On August 30, 2024, the HRUG regular seminar on “In the Contemporary Context: The Essence of the Concept of Human Rights” was successfully held. This seminar was chaired by Professor Peter Herrmann (a researcher of CSU Human Rights Center). Mehmet Okyayuz (a professor of political science at Middle East Technical University, Turkey), and three teaching assistants — Batuhan Parmaksiz、Veli Can Çınar and Sultan Sadaka (Faculty of Political Science and Public Administration, Department of Political Science, Social Sciences University of Ankara) participated in the discussion. They surrounded the nature of the concept of human rights to explore issues.
The seminar focused on the essence of “human” and people’s fundamental rights, digging out the definition of human and the rights he/she is entitled to, and further exploring the close connection between rights and duties/obligations. Professor Mehmet Okyayuz pointed out that the human rights debate is becoming politicized and socialized. Despite the concrete actions embedded in the human rights narratives, we still need to face the challenge of moralization. Taking Germany’s apology for the Holocaust as an example, he emphasized that attitudes alone, without actual political initiatives, do not constitute real action. So he called for human rights statements to be aligned with concrete political measures. The current reduce of substantive political initiatives in the global human rights narrative has led to a gap between the promotion and practice of the values of the “free Western world”. As the number of specific human rights violations decreases, the moral debate increases. It is necessary to bridge the gap between rhetoric, apologies and actual action by exploring aspects of the social environment, political demands and material conditions.
Batuhan Parmaksiz argued that the exercise of human rights is susceptible to constraints imposed by socioeconomic factors, thus putting forward a series of questions: what is the biggest problem in the human rights debate today? How to overcome the problem? What are concrete measures that could be taken?
Veli Can Çınar responded to the above questions and presented her views. She focused on the fundamental problems in the practice of human rights, especially the challenges of law’s implementation. Taking Turkey as an example, she explained the specific dilemmas of current human rights protection, noting that not only human rights law but also other laws such as civil law face difficulties in implementation. She believed that the field of human rights suffers from an over-moralization of values and universal concepts. In order to overcome those dilemmas, it is important to go back to basic steps, to question the implementation of the law, to stop idolizing human rights concepts and finally to focus on their concrete practice in terms of the protection of human beings and law. Minor violations, such as the lack of basic livelihood security for released persons, as well as problems from law enforcement are prevalent in Turkey and the gradual adaptation of society to these human rights violations constitutes a crisis of adaptation. Therefore, these seemingly minor but widespread human rights violations should be addressed first as a starting point for improving the human rights situation.
Prof. Peter Herrmann insisted that the definition of human rights violations is relative and historically dynamic, with significant differences across historical periods, regions and social groups. He illustrated the evolution of the concept of human rights through historical examples. He proposed that even in contemporary times, the perception and practice of human rights are still influenced by a variety of factors, including political and economic factors.
In the evaluation part, Prof. Mehmet Okyayuz raised questions about migration and human rights. That is, what is missed or what needs to be improved in terms of human rights policies dealing with migration? As a migrant and alternative family worker, Sultan Sadaka argued that there are clear problems in the current relationship between human rights and migration policies. The main issue is that policy-making is often not based on human rights, but rather is influenced by popular perceptions, social media and misinformation. In the field of child care in particular, policies should more center on the best interests of children rather than merely seeking numerical success or conformity with traditional family values (family formation). In addition, the influence of social media on government departments and on the policy-making process as a whole is a concern. The right decisions should not always be subject to outside pressures.
2024年8月30日，HRUG定期研讨会之“在当代语境下——人权概念的本质”主题会议顺利召开。本次研讨会由中南大学人权研究中心研究员Peter Herrmann教授主持，土耳其中东科技大学政治学Mehmet Okyayuz教授、安卡拉社会科学大学政治学部政治学与公共管理学院教学助理Batuhan Parmaksiz、Veli Can Çınar、Sultan Sadaka参加，围绕人权概念的本质问题进行探讨。
会议主要围绕“人”的本质定义及其基本权利展开，深入探讨了“人”的定义及其应享有的权利，并就此进一步探讨了权利与责任、义务之间的紧密联系。Mehmet Okyayuz教授指出，人权辩论正趋向政治化和社会化，尽管人权叙事中包含具体行动，但仍需直面道德化挑战。以德国就大屠杀道歉为例，他强调仅有态度而无实际政治举措难以构成真正行动，呼吁人权声明应与具体政治措施相一致。而当前全球人权叙事中实质性政治举措减少，导致“自由西方世界”价值观的宣扬与实践之间存在差距。随着具体侵犯人权行为的减少，道德辩论却增多，需通过探讨社会环境、政治需求和物质条件等方面，推动缩小言论、道歉与实际行动的差距。
Batuhan Parmaksiz认为人权的行使容易受到社会经济因素的限制，从而提出了一系列问题：当今人权辩论中最大的问题是什么？应当如何克服这些问题？可行的具体措施有哪一些？
Veli Can Çınar对上述问题进行了回答，并提出自己的观点。她聚焦于人权实践中的基本问题，特别是在法律执行层面上的挑战。她以土耳其为例阐释了当前人权保护的具体困境，指出不仅人权法，其他法律如民法在执行中也面临困难。她认为人权领域存在将价值观和普遍观念过度道德化的问题，为克服这些困境，应回归基本步骤，质疑法律执行情况，并停止将人权理念偶像化，转而关注其在保护人类和法律方面的具体实践。诸如被释放者缺乏基本生活保障等轻微侵权行为以及执法问题在土耳其普遍存在，且社会逐渐适应了这些侵犯人权行为，构成了一种适应性危机。因此，应首先解决这些看似微小但普遍的人权侵犯问题，作为改善人权状况的起点。
Peter Herrmann教授认为人权侵犯的定义具有相对性和历史动态性，在不同历史时期、地区和社会群体中存在显著差异。他通过历史实例阐述了人权概念的演进过程，并指出即使在当代，人权认知和实践也仍受多种因素影响，包括政治、经济等因素。
在评议环节，Mehmet Okyayuz教授提出有关移民与人权的问题。即在处理移民问题的人权政策上，存在哪些缺失或需要改进的地方？Sultan Sadaka作为一名移民和替代性家庭工作者，她认为当前人权与移民政策之间的关系存在明显问题，主要在于政策制定往往不是基于人权，而是受到流行观念、社交媒体和错误信息的影响。特别是在儿童照料领域，政策应该更加关注儿童的最佳利益，而不是仅仅追求数字上的成功或符合传统家庭价值观（家庭的建立）。此外，社交媒体对政府部门和整个决策过程的影响也令人担忧，正确的决定不应该总是受到外界压力的左右。
(Transcription: Yuou Dai, Yuxin Wang; Translation: Yaxing Bai)