The Rediff Interview/Norman Dorsen

'The State may have to use force. That does not mean they should torture people'

Human rights are the most basic rights of human life. There is no point in living if a person has no human rights," says Norman Dorsen, president, American Civil Liberties Union between 1976 and 1991. Dorsen was in India last fortnight, for the first time, to understand the Indian human rights problem.

Dorsen, who is also chairman of the Lawyer's Committee for Human Rights and president of the US Association of Constitutional Law, attended a series of meetings with Indian human rights activists in Madras, Bombay, Delhi and Calcutta. He took out some time from his busy schedule to speak to Syed Firdaus Ashraf. Excerpts from the interview:

The issue of human rights has become a bone of contention between the United States and many Asian countries, especially China. These countries claim that human rights is a Western concept and cannot be imposed on Asian countries. What do you feel?

I disagree with that. Every nation has its own concept of human rights. But there are certain fundamental human rights which is shared by all people. The United Nations Declaration of Human Rights has been ratified by a large number of countries... Even China has endorsed those principles.

There are certain things which I believe is inherent in human conditions. Freedom of speech, freedom of religion, a right not to be arrested, a right not to be kept in jail without a trial, a right not to be tortured. All these things are applicable whether you are in Asia, Africa or any part of the world. These are the basic rights of human beings and everybody should have it.

Why then are Asian countries saying that human rights is a Western concept?

They are saying that because they don't want to comply with the human rights rules.

Do you see a confrontation emerging in the future between the US and countries like Malaysia over human rights, since Washington is keen to impose certain standards of civil liberties while Asian countries refuse to accept them?

I don't know. The United States policy includes human rights. I hope that the US maintains its human rights policy and presses other countries to improve their human right record. The US should also improve its HR record.... I am not thinking about a country. I am thinking about people, people all over the world.

China too says that human rights is an alien concept.

No, it is not an alien concept. It is written in the UN declaration. And China had agreed to it. If they agreed to it, how could it be alien?

There is a feeling that the US is always ready to compromise on human rights when it comes to trade, China being a good example.

People have different opinions about that. Human rights is a part of American foreign policy. And I would like (the US) to have a better foreign policy. But human rights is not the only thing in US foreign policy. Economics, trade, national defence and many other factors are also part of American policy. All these things one has to see together. So sometimes, they do compromise human rights.

Do you think there should be no compromise?

Each case has to be treated separately. I would like less compromise.

In India, terrorism has affected some states. How is it possible for the army and the police not to suppress human rights when combating people fighting against the State? Do you think that human rights can be ignored when a State is fighting to preserve itself from collapse?

The situation is very serious. Governments always do what they feel is necessary. They do it to preserve themselves and to preserve law and order. And in doing that they restrict human rights. I suppose the standard should be to restrict the human rights to the least amount. In other words, there may be restrictions to human rights. But these should be as few as possible. The government should give reasons why specific human rights are not allowed. And in that too there should be justification for the violation.

But how is it possible? When people are fighting to secede from the country, how can a government not use violence against such people?

I did not say there should be no violence. In cases of revolution and terrorism, governments will resort to force. And I am not surprised that governments use force.

In your opinion, what is the greatest threat to human rights in the modern age?

I would say, two things. First is the widespread discrimination against race, sex, homosexuals and castes. I just went to Mahatma Gandhi's house at Mani Bhavan. And I found that he fought his whole life against the caste system... We have racial discrimination in the US. This is one basic discrimination.

The other is when the government, in the name of national security, goes too far and restricts the media, free speech, uses torture and all kinds of force to prevail. These are the two human rights problems.

In Northern Ireland, the British have often violated human rights, as India is said to be doing in Kashmir. It is very likely that human rights gets trampled, violated in such extraordinary situations. How does a State guard such abuse?

First of all, courts must be opened. Secondly, people should be allowed to protest about violations of human rights... The State may have to use force. That does not mean they should torture people. It does not mean it should not allow newspapers to express themselves.

How would you assess the human rights situation in India?

I am not sure about human rights in India. We were requested to visit India by a local civil liberties organisation. And we would certainly like to help them. The world is too big. India is not the only place. China too has problems of human rights violations. We do everything what we can do. Send people to trials. We give advice to local NGOs. We would protest to the government if we saw human rights violations.

Do you think the Government of India has failed to protect human rights?

I just don't know enough about the Indian situation. And that is one the reason I am here -- to learn. I have been here for only a week and it will not be fair on my part to comment on the situation without knowing. I will do so only after I come to know about all the issues.

The anti-India US congressman Dan Burton has been quite vocal about the human rights situation in India. Have you ever participated in his discussions?

I have not participated in those discussions. American congressmen talk about (imposing) trade restrictions on everybody. At least some congressmen do, if not everybody. It is not India which is picked on as a bad example. When you talk about foreign policy for a country like India which is so large, the situation is very complicated. My impression is that relations between India and US are improving. After the Cold War where the Soviet Union is no longer a factor, the United States and India have become more closer.

What would you tell the Indian government to improve its human rights record?

I would say the same thing which I say in every country: To be familiar with human rights rules and principles. And to instruct all the officials all over the country to follow the principles of human rights. Be alert, understand the problems. Be firm and act. Be sensible and try to improve the situation. And that is what I say to the American government. I have told this to the American government many times.

Do you believe the United Nations should impose sanctions against nations accused of gross human rights violations?

Yes, they should. And that is the best way to do it. They should be brought to the international criminals courts. There is lot of discussion -- which you may know -- about the setting up of a permanent international criminals court. We had temporary courts in Nuremberg after the Second World War. Now in Bosnia and Rwanda. But there must be some permanent court with power.

There must be trials of people who violate human rights. There should be a way for the United Nations to impose restrictions. Human rights is one of the most basic rights of human life. What is the point of living if you don't have any rights?

In a country like India, it is difficult for young women to resist their parents and society and do what they would like to do. Many others cannot do things which they want to do in their lives. How do such people get their human rights?

Each country has its own problems; each country has traditions. People who are in position of authority and respect should come forward to defend them. I am not talking about violence now. I am talking about protest. They should come forward and speak on behalf of people to protect their rights, the right to speak, the right to express themselves.

It is a long struggle. It has been going on not for years or decades, but for centuries. It did not start today and is not going to end tomorrow. But progress has to be made. There is more human rights protection today in the world than it used to be earlier.

How does one gain individual human rights?

You must have laws which have to be enforced aggressively. People have to be protected from violence. Their rights have to be protected. Just like you protect property rights.

You must set up a system. So this system can progress slowly, but steadily. And then you are slowly changing culture.

Again, I am not talking of India. This can happen in any country. There was slavery in our country until the middle of the 19th century. And even till the middle of the 20th century black people in the USA were in a terrible situation. Also, in South Africa. We worked on it. We improved it. And still we are not perfect. Today, we try to do the best we can.

But how do you change the mindset of the people? It is very difficult to change that.

First, you have to protect people from violence and torture. You must have the authority to do that. The United Nations has very little authority at the moment. And you must try to make people in power understand how important it is to enforce human rights laws.

Tell us what you think of this interview