WORLD AFFAIRS

FREEDOM AND SECURITY: AN EXPLORATION

Introduced by Geoffrey Catchpole on 17 July 1998

The concluding discussion of the l997/8 year was introduced by the Convener, who presented a number of items, each intended to illustrate some basic issues relating to the overall theme. With regard to the criticisms publicly made by President Clinton of China's human rights record when he was its guest, the question of the extent to which political realities should determine human rights was posed. The nature of those realities with respect to the political and economic interests of both the American and Chinese populations was first discussed. The nature of their political systems was seen to be relevant to any consideration of citizen rights and it was recognised that the rural/urban balance of interests in China is a crucial factor in deciding how representative of democratic interests any government may be.
Turning to the potential legislation on human rights in Britain now being discussed in Parliament, the nature and validity of various claims to such rights were next considered. It was recognised that political factors are prominent in their advocacy and that their recognition is often dependent upon a balance of political interests. Moreover, such legislation would necessarily incur costs, and the willingness to provide adequate funding for those unable to meet legal costs is itself a question of politics.The development of courts with jurisdiction beyond that of British courts is a further complication. There is a possibility that new legislation could exacerbate rather than alleviate current problems for those most needing protection for proclaimed rights.
Shortage of time prohibited discussion of a consultation paper issued by the Joint Committee on Parliamentary Privilege, which is seeking views from the public at this time, and also of a number of similar items. However, the group was able to consider the degree to which claims of national security/welfare should be allowed to limit personal freedoms, specifically with respect to the issue of torture. Although it was agreed that torture is never permissable, it was pointed out that terms such as ‘national interest’, ‘human rights’ and even ‘torture’ are open to many interpretations and that contexts do affect judgments. A distinction was drawn between short-term and long-term considerations, so that soundbites such as ‘no pain - no gain’ should not be regarded as entirely vacuous.
Geoffrey Catchpole