WIXLIB

The Four FreedomsAddressing Congress on January 6, 1941, President Roosevelterected a cornerstone and offered a rallying-point in his nowfamous Four Freedoms:“We look forward to a world founded upon four essen tial human freedoms. The first is freedom of speech andexpression—everywhere in the world. The second is freedomof every person to worship God in his own way—everywherein the world. The third is freedom from want—which, trans lated into world terms, means economic understandingswhich will secure to every nation a healthy peaceful life forits inhabitants—everywhere in the world. The fourth isfreedom from fear—which, translated into world terms,means a world-wide reduction of armaments to such a pointand in such a thorough fashion that no nation will be in aposition to commit an act of physical aggression against anyneighbor—anywhere in the world.”The Atlantic Charter, signed by President Roosevelt andPrime Minister Churchill on August 14, 1941, included two ofthe Four Freedoms. Articles Six and Eight referred to “a peacewhich will afford to all nations the means of dwelling in safetywithin their own boundaries” and “the abandonment of the useof force.” Article Five recognized the “object of securing, forall, improved labor standards, economic advancement and socialsecurity.”Article Six concluded with the “assurance that allmen in all the lands may live out their lives in freedom fromfear and want.”In his report to Congress on the Atlantic Charter on August21, 1941, President Roosevelt indicated that his first two free doms were also implied:“It is also unnecessary for me to pointout that the declaration of principles includes of necessity theworld need for freedom of religion and freedom of information.No society of the world organized under the announced prin ciples could survive without these freedoms which are a part ofthe whole freedom for which we strive.”The announced goal to secure human rights to all men was12

formally incorporated in a joint declaration signed by the UnitedNations on January 1, 1942.The governments which becameparties to this declaration supported the provisions of the At lantic Charter, which however had included only two of theFour Freedoms. To remove any doubt concerning the intentionto include all essential freedoms, a general introductory state ment was incorporated in it:“Being convinced that completevictory over their enemies is essential to defend life, liberty, inde pendence and religious freedom, and to preserve human rightsand justice in their own lands as well as in other lands . . .”The strong emphasis upon human rights and freedoms whilethe war was in process gave rise to widespread insistence that anyorganization of nations to be erected following the war shouldaccept the protection of human rights as a major purpose.Human Rights in the UN CharterThe Dumbarton Oaks Proposals for the charter of a worldorganization contained only one brief and subordinate referenceto human rights and fundamental freedoms. In the period be tween October 1944, when the proposals were made public, andApril 1945, when the Conference on World Organization wasconvened at San Francisco, strong popular sentiment was arousedto remedy this defect. Accredited consultants to the United Statesdelegation—representing churches, labor, education, business andmany other interests—pressed for a more prominent recognitionof human rights and the establishment of a human rights com mission.Nongovernmentalorganizationscommunicated with their delegations.inothercountriesFrance, Canada, NewZealand, India, Egypt, Panama, Brazil, Uruguay, Cuba, Haiti,.Chile, San Domingo and Mexico submitted amendments con cerned with human rights.This flood of proposals influencedthe United States, the U.S.S.R., the United Kingdom and Chinato present separate or joint amendments which led to the textas finally adopted.The preamble of the Charter, written in the name of the13

peoples of the United Nations, expresses determination to “re affirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity andworth of the human person, in the equal rights of men andwomen and of nations large and small.” One of the chief pur poses of the organization shall be “to achieve international co operation . in promoting and encouraging respect for humanrights and fundamental freedoms for all without distinction asto race, sex, language, or religion” (Art. 1, Sec. 3).The Charter relates this purpose to the functions and powersof the General Assembly (Art. 13, Sec. 1, b), and of the Eco nomic and Social Council (Art. 62, Sec. 2), and lists it amongthe basic objectives of the international Trusteeship System(Art. 76, Sec. c). The Economic and Social Council, empoweredto make recommendations for the purpose of promoting respectfor, and observance of, human rights and fundamental freedoms,is required “to set up commissions in economic and social fieldsand for the promotion of human rights” (Art. 68).New Factor IntroducedA new factor was here introduced into man’s age-old strugglefor freedom in society.The nations accepted an internationalresponsibility. The authority to recognize or deny man’s rightsand freedoms was traditionally vested in national states. Whenhuman rights were violated in any country, a foreign govern ment felt justified in intervening mainly to protect its nationals.In scattered instances, friendly representations were made toprotest extreme violations on grounds of common humanity.The Charter of the United Nations opens the way for actionbeyond diplomatic protection of citizens abroad or friendlyintervention in the name of humanity. Its terms are more in clusive than the Versailles provisions to protect minorities andthe objectives sought by the Mandates Commission of the Leagueof Nations or by the International Labor Organization.TheCharter seems to indicate that some kind of check is intended14

upon the constitutional and legal provisions as well as the prac tices of separate states.Unanswered QuestionsThe substantial progress noted in the United Nations Charteroffers ground for encouragement. At the same time, we mustrealistically admit that two important questions are left unan swered. These unanswered questions must be clearly understood,for the activities of the United Nations in the field of humanrights are directed toward finding the much needed solutions.First, what are the human rights which are to be respectedand observed? The Charter makes only broad reference to man’srights and freedoms. It does not specify any single right as toits substance or meaning. This general approach resulted fromthe reluctance of delegates at the San Francisco Conference tobecome ensnarled in a specification of particular rights.Ac cordingly, while the Charter brings into clear relief the fact thatthere are rights and freedoms, it in no sense contains a declara tion or bill of rights.While recognizing this inadequacy, we must give full creditto the emphasis upon the goal of observance “without distinc tion as to race, sex, language, or religion.”The standard ofnondiscrimination is commendable and marks a forward step.At the same time, unless accompanied by a definition of rights,it is open to abuse. This becomes readily apparent when onepictures what can happen in applying the principle of nondis crimination.Consider the illustration of religious liberty. All governmentsdo recognize man’s right to religious freedom. However, in theabsence of a definition of this right, they are free to place theirown construction upon it. They may hold that freedom of re ligion involves only freedom of worship in a limited form andthus deny the right of religious teaching and practice. They willobserve the terms of the Charter if they apply this conception15

“without distinction.” A similar situation could develop withrespect to the various social, civil and economic rights. The pro visions of the Charter will become effective in this regard onlywhen rights and freedoms have been specified and clearly defined.Means of PromotionSecond, by what means shall respect for and obsewance ofhuman rights be promoted? The Charter states that the UnitedNations shall seek to achieve international co-operation in pro moting and encouraging respect for and observance of humanrights and fundamental freedoms, but it does not specify themethods whereby this shall be done. The task of achieving inter national co-operation is assigned generally to the entire organi zation and more specifically to the General Assembly, the Eco nomic and Social Council and the Trusteeship System.So far as the Economic and Social Council is concerned, it isrequired to set up a Commission on Human Rights. Nowherein the Charter, however, is direct reference made to the mannerin which the United Nations or any organ is authorized to pro ceed in order that human rights may actually be exercised. Itseems quite clear, however, from various Charter references thatsteps can be taken to encourage member states to move towardthe accomplishment of this purpose.More baffling than the method of encouragement is the methodof action which the United Nations can undertake. The Charterauthorizes the United Nations—in most instances, the SecuritvCouncil—to take action in six types of situations which are un derstood to fall not within domestic but within internationaljurisdiction. These are:(1) an act of aggression; (2) a breachof the peace; (3) a threat to the peace; (4) a dispute, the con tinuance of which is likely to endanger the maintenance of inter national peace and security; (5) a situation which might lead tointernational friction or give rise to a dispute;(6) a questionrelating to the maintenance of peace and security, to armamentsor disarmament, or to general principles of co-operation.16

Action by the United Nations under these circumstances wasclearly designed in the interest of international peace and se curity. It may therefore be assumed that action on violations ofhuman rights will be possible under the Charter in the firstinstance when international issues are involved.What can be done by way of international action when viola tions do not constitute a threat to world peace or security is aquestion which the United Nations Charter does not answer.17

3. Major Issues and ConflictsThe activities ofthe United Nations with respect to humanrights have in the main been directed towards the two questionswhich its Charter left unanswered.In the course of its earlywork, the organization was forced to reckon with conflictingviews at many points. The issues thus raised must be understoodin order to appreciate the progress which the United Nationshas been able to make. Since the differences have not yet beenresolved on a world scale, they must be taken into account indetermining the steps that lie ahead.Meaning of Human RightsMost men agree that human rights should be respected andobserved. Disagreement begins to appear when they attempt tostate what man’s rights are and to determine the relative im portance to be attached to different rights. The tradition of theWestern societies lays particular stress upon the importance ofthe classical civil and social rights. These include equal protec tion before the law and the courts, individual liberty, freedomof conscience and religion, freedom of assembly and associationand freedom of speech and expression.Rights such as thesehave found expression in most constitutions and have been forti fied by legal provisions and by the insistent demand of popularopinion.Various factors have contributed to the conviction that, im18

portant as these rights are, they are not in themselves sufficient.People have found themselves victims of cycles of unemployment.Two world wars have completely disrupted national economies,with inevitable hardship upon large masses of the population.Even in normal times—if there be such—men living in an in*dustrial society know that without economic rights they can nolonger be free. In the Declaration of Santiago de Chile, adoptedby the governments of the American nations on September 16,1942, this new situation was described as follows:“To be ableto enjoy the basic freedoms of thought, expression and security,every man and woman must be afforded physical and economicprotection against social and economic risks through properlyorganized social action.”While there remain some people who refuse to recognize man’seconomic-social rights, it seems safe to assert that tacitly or openlythe importance of man’s economic freedom has come to be widelyaccepted.Considerable difference of opinion appears as to therelative importance to be attached to the traditional rights andthe newly emphasized economic rights.An extreme view is found in Soviet communism, where theright to work and the material well-being of people are declaredto be the primary consideration.In the United States, eventhough there are such provisions as unemployment insuranceand old-age benefits, there is a general disposition to considereconomic rights secondary, or certainly no more than on a parwith the traditional freedoms.Clash Over ObservanceEven more acute than the differing views as to the importanceof rights is the clash over the manner in which their observanceshall be achieved. The U.S.S.R. contends that the state by itscontrol and direct action is the responsible agent for seeing toit that the people enjoy their economic right. The operation ofthis principle results in a limitation upon the exercise of thetraditional freedoms. This is deemed no cause for disturbance,19

since the primary emphasis is placed upon the material well being of the people within the state.In other than Soviet-Communist countries, it is generally feltthat when the government assumes full responsibility for theobservance of economic rights, there is grave risk that the highlycherished traditional freedoms will be lost. In Great Britain andin some North European countries, a form of socialism, underwhich people maintain the right to change their government bypopular vote, represents an experiment in the method of in suring economic rights without loss of essential freedom.In the United States, where a variety of government controlshave been imposed upon management and labor and insuranceprovisions enacted, the major responsibilities for the exercise ofeconomic rights still rest with the people.Obviously the prob lem thus raised is one that has not been satisfactorily solved andmust be kept clearly to the fore. How can man’s economic rightsin an industrial society be insured without impairing the basicfreedoms which his nature and dignity demand?The Basis of Human RightsOn what grounds can man lay claim to rights and freedomsin society? In one sense, this is a theoretical question and mustbe answered largely from conviction.In another respect, how ever, it is a quite practical issue; for the answer which is acceptedwill determine in considerable measure the prerogative and au thority of the state.In the societies which gave birth to the classical declarationsof rights it was generally understood that the rights of the indi vidual are “anterior and superior” to the state.Man is a ra tional being and is entitled to everything that is essential to areasonable development of his personality. This view is variouslydefended on the basis of natural law or religious conviction. Itfinds its conclusion in the social or juridical contention that manhas inalienable rights.In a government which operates under a totalitarian system,20

Difficulties for International Actionl.Our ideas of Human Rights are different3 If "UN is to act what powers shall it have ?GRAPHIC ASSOCIATES

whether for political reasons or in the professed interests of thepeople, the individual becomes subordinate to the communityor to the state. He has no rights, it is claimed, other than thosewhich contribute apparently to community interest or whichthe state by its decision acknowledges are not harmful to thecommunity.In the final debate on the Universal Declaration of HumanRights at Paris, Andrei Y. Vishinsky, then Deputy Foreign Min ister of the U.S.S.R., said:“It is stated that the principle ofgovernment should not be dealt with in the Declaration ofHuman Rights because the Declaration is dealing with the rightsof human beings, of persons. Such a statement cannot be agreedto, because the rights of human beings cannot be consideredoutside the prerogatives of governments, and the very under standing of human rights is a governmental concept.”The seriousness of this difference becomes apparent both inthe process of defining human rights and in the process of seek ing their observance.If it is acknowledged that man by hisnature has inalienable rights, it follows that the state can dono more than recognize the existing rights and create conditionsfavorable to their exercise. If, on the other hand, it is claimedthat man has no inherent rights, the state can assume authorityunder changing times and conditions to decide what rights itshall grant to its people. With the authority to grant rights willobviously go the power to repudiate or deny rights. The pointof departure which is accepted as to the basis of human rightswill radically affect the manner in which the rights are definedand the provisions for securing them to all men.National or International Action?The United Nations is committed to achieve internationalco-operation in promoting and encouraging respect for humanrights and fundamental freedoms for all. To what extent do theprovisions of the Charter imply an international responsibility22

for the protection of the rights of individuals and groups? Howfar does that responsibility go?As a general limitation uponinternational action, the Charter, in Article 2, Section 7, states:“Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorizethe United Nations to intervene in matters which are essen tially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shallrequire the Members to submit such matters to settlementunder the present Charter: but this principle shall not preju dice the application of enforcement measures under ChapterVII.” (Chapter VII sets forth action which the SecurityCouncil may take with respect to threats to the peace,breaches of the peace, and acts of aggression.)To what extent is protection of human rights a matter ofdomestic jurisdiction and to what extent a matter of interna tional concern?Wide Range of InterpretationsThe general nature of the Charter references has elicited awide range of interpretations. Very few people go so far as tocontend that the United Nations has clear authority over themanner in which human rights are construed and exercised inits member states.Many do claim, however, that the Charteropens the way for the United Nations progressively to achievesuch responsibility. 'They further contend that this developmentis imperative and that only as the nations yield a measure oftheir sovereignty can the goals of the Charter actually be realized.This view is not he

Rebellion Against Tyranny . 3. Major Issues and Conflicts . 4. UN Activities . 5. Adoption of Declaration . 6. Next Steps . Declaration Text . 3 5 . 8. 18 . 26 . 38 . 49 55 . The Authors . . It was the spirit of liberty which gave rise to such constitu tional safeguards—safeguards which could be vindicated in the courts of the land. More .