented a clear departure from fundamental rights.

Allegations of torture techniques such as waterboarding, a practice that simulates drowning, further illustrate how rights can be violated in the name of security.

This raises a difficult question:

When people demand the protection of human rights, do they mean rights for everyone, or only for those they believe “deserve” them?

Absolute human rights do not exist; they are always balanced against competing interests.

4. Economic Factors

Economic pressures also shape the fight for human rights.

In fast‑moving societies, people often prioritise earning a living over activism. Protests may fade quickly because participants must return to work. This is especially true in developing countries, where economic insecurity leaves little room for sustained advocacy.

Economic hardship can directly restrict rights. If parents cannot afford schooling, or if a state lacks the resources to provide free education, children may be denied access to learning, a right many consider fundamental.

Economic interests can also override human rights in more complex ways.

The legalisation of prostitution in countries such as Hong Kong, Singapore, Finland, Germany and the UK may boost economic activity, but it can also expose vulnerable individuals to exploitation. In such cases, economic gain appears to outweigh human‑rights concerns.

Conclusion

The fight for human rights is shaped by a complex interplay of education, law, national security, and economic realities.

These factors can strengthen rights or erode them. Understanding how they operate is essential if societies are to protect human dignity consistently, not selectively.