Human rights, democracy and the COVID-19 challenge
The COVID-19 crisis has affected almost every aspect of human life and society around the globe. While the economic costs are already felt, the impact in other areas will take months, perhaps years, to be felt and fully measured. It has, however, exposed many fault lines and generated intense debate on human rights and democracy.
Human rights originated in the Enlightenment era with philosophers like John Locke arguing individuals have inalienable rights to life, liberty, and property, which cannot be infringed by the state. Called initially natural rights, these rights formed a bedrock of modern states.
These ideas in the 21st century led to the envisioning of a world in which the security of individuals is prioritized over the security of borders and military powers. With its seven dimensions of interrelated security, — economic security, food security, health security, environmental security, personal security, community security, and political security — human security heralded a period in which human rights and wellbeing of the individual were prioritized.
The United Nations’ Millennium Development Goals and Sustainable Development Goals aimed at promoting human rights and security throughout the world.
There appeared a movement of contradictory forces — while the ideas of democracy, human rights, and human security were gaining ground and becoming popular, the rise of authoritarian states and illiberal democracies undermined democratic ideals. This has become more apparent during the current crisis.
State actions to address coronavirus have undermined human rights and democracy. Emergency powers acquired by the states to provide security to the people have actually undermined the security of the very people. While measures like lockdown and social distancing have been used to address the pandemic, they have have become tools of repression by authoritarian states.
This is, however, not happening globally. The democratic states are open to public scrutiny and accountability. The authoritarian states evade any such accountability. Instead, during this crisis, the authoritarian states and illiberal democracies have acquired unbridled powers.
They have forcibly quarantined people and adopted coercive measures such as flogging and even given orders for shootat-sight for the violators. They have also largely failed in providing basic healthcare facilities or the necessities of life to the suffering people during this time.
However, there is no visible public unrest in these states. While democratic states fail, they fail in the public glare, and the leaders of these states, being accountable to citizens, may confront harsh criticism, the authoritarian states enjoy unbridled power and their leaders remain above public scrutiny. While leaders of the democracies are accountable and face regular elections, the authoritarian state leaders face no elections or face sham elections.
The crisis demands global cooperation. Instead of coordinating policies to address the crisis, some authoritarian states have actually distanced from any such ideas. China’s dismissal of any international investigation into the origin of the virus is a reflection of this trend.
The social distancing needed to stop the spread of the virus has translated into the behavior of states and turned into noncooperation and political distancing. In fact, contrary trends have emerged. Some states have indulged in a misinformation campaign and tried to turn this global catastrophe as a political tool to their advantage. In the midst of this crisis, the South China Sea has seen increasing militarization.
While the post-Cold War globalized world brought us a promise of a better world as the ideological battle ended, the recent developments display pessimistic signs. Psychologist Steven Pinker’s optimism that a peaceful world is our 21st-century right is appearing distant.
The polarization among states has increased, and a new Cold War is often talked about. At a broader plane, to adapt the phrase of Samuel Huntington, the coming years may see a clash of ideas and practices of democracy and authoritarianism. In this clash, human rights and security will be the wagers.