UNIT 12: RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS

(IMPORTANT ISSUE: HUMAN

TRAFFICKING) *
Structure
12.0 Objectives
12.1 Introduction
12.2 Concept of Rights
12.2.1 Development of Rights
12.2.2 Types of Rights
12.3 Obligations
12.3.1 Relationship between Rights and Obligations
12.3.2 Theories of Political Obligation
12.4 Human Trafficking
12.4.1 Causes
12.4.2 Human Trafficking in India
12.5 Let Us Sum Up
12.6 References
12.7 Answers to Check Your Progress Exercises

12.0 OBJECTIVES

This unit will familiarise the students with the concepts of rights and
obligations. After studying this unit, you should be able to:
• Understand the meaning of rights and obligations
• Know the relationship between them; and
• Explain the concept of human trafficking

12.1 INTRODUCTION

The idea of rights is very important in every day life, whether it is related
with the life of children, parents, teachers, students, officers, workers etc.
Since long time, the term right stood for a power, privileges, as in the right
of the nobility, the right of clergy and the divine right of kings. However, in
its modern sense, it refers to an entitlement to act or be treated in a particular

* Priyanka Mallick, Assistant Professor, Christ (Deemed to be University)

149
Rights way. In the 18th century, the US Declaration of Independence (1776) and
the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen (1789) stated
that certain rights are inalienable. Thus, the two most influential political
documents of the modern age take the notion of rights as the central concept
upon which their political organizations are built. This unit looks into the
different notions of rights and its relationship with obligations.

12.2 CONCEPT OF RIGHTS

Rights are always coming as the conflicting claims between the individual
and the state. It has a two-way relationship. The benefits which flow
automatically from the existence of the state do not constitute rights. It
is only when the authority of the state is sought to be limited and when
individuals and groups demand a positive role of the state, rights are claimed.
Glorification of the state, without an in built mechanism to curb the authority
of the state means a complete subordination of the individual to the ruler or
the ruling groups, thereby opening the floodgates of corruption, oppression,
exploitation and injustice. Every right requires social recognition. Without
such recognition, rights are empty claims. Rights do not exist in a vacuum,
so to speak. They require the sanction of society.
During the Greek period, Plato and Aristotle gave more emphasis on the
role and responsibility of the state. Plato, for example believes that the state
alone can give justice and the individual has to perform his duties to the
best of abilities and capacities. We call these philosophers, the idealists.
There are others, John Locke for example, who hold the view that the state
as a means exists for an end, and the end is the individual, meaning thereby
that individual rights are sacrosanct and inviolable. Older societies as a
rule did not recognise rights to any great extent. They had only petitions
and charities. Modern democratic societies on the other hand, give a very
important place to rights. Now, new rights frequently come into being
like the right to work, right to strike, animal rights etc. Human rights have
become a major concern in recent times. Thus, discourse about rights has
become persuasive in our society.

12.2.1 Development of Rights

The idea of rights entered politics in the form of natural rights. Rights that
exist in nature independently of any human laws or customs. During the
medieval period, this idea was developed to promote or violate a person’s
rights in favour of the command of God. This was based on religious belief
about divine purposes in creating the universe. During the Enlightenment of
the 16th to the 18th century, when religious authority, hereditary monarchies,
and feudal system were being questioned, natural law was given a more
rationalist foundation. At this time, rights came to be associated with the
idea of a social contract, where ‘state of nature’ was a predominant condition
developed by Hobbes, Locke and Rousseau. Critiques of natural rights also
150
came from a variety of political positions. In the 18th century Edmund Burke, Rights and Obligations
saw natural rights as undermining the settled traditions on which genuine
liberty is based in actual societies, and as licensing the anarchic destruction
of legitimate authority and settled rights, resulting in insecurity and war.
Jeremy Bentham ridiculed natural rights as a pernicious fiction used to
obstruct the social reforms that were needed to promote human happiness.
The historical theory of rights holds that rights are the product of a long
historical process. It holds that rights are the crystallization of customs. It
suggests that the state cannot create rights at its own will, nor is it required
to follow abstract and subjective conceptions of natural rights. The state has
only to recognize those rights of men which have already come into vogue
through long standing usage and customs. Edmund Burke, the greatest
champion of the historical theory of rights, has observed that the French
Revolution was based on the abstract rights of man, while the English
Revolution was based on the customary rights of Englishmen. Rights have
numerous interpretations. These are discussed by several scholars. Wilde,
in his definition of rights gives a casual treatment to the social claim aspect
when he says: “A right is a reasonable claim to freedom in the exercise
of certain activities.” Bosanquet and Laski, in their definitions of rights,
include the positions of society, and state and man’s personality, but they too
ignore the important aspect of ‘duty’ as a part of ‘rights’. Bosanquet says: “A
right is a claim recognized by society and enforced by the state”. According
to Laski, “Rights are those conditions of social life without which no man
can seek, in general, to be himself at his best.” T. H. Green explained that
“Rights are powers necessary for the fulfilment of man’s vocation as a moral
being.”Beni Prasad stated that “Rights are nothing more, nor less, than those
social conditions which are necessary or favourable to the development of
personality”.

12.2.2 Types of Rights

With the development of social consciousness, rights are subjected to
continual review and redefinition. Now, the concept of rights has been
modified in two important directions: 1) the advantages of rights should not
be confined to a tiny class which is placed in a privileged position by any
means 2) rights should not be confined to delimiting the sphere of activity
and authority of the state, but the benefits should reach the bulk of society.
a) Negative and Positive Rights - Negative rights are rights that entail non-
interference from the society at large. It suggests that the freedom of
the individual shall not be encroached upon by the state like the right to
life, liberty, property. Positive rights entail the responsibility of the state
in securing the rights of individuals. It requires the state to take positive
measures for the protection of the rights of the weaker and vulnerable
sections of society. For example, the right to health, basic subsistence etc
requires a positive interference to do something.
151
Rights b) Civil Rights - In contemporary political thought, the term ‘civil rights’ is
indissolubly linked to the struggle for equality of African Americans during
the 1950s and the 1960s. The aim of that struggle was to secure the status of
equal citizenship in a liberal democratic state. Civil rights are those rights
which provide opportunity to each person to lead a civilized social life.
These fulfil basic needs of human life in society. Right to life, liberty and
equality are civil rights. Civil rights are protected by the state.
c) Political Rights - Political rights are given to the individual as a part of
being the citizen of a country and get a share in the political process. These
enable them to take an active part in the political process. These rights
include the right to vote, right to get elected, right to hold public office and
the right to criticise and oppose the government. These rights are available
to the people in a democratic state.
d) Socio-Economic Rights - These rights are provided in order that people
have socio-economic security. These enable all citizens to make proper use
of their civil and political rights. The basic needs of every person are related
to his food, clothing, shelter, medical treatment etc. Without the fulfilment
of these, no person can really enjoy his civil and political rights. Harold J
Laski has produced an elaborate blue print of a just society with a scheme
of social, economic as well as political rights. He insists on the citizen’s
right to work, as an essential means to earn his livelihood. It is, therefore,
essential, that every person must get the right to work, right to adequate
wages, right to leisure and rest, and right to social security in case of illness,
physical disability and old age.

Check Your Progress Exercise 1

Note: i) Use the space given below for your answer.

ii) See the end of the unit for tips for your answer.
1) Differentiate between the negative and positive rights.
………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………..………………………
………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………

12.3 OBLIGATIONS

Political obligation is one of the fundamental issues of political philosophy.

History of political thought is struggling to provide a satisfactory account of
152
political obligation, from the time of Socrates to the present. It is primarily Rights and Obligations
concerned with the question that how far, when and why an individual is
obliged to obey the law and commands of political authority. This question
is so complex that it is not possible to find a definite answer which could be
universally acceptable. While rights and obligations are not the same, they
are still connected. Whenever you decide to do what you have a right to do,
others have an obligation to let you do it. An obligation is a requirementor
duty to act in a particular way. H L A Hart distinguished between “being
obliged” to do something, which implies an element of coercion and
“having an obligation” to do something which suggests only a moral duty.
For example, legal obligations have the requirement to pay taxes and
observe other laws, which is backed by a system of penalties. On the other
hand, moral obligations are fulfilled not because it is sensible to do so, but
because such conduct is thought to be rightful or morally correct. One way
of approaching issues of obligations is to see how they rise and the form
they take in a different political system. The political system under which
people live determines not only the laws they are required to obey, but the
means available for expressing dissent and exerting pressure to change rules
and policies.

12.3.1 Relationship between Rights and Obligations

Rights and obligations are the reverse sides of the same coin. To possess
a right, usually, places someone else under an obligation to uphold or
respect that right. In the field of jurisprudence, the social life of men is
regulated by law. And to protect right to life, government has an obligation
to maintain public order and ensure personal security. Negative rights
entail an obligation on the part of the state to limit or constrain its power.
Positive rights oblige the state to manage economic life, provide a range
of welfare services and so on. However, obligations do not always fall on
the state. Individuals who possess rights, must acknowledge the obligations
towards the state, otherwise civilised life would be impossible. Citizenship,
therefore, is a blend of rights and obligations. The duty of the citizen is to
acknowledge the authority of the state and obey its laws. The obligation to
obey the state is based on an implicit promise made by the simple fact that
citizens choose to remain within its borders. The earliest example of this is
found in Plato’s Crito. Here, Plato mentions Socrates refusal to escape from
prison where he was sentenced to death for corrupting the youth of Athens.
Socrates being an Athenian citizen, promised to obey the Athenian law and
he intended to keep his promise even at the cost of his own life.

12.3.1 Theories of Political Obligation

a) Doctrine of Force Majuere

According to this theory, political obligation is born out of fear, force and
compulsion. The state cannot be challenged or resisted and therefore, this

153
Rights theory has put forward the concept of unlimited obligation. It regards the
superior strength of the state as the source of political obligation. According
to this view, the state is so powerful that the individual has no option but
to obey its laws and commands. In this sense, political obligation is based
on the fear of punishment or other unpleasant consequences which would
follow from a disobedience of law. Under this theory, the individual is too
week to challenge the authority of the state. This theory is not based on any
moral ground. It does not allow the individual to inquire whether a law is
right or wrong. It does not care to secure his willing obedience.

b) Divine Right Theory

The theory of divine right holds that the authority of the sovereign is
derived from God. It states that political obligation is based on the principle
of faith. The true source of the authority is independent of human choice
and custom and the individual is obliged to obey the sovereign as the divine
authority. In Europe, this theory was developed during the ascendency of
monarchy in the middle ages. Robert Filmer was one of the chief exponents
of the theory. With the advent of new learning in modern ages, this theory
lost its relevance. Since God’s will is binding on all decisions, this theory
upholds an unlimited political obligation. It establishes political obligation
on religious rather than moral grounds. If a king turns out to be a tyrant,
people have to obey him as a punishment for their sin. James I of England
sought to justify his tyrannical rule precisely on this ground. This theory
received a lot of criticism by eminent thinkers like Grotius, Hobbes and
Locke, who rejected its metaphysical premises and traced the source of
political obligation in the consent of the individual. The theory also started
to lose significance due to the growth of democracy and also due to the
separation of the church from the state.

c) Conservative Theory - Conservatism is a political and social philosophy

that promotes the maintenance of traditional institutions and supports
minimal and gradual change in society.Conservative thinkers uphold
obedience to the state or political authority for practical reasons. David
Hume argued that its good to follow any type of political authority than
to having no government at all. Edmund Burke argued in favour of social
continuity. He contended that revolution is an evil and strongly criticised the
French revolution. Revolution involves violence and destruction and also,
it results in misuse of power by those who manage to capture it after the
revolution. Burke was against any extreme version of reform and supported
gradual change. Conservatives argue that human beings are morally and
intellectually imperfect, and seek the security that only tradition, authority
and shared culture can offer. The conservative view of political obligation is
based on legitimacy rather than on consent or morality.

d) Consent/Contract Theory - This theory regards the individual’s consent

as the proper source of political obligation. The individual is expected
154
to obey a ruler only with his/her consent. A government can exercise its Rights and Obligations
power only with an explicit or implicit consent of its citizens. The chief
exponents of the theory of social contract are: Hobbes, Locke and Rousseau.
These thinkers have postulated a “state of nature”, that is a hypothetical
stage before the creation of political authority. Social contract represents
the method of arriving at an agreement for setting up the state. It marks a
transition from the state of nature to civil society. The terms of the contract
define the ground and limits of political obligation. In Leviathan, Hobbes
argued that citizens have an absolute obligation to obey political authority,
regardless of how governments may behave. Hobbes believed that though
citizens were obliged to obey the state, the state itself was not subject to any
reciprocal obligations. Although Hobbes postulates an unlimited political
obligation, yet it is solely based on consent not imposed from above. An
alternative and a more balanced view of political obligation is found in
the writings of Locke. Civil society was established by mutual consent of
the people, only to deal with few law breakers. Under the social contract,
man surrenders the right to be a judge in his own case to the state which is
entrusted with the task of protection of his natural right to ‘life, liberty and
property’. Government is therefore, created as a trust which can be dissolved
if it fails to perform this function. The idea of social contract, however,
took a highly philosophical form at the hands of Rousseau, who reposed the
fact of political obligation in the “General Will”. This meant that man no
longer remains a slave to his impulses of appetite after entering into a civil
society, but he becomes bound to obey the law of the general good. In such
circumstances, Rousseau acknowledged that citizens should be ‘forced to be
free’. Thus, the social contract theory justifies the conception that the ruling
authority, if he has to be legitimate, must rest ultimately on the consent of
the governed. Among the exponents of the social contract, Locke creates a
limited political obligation. Hobbes and Rousseau postulate unconditional
consent and absolute sovereignty.

e) Idealist Theory - The idealist school of thought originally created an

unconditional and unlimited obligation, but later it was modified to admit a
note of caution. G.W.F. Hegel postulated an unlimited political obligation
without making a clear distinction between the state and government. He
gave a divine reason for the origin of the state when he said, “state is the
march of God on earth”. In the 19th century, T H Green modified the idealist
tradition when he declared that a government cannot claim an unconditional
obedience of its citizens. Green argued that an individual owes his allegiance
to society, not to the state or government. In his Lectures on the Principles
of Political Obligation, he argued that the state itself is obliged to promote
the common good as conceived by its citizens, and that individual is obliged
to obey only those laws which will promote the common good. Green
said, “will not force is the basis of state”. Thus, Green’s view of political
obligation is based on the moral nature and capacity of human beings. The

155
Rights idealistic theories have been criticized on the ground of being too abstract.
It places ordinary things in a highly philosophical or metaphysical form that
cannot be understood by a man of average understanding. The idealists are
reluctant to accommodate the right to resistance in their doctrine of political
obligation.

f) Marxist Theory - Marxist theory is different from other theories of political

obligation. It comes against the concept of political obligation towards state.
According to this theory, the state is by no means the organized power of the
community. It is, rather, the organized power of the dominant class, which
controls the major means of production. As per the Marxist view, society,
is divided on the basis of class haves and haves not. Haves always play a
dominant role in society. In such a society the purpose is not the general
welfare, but helping the strongest group to increase their wealth and power
by exploiting weak competitors as well as the dependent class. In such a
class divided society, the individual can have no political obligation towards
the state. The case of political obligation arises when the ‘new state’ comes
into being after the revolution.This new state is considered by Marx as a
‘dictatorship of the proletariat’. The dictatorship of the proletariat means
concrete democracy, i.e. the coercive power of a majority over a minority.
However, the idea of political obligation ceases to exist with the withering
away of the state in the last stage of development, called communism, and
finds its final conversion into the injunction of social obligation.

g) Anarchist Theory – The anarchist view holds that society can and
should be organised without the coercive authority of state. It had its
greatest influence in the late 19th and the early 20th century, when several
revolutionary movements in Western countries favoured this mode of
thought. All anarchists agree on the need to dispense with a compulsory
form of authority, that is the state. They want to build a society wherein all
human beings shall freely and spontaneously adjust with each other without
requiring an external force to regulate their relations. Anarchists like P.J.
Proudhon and Peter Kropotkin argued that all governmental authority is
illegitimate, because the state is indeed a coercive institution, which is
suited only to a corrupt and unjust society. Although classical anarchists
such as Proudhon, Bakunin and Kropotkin rejected the claims of political
authority, they nevertheless recognised that a healthy society demands
sociable, cooperative and respectable behaviour from its members. This
amounts to a theory of social obligation that in some ways parallels the more
traditional notion of political obligation. Political obligation is a complex
issue. The idea of political obligation is not a political but a moral affair.
Government is only an external agency. A good government is a product
of human ingenuity. The power of reasoning is still retained by human
beings themselves. It cannot be transferred to the instrument created by
them. However, it is necessary to realize that the individual owes political
obligation to political authority. Green suggested political obligation
towards the “organized power of society” as distinguished from the state.
156
State is necessary to maintain law and order, however public opinion should Rights and Obligations
also be crystallized and mobilized.

Check Your Progress Exercise 2

Note: i) Use the space given below for your answer.

ii) See the end of the unit for tips for your answer.
1) What is political obligation?
………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………..………………………
………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………

12.4 HUMAN TRAFFICKING

In modern times, functions and role of the state has changed drastically,
particularly after the emergence of the concept of human rights. Concept of
human rights is a broad one, but it basically entitles rights to an individual
by virtue of being a human being. Human rights include civil and political
rights of human beings. The concept rules out any discrimination between
human beings on the grounds of race, language, colour, sex, religion,
nationality etc. One of the important aspects of human rights is that, it
provides right to life, liberty, security, prohibition of slavery, slave trade and
servitude for everyone. Human rights completely disregards any form or
type of human trafficking. The role and responsibility of state is very high to
deal with any kind of human rights violation. Human trafficking is a major
concern in the modern era of globalization. Globalization has increased the
movement of goods, services and people. It also helps in enhancing the
modern era of slavery in the form of human trafficking. Slavery is an old
concept. Different forms and magnitudes of slavery were present even in
the ancient Greek period. Modern slavery is not defined in law; it is used as
an umbrella term that focuses attention on commonalities across these legal
concepts including forced labour, debt bondage, forced marriage, other
slavery and slavery like practices, and human trafficking.

12.4.1 Causes of Human Trafficking - It is not easy to identify the root

causes of human trafficking. Causes of trafficking are various and often
differ from one country to another. Trafficking is a complex phenomenon
157
Rights and is often influenced by social, economic, cultural and other factors. These
factors may vary on the basis of individual or region-specific circumstances.
Some of the common factors are related with poverty, oppression, lack of
social and economic opportunities, human rights violation, war or conflict-
ridden zone. Trafficking can further be increased in a political instable region
which leads to militarism, civil unrest, internal armed conflicts. Further,
human trafficking is a major concern in a natural disaster-prone region. The
destabilization and displacement of populations increase their vulnerability
to exploitation and abuse through trafficking and forced labour. After the
2015 disastrous earthquake in Nepal, human trafficking has increased
particularly affecting women and children from socially and economically
disadvantaged groups such as Tamang and Dalit communities. Similarly,
war and civil strife may lead to a massive displacement of populations,
leaving orphans and street children extremely vulnerable to trafficking, as
we can see in several West Asian countries, particularly recently in Syria.
Another very common reason for human trafficking is the demand of cheap
labour. Because of a high rate of population growth, unemployment and
poverty people readily agree to migrate from one place in the hope of better
opportunities. These people are used as a forced labourer in construction
works, agricultural field and in domestic helps. The victims of trafficking
can rarely protect themselves from business owners and brokers because
they have very few alternatives.
Human trafficking is considered illegal in India and remains a significant
problem under the present socio-economic and political circumstances.
According to the Ministry of Women and Child Development, nearly
20,000 women and children were victims of human trafficking in India in
2016; that is around a 25% rise compared to 2015. In South Asia, India is
the centre for fastest growing human trafficking. Women and children from
Nepal and Bangladesh are illegally migrated to India for different forms
of exploitation. People from the lower cast or the tribal communities and
the women and children from the excluded groups of society are generally
victims of human trafficking. India also has the highest number of child
labour in the World. According to the Labour ministry, 12.6 million children
in the age group of 5-14 years are presently working in India. In terms
of constitutional and legal provisions, any form of human trafficking is
completely banned in India. The state also has the power to impose any law
for offenders. Article 23 of the Indian constitution talks about prohibition
of traffic in human beings and forced labour. Traffic in human beings and
begar and other similar forms of forced labour are prohibited, and any
contravention of this provision shall be an offence punishable in accordance
with the law. Overall, Human trafficking is the third largest organized crime
after drugs and the arms trade across the globe. Till date, there is no clear
data regarding the number of persons or kids trafficked in any region. Several
cases of human trafficking are not reported. It is a complex problem in any
society. Only law-making is not an effective step to eliminate this crime.
158
An effective legal watch system with proper implementation is an urgent Rights and Obligations
requirement. The issue of trafficking is more an issue of society than a simple
law enforcement procedure. So, civil society needs to take it more seriously.
A collaborative effort between government and civil society organizations is
very important. In India, the government must implement all the laws in an
effective way to eliminate human trafficking and associated crimes.

Check Your Progress Exercise 3

Note: i) Use the space given below for your answer.

ii) See the end of the unit for tips for your answer.
1) What are the causes of human trafficking?
………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………..………………………
………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………

12.5 LET US SUM UP

Rights and obligations are the reverse sides of the same coin. To possess
a right, usually, places someone else under an obligation to uphold or
respect that right. In the field of jurisprudence, the social life of men is
regulated by law. And to protect right to life, government has an obligation
to maintain public order and ensure personal security. Negative rights
entail an obligation on the part of the state to limit or constrain its power.
Positive rights oblige the state to manage economic life, provide a range
of welfare services and so on. However, obligations do not always fall on
the state. Individuals who possess rights, must acknowledge the obligations
towards the state, otherwise civilised life would be impossible. Citizenship,
therefore, is a blend of rights and obligations. The duty of the citizen is to
acknowledge the authority of the state and obey its laws.

12.6 REFERENCES

Bhargava, Rajeev and Ashok Acharya. (eds). (2008). Political Theory – An

Introduction. Noida: Pearson.
Asirvatham, Eddy and K K Misra. (2001). Political Theory, New Delhi: S
Chand & Company Ltd.
159
Rights Heywood, Andrew. (2015). Political Theory - An Introduction, London:
Palgrave Macmillian.
Mckinnon, Catriona. (ed). (2010). Issues in Political Theory, US: Oxford
University Press.

12.7 ANSWERS TO CHECK YOUR PROGRESS EXERCISES

Check Your Progress Exercise 1

1) Your answer should highlight that negative rights entail non-

interference from the state while positive rights are ensured by state
intervention

Check Your Progress Exercise 2

1) Your answer should highlight following point

• Concerned with the question that how far, when and why an
individual is obliged to obey the political authority

Check Your Progress Exercise 3

1) Your answer should highlight factors like oppression, poverty, lack of

economic opportunities, human rights violations, conflict etc

160