24 June 2019
HUMAN RIGHTS IN DEMOCRACY
[“Australia should treat its membership in the UN Human Rights Council as both an opportunity and responsibility to be a leader in defending human rights abroad and at home,” said Elaine Pearson, Australia director at Human Rights Watch. “Promoting human rights values includes publicly raising rights issues with foreign leaders, not just making generic statements of concern in Geneva.”] Human Rights Watch
The question that comes to my mind is whether Human Rights in America would look the same when manifested in say Sri Lanka or Australia? How does a right develop? Does Australian government have the natural right to question another government on bilateral basis? Does Australian Citizen have the right to question a Sri Lankan citizen in relation to human rights?
Yesterday, I wrote : [Yesterday for example, the businessman to whom we lent money said to me that the last person through whom we paid him the loan was a ‘black’ person and that ‘black’ persons did not suit them. Since our employees are usually from toddy tapper village of Thunaivi - black means low caste to this guy. ]
The above guy said it to me - a person of senior caste. Does that amount to breach in human right to be equal? Or does it become a breach when the other person or a member of his group hear it and feel hurt? Most importantly does any other group like Human Rights Watch have the right to question this guy directly and/or through his government? A nation’s rights are based on the consolidated value developed by all of its People and is an intrinsic part of the people. Watch groups may observe, report and highlight. But they have no right to judge except as part of that group.
Ms Elaine Pearson for example is presented as follows: ‘Pearson writes frequently for publications including Harper's Bazaar, the Guardian and the Wall Street Journal. She is an adjunct lecturer in law at the University of New South Wales. From 2007 to 2012 she was the Deputy Director of Human Rights Watch's Asia Division based in New York.’
I wrote the book ‘Naan Australian’ based on my direct experiences at the University of NSW where the Police were called in by the Vice Chancellor’s office to arrest me for trespass. I was doing the parallel of Ms Elaine Pearson but based on my true experienced pain. The arrest was unlawful. To the extent Ms Elaine Pearson carries the name of University of New South Wales - Ms Pearson is as guilty as the University in acting in breach of my basic right to have my experienced grievances escalated to the Governing Council which is the ultimate body responsible for issues in common with the Public. Had that passage been facilitated by fellow Australians my book would have carried the title ‘Naam Australians’ (we are Australians) instead of Naan Australian (I am Australian).
I write practically every day - including from Sri Lanka - as I am doing right now - and this is also Australian and Sri Lankan to the extent I feel Australian and Sri Lankan. That is how true rights are developed. President Kennedy said to ask what we can do for the country ? - I did not ask. I just did and am continuing to do to share and quietly place myself in the folks whom I recognize are breachers of my rights and therefore the rights of those who are a part of me. The more we ‘show’ the less we have to share. Hence I keep the showing to help ‘foreigners’ who - like the Vice Chancellor of the University of NSW have made negative contributions.
In April Ms Pearson wrote under the heading ‘More Must be Done to Protect Academic Freedoms Under Threat from China’
If Ms Pearson did not know that I was acting to protect that very right at the University of NSW - then as per my conclusion - Ms Pearson is not qualified to question at National level. The individual carries that basic right as per her/his contribution to a relationship, family, work institution, community and nation. The other side changes from a seen relative to unseen common person who is within us as our other side. The above mentioned Vaddukoddai businessman hurt me because I had him in me. The Vice Chancellor of UNSW hurt me because I invested in the Vice Chancellor through due processes applicable to our relationship. Due processes born out of experience in that institution are the Energy-sharing pathways that our heritage facilitates. That Energy combined forces with others like themselves - which facilitated my book to find a home in Australian National Library. Many global participants contributed to this carriage of True Justice and therefore the protection of my Human Right to uphold my truth in any institution I believe I belong to. It would not have happened if the Australian National were like the University of NSW. Australians have the first right to share within Australia before sharing with ‘foreigners’. Until then our government has the basic right to limit its commitment to making intellectual contributions through the UN and other common governing bodies. The latter are Due Processes to respect the UN ancestors who had the experience - not just as officials but as those who felt the pain of victims as theirs. From time to time governments become victims due to abuse of the facilities by citizens and refugees. I have come across many of them and I become the government and discipline them. That is true and natural protection of Human Rights.
As per my discovery - one needs to believe to be entitled to protection of the right which is the first recognition of that belief by oneself and then shared with others. No Belief , No Human Right.