# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Well organized and easy to understand Web building tutorials with lots of examples of how to use HTML, CSS, JavaScript, SQL, PHP, and XML.

# data[].attributes.body
I think this HMW question is a good idea because teenagers crime is being a social issue all around the world, and our law are still keep making changes on this cause it is incomplete now. However, we do not has a way that is more useful then the punishment from the law. I hope this website could help others or remind some teenagers and their parents to focus on this issue.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Want to convince your readers to do something or agree with your point of view?

OK, that was a silly question. Of course you do.

Persuasion is generally an exercise in creating a win-win situation. You present a case that others find beneficial to agree with. You make them an offer they can't refuse, but not in the manipulative Godfather sense.

It's simply a good deal or a position that makes sense to that particular person.

But there are techniques that can make your job easier and your case more compelling. While this list is in no way comprehensive, these 10 strategies are used quite a bit because they work.

Repetition

Talk to anyone well versed in learning psychology, and they'll tell you repetition is crucial. It's also critical in persuasive writing, since a person can't agree with you if they don't truly get what you're saying.

Of course, there's good repetition and bad. To stay on the good side, make your point in several different ways, such as directly, using an example, in a story, via a quote from a famous person, and once more in your summary.

Reasons Why

Remember the power of the word because. Psychological studies have shown that people are more likely to comply with a request if you simply give them a reason why... even if that reason makes no sense.

The strategy itself does make sense if you think about it. We don't like to be told things or asked to take action without a reasonable explanation. When you need people to be receptive to your line of thinking, always give reasons why.

Consistency

It's been called the "hobgoblin of little minds," but consistency in our thoughts and actions is a valued social trait. We don't want to appear inconsistent, since, whether fair or not, that characteristic is associated with instability and flightiness, while consistency is associated with integrity and rational behavior.

Use this in your writing by getting the reader to agree with something up front that most people would have a hard time disagreeing with. Then rigorously make your case, with plenty of supporting evidence, all while relating your ultimate point back to the opening scenario that's already been accepted.

Social Proof

Looking for guidance from others as to what to do and what to accept is one of the most powerful psychological forces in our lives. It can determine whether we deliver aid to a person in need, and it can determine whether we muster the courage to kill ourselves.

Obvious examples of social proof can be found in testimonials and outside referrals, and it's the driving force behind social media. But you can also casually integrate elements of social proof in your writing, ranging from skillful alignment with outside authorities to blatant name dropping.

Comparisons

Metaphors, similes and analogies are the persuasive writer's best friends. When you can relate your scenario to something that the reader already accepts as true, you're well on your way to convincing someone to see things your way.

But comparisons work in other ways too. Sometimes you can be more persuasive by comparing apples to oranges (to use a tired but effective metaphor). Don't compare the price of your home study course to the price of a similar course-compare it to the price of a live seminar or your hourly consulting rate.

Agitate and Solve

This is a persuasion theme that works as an overall approach to making your case. First, you identify the problem and qualify your audience. Then you agitate the reader's pain before offering your solution as the answer that will make it all better.

The agitation phase is not about being sadistic; it's about empathy. You want the reader to know unequivocally that you understand his problem because you've dealt with it and/or are experienced at eliminating it. The credibility of your solution goes way up if you demonstrate that you truly feel the prospect's pain.

Prognosticate

Another persuasion theme involves providing your readers with a glimpse into the future. If you can convincingly present an extrapolation of current events into likely future outcomes, you may as well have a license to print money.

This entire strategy is built on credibility. If you have no idea what you're talking about, you'll end up looking foolish. But if you can back up your claims with your credentials or your obvious grasp of the subject matter, this is an extremely persuasive technique.

Unify ... Selectively

Despite our attempts to be sophisticated, evolved beings, we humans are exclusionary by nature. Give someone a chance to be a part of a group that they want to be in-whether that be wealthy, or hip, or green, or even contrarian-and they'll hop on board whatever train you're driving.

This is the technique used in the greatest sales letter ever written. Find out what group people want to be in, and offer them an invitation to join while seemingly excluding others.

Address Objections

If you present your case and someone is left thinking "yeah, but...", well, you've lost. This is why direct marketers use long copy-it's not that they want you to read it all, it's that they want you to read enough until you buy.

Addressing all the potential objections of at least the majority of your readers can be tough, but if you really know your subject the arguments against you should be fairly obvious. If you think there are no reasonable objections to your position, you're in for a shock if you have comments enabled.

Storytelling

Storytelling is really a catch-all technique-you can and should use it in combination with any and all of the previous nine strategies. But the reason why storytelling works so well lies at the heart of what persuasion really is.

Stories allow people to persuade themselves, and that's what it's really all about. You might say that we never convince anyone of anything-we simply help others independently decide that we're right. Do everything you can to tell better stories, and you'll find that you are a terribly persuasive person.
About the Author: Brian Clark is founder of Copyblogger and CEO of Copyblogger Media. Get more from Brian on Twitter.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Ten Timeless Persuasive Writing Techniques - Copyblogger

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Want to convince your readers to do something or agree with your point of view? OK, that was a silly question. Of course you do. Persuasion is generally an exercise in creating a win-win situation. You present a case that others find beneficial to agree with.

# data[].attributes.body
This web has A detailed description of how to write a convincing article, such as the different parts that you need to follow.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Award-winning online curriculum teaching math, language arts, science, social studies and more! Great for homeschool program, afterschool & summer use.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
AbdRahmanSalah A teenage is usually a person between 14 and 20 years old. these are the interests of any teenager either a boy or a girl.

My favourite game is minecraft

Dating is stupid - RoseCandyMusic

Got to look good - ParkerFang

Yes Internet is AMAZING

My best friend.

I love the Internet - AyHaq

I love Netflix and Chill

What is Netflix

Me too girl x

I love T.V. - AyHaq

The Contenders

Love parties sometimes

I. hate. shopping. - micahisthebest

All teens love this! - micahisthebest

I like texting - AyHaq

Choke me harder daddy

Food is bae

Not allowed it. - micahisthebest

Sounds good

M born with it

I hate anime. - Kaboom

That is true

Porn is stupid. - Kaboom

Just wanna f my teachers

The monsters are high. - Kaboom

30 Hating Justin Beiber

I LOVE Justin Bieber

Don't we all? - HufflepuffGeekGirl

I agree

its littt

Love it - Kaboom

Who doesn't like pizza? - Kaboom

Very inappropiate

That's this - AyHaq

Who would do this? - Kaboom

true

Hey, it's me

She sucks - Kaboom

Love Katy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
AbdRahmanSalah A teenage is usually a person between 14 and 20 years old. these are the interests of any teenager either a boy or a girl. My favourite game is minecraft Dating is stupid - RoseCandyMusic Got to look good - ParkerFang Yes Internet is AMAZING My best friend.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Treat violence as a public health concern: We need to use campaigns and technology to reach every child and family in these countries. We need to develop those tools to make sure that everybody feels important and cared for through parenting interventions, family interventions, wellbeing campaigns, and early childhood education. Anilena Mejia, research fellow, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia

Localise programmes: During the 90s in Rio we had rates of homicide that would go beyond epidemic levels (over 100 per 100,000 citizens). It took a really costly but comprehensive programme in Brazil called Pronasci to tie up a lot of elements that were drivers of violence in the country, building local frameworks, gun-free zones and fostering civic culture to reduce violence, which has been the case in Bogotá, Medellín in Colombia and Santa Tecla in El Salvador. Natasha Leite de Moura, project adviser, public security programme, United Nations, Lima, Peru

Focus on hotspots: We've got scientific evidence that a focus on hotspots and 'hot people' can prevent or reduce violence. But we need also accompany this with other measures - urban upgrading, better urban planning, situational prevention - especially early childhood intervention. Robert Muggah, research director of Igarapé Institute, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, and the SecDev Foundation, Canada

Look at the whole picture: While people are aware that there are high levels of lethal violence in Brazil, this is often misrepresented by national and international media as a simple cops vs robbers dynamic - a misrepresentation that more often than not criminalises poverty. Much more work needs to be done on understanding the official and unofficial social, political and economic structures that sustain these high levels. Damian Platt, researcher, activist and author, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Create well-targeted programmes: If the goal is to reduce homicides, then programme selection should be located in hotspot areas and focused on the population group most likely to commit violence crimes, often young males between 10-29 years old. The risk factors for why these young men get involved in criminality also needs to be clearly diagnosed and complemented with a treatment plan that involves the family and community. Enrique Roig, director, citizen security, Creative Associates, Washington, DC

Focus on prevention: Prison populations are overflowing, crime is high and violence is a culture in South Africa. The focus needs to be on preventing the conditions that draw people into violent or criminal behaviour. In order to do this we need a systematic, integrated, coordinated approach combining the responsibilities of a wide range of state and non-state actors. Venessa Padayachee, national advocacy and lobbying manager, Nicro, Cape Town, South Africa

Avoid repressive policies: Many countries have approached the problem of violence from a crime and security angle, focusing their action on law-enforcement only. Unfortunate examples of this are the 'mano dura' tactics in Central America. While justice and police have an important role to play, repression only is counter-productive if not combined with development interventions that look at the drivers of violence, and tackle things like skills and education of youth, socio-economic inequalities, and access to communal services. Luigi De Martino, senior researcher, Small Arms Survey, Geneva

Be proactive: You have to systematically invest in protective factors. Supporting proactive community associations and schools to activate their involvement has also demonstrated positive results in places such as Cape Town, Chicago and New York. In addition, promoting links between neighbouring communities that adjoin each other is also important. John de Boer, senior policy adviser, United Nations University, Centre for Policy Research, Tokyo, Japan

Don't forget about male violence: There are lots of interventions that are focused on women's rights. These are noble. But the vast majority of killings I have seen around the world are by men on men. I think this needs to be addressed. The international community focuses a great deal on the impact of violence against women. If you address the male drivers of violence, you reduce the female harm of violence. Iain Overton, author, Gun Baby Gun, London

Officers from the CORE police special forces patrol during an operation to search for fugitives in a favela in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Photograph: Mario Tama/Getty Images

But treat male and female violence as the same issue: Male and female dimensions of violence are connected. We need to look at these issues comprehensively rather than a divide and conquer approach. Research has shown it is not just about single risk factors (i.e. being a male is a risk factor) that determines violence - rather it is the accumulation of risk factors that produce violence. John de Boer

Understand that violence is going virtual: Cyberspace is a new domain for violence. This ranges from the use of social media to project force (videos showing assassinations, torture, threats), to recruit would-be members of extremist groups (digitally savvy marketing campaigns, online chat sites), for selling product (deep web), and also for more banal but no less important forms of intimidation and coercion (bullying). Violence is going virtual, and we need to get a much better handle on all of this. Robert Muggah

Learn from history: A lot of human rights violations of massive proportions in Brazil, such as slavery and dictatorship, were never really dealt within a transitional or reconciliation process. At the same time, the security forces are relying on structures that don't make sense and foster competition and corruption. Natasha Leite

Keep in mind the impact of drugs: The global "war on drugs" is a massive driver of crime, violence and insecurity, not only in the Americas but increasingly globally. It is time for all international anti-violence development initiatives to take this on board. It still amazes me how much taboo there is around this issue, especially regarding the cocaine industry. Damian Platt

A Brazilian drug gang member nicknamed poses with a gun atop a hill overlooking a slum in Salvador. Photograph: LUNAE PARRACHO/REUTERS

Be aware of the link between organised crime and terrorism: My own take on the Zetas is that the lines that once separated organised crime from terrorism are increasingly blurred. That does not mean that they are the same actors, nor motivated by the same factors. However, there is an increasing convergence among some gangs and terrorists in terms of their methods. The Zetas have clearly appropriated terrorist tactics to pursue their motives. John de Boer

Raise awareness of improvised explosive devices (IEDs): Countries can be more active in the control of conventional munitions stockpiles, states and international bodies can mitigate the proliferation of IEDs. They can step up the sharing of information on IED events to enhance awareness of the threat and to inform national and international decision making. Luigi de Martino
Is there anything that we've left out? Leave your thoughts in the comments below. Join our community of development professionals and humanitarians. Follow@GuardianGDP on Twitter.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
24 ways to reduce crime in the world's most violent cities

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Violent crime is deeply entrenched in some developing countries, particularly in Latin America. Our experts offer these solutions to bringing down high rates

# data[].attributes.body
Human right

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Human rights are moral principles or norms[1] for certain standards of human behaviour and are regularly protected in municipal and international law.[2] They are commonly understood as inalienable,[3] fundamental rights "to which a person is inherently entitled simply because she or he is a human being"[4] and which are "inherent in all human beings",[5] regardless of their age, ethnic origin, location, language, religion, ethnicity, or any other status.[3] They are applicable everywhere and at every time in the sense of being universal,[1] and they are egalitarian in the sense of being the same for everyone.[3] They are regarded as requiring empathy and the rule of law[6] and imposing an obligation on persons to respect the human rights of others,[1][3] and it is generally considered that they should not be taken away except as a result of due process based on specific circumstances.[3]

The doctrine of human rights has been highly influential within international law and global and regional institutions.[3] Actions by states and non-governmental organisations form a basis of public policy worldwide. The idea of human rights[7] suggests that "if the public discourse of peacetime global society can be said to have a common moral language, it is that of human rights". The strong claims made by the doctrine of human rights continue to provoke considerable scepticism and debates about the content, nature and justifications of human rights to this day. The precise meaning of the term right is controversial and is the subject of continued philosophical debate;[8] while there is consensus that human rights encompasses a wide variety of rights[5] such as the right to a fair trial, protection against enslavement, prohibition of genocide, free speech[9] or a right to education, there is disagreement about which of these particular rights should be included within the general framework of human rights;[1] some thinkers suggest that human rights should be a minimum requirement to avoid the worst-case abuses, while others see it as a higher standard.[1][10]

Many of the basic ideas that animated the human rights movement developed in the aftermath of the Second World War and the events of the Holocaust,[6] culminating in the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in Paris by the United Nations General Assembly in 1948. Ancient peoples did not have the same modern-day conception of universal human rights.[11] The true forerunner of human rights discourse was the concept of natural rights which appeared as part of the medieval natural law tradition that became prominent during the European Enlightenment with such philosophers as John Locke, Francis Hutcheson and Jean-Jacques Burlamaqui and which featured prominently in the political discourse of the American Revolution and the French Revolution.[6] From this foundation, the modern human rights arguments emerged over the latter half of the 20th century,[12] possibly as a reaction to slavery, torture, genocide and war crimes,[6] as a realisation of inherent human vulnerability and as being a precondition for the possibility of a just society.[5]

Ancient peoples did not think of universal human rights in the same way we do today.[11] The true forerunner of human-rights discourse was the concept of natural rights which appeared as part of the medieval natural law tradition that became prominent during the European Enlightenment. From this foundation, the modern human rights arguments emerged over the latter half of the 20th century.[12]

17th-century English philosopher John Locke discussed natural rights in his work, identifying them as being "life, liberty, and estate (property)", and argued that such fundamental rights could not be surrendered in the social contract. In Britain in 1689, the English Bill of Rights and the Scottish Claim of Right each made a range of oppressive governmental actions, illegal.[13] Two major revolutions occurred during the 18th century, in the United States (1776) and in France (1789), leading to the United States Declaration of Independence and the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen respectively, both of which articulated certain human rights. Additionally, the Virginia Declaration of Rights of 1776 encoded into law a number of fundamental civil rights and civil freedoms.

1800 to World War I

Philosophers such as Thomas Paine, John Stuart Mill and Hegel expanded on the theme of universality during the 18th and 19th centuries. In 1831 William Lloyd Garrison wrote in a newspaper called The Liberator that he was trying to enlist his readers in "the great cause of human rights"[14] so the term human rights probably came into use sometime between Paine's The Rights of Man and Garrison's publication. In 1849 a contemporary, Henry David Thoreau, wrote about human rights in his treatise On the Duty of Civil Disobedience which was later influential on human rights and civil rights thinkers. United States Supreme Court Justice David Davis, in his 1867 opinion for Ex Parte Milligan, wrote "By the protection of the law, human rights are secured; withdraw that protection and they are at the mercy of wicked rulers or the clamor of an excited people."[15]

Many groups and movements have managed to achieve profound social changes over the course of the 20th century in the name of human rights. In Western Europe and North America, labour unions brought about laws granting workers the right to strike, establishing minimum work conditions and forbidding or regulating child labour. The women's rights movement succeeded in gaining for many women the right to vote. National liberation movements in many countries succeeded in driving out colonial powers. One of the most influential was Mahatma Gandhi's leadership of the Indian independence movement. Movements by long-oppressed racial and religious minorities succeeded in many parts of the world, among them the civil rights movement, and more recent diverse identity politics movements, on behalf of women and minorities in the United States.[citation needed ]

The foundation of the International Committee of the Red Cross, the 1864 Lieber Code and the first of the Geneva Conventions in 1864 laid the foundations of International humanitarian law, to be further developed following the two World Wars.

Between World War I and World War II

The League of Nations was established in 1919 at the negotiations over the Treaty of Versailles following the end of World War I. The League's goals included disarmament, preventing war through collective security, settling disputes between countries through negotiation, diplomacy and improving global welfare. Enshrined in its Charter was a mandate to promote many of the rights which were later included in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

The League of Nations had mandates to support many of the former colonies of the Western European colonial powers during their transition from colony to independent state.

Established as an agency of the League of Nations, and now part of United Nations, the International Labour Organization also had a mandate to promote and safeguard certain of the rights later included in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR):

After World War II

On the issue of "universal", the declarations did not apply to domestic discrimination or racism.[16] Henry J. Richardson III has argued:[17]

All major governments at the time of drafting the U.N. charter and the Universal declaration did their best to ensure, by all means known to domestic and international law, that these principles had only international application and carried no legal obligation on those governments to be implemented domestically. All tacitly realized that for their own discriminated-against minorities to acquire leverage on the basis of legally being able to claim enforcement of these wide-reaching rights would create pressures that would be political dynamite.

Universal Declaration of Human Rights

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is a non-binding declaration adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1948,[19] partly in response to the events of World War II. The UDHR urges member states to promote a number of human, civil, economic and social rights, asserting these rights are part of the "foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world". The declaration was the first international legal effort to limit the behavior of states and make sure they did their duties to their citizens following the model of the rights-duty duality.

...recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world

-  Preamble to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948

The UDHR was framed by members of the Human Rights Commission, with Eleanor Roosevelt as chair, who began to discuss an International Bill of Rights in 1947. The members of the Commission did not immediately agree on the form of such a bill of rights, and whether, or how, it should be enforced. The Commission proceeded to frame the UDHR and accompanying treaties, but the UDHR quickly became the priority.[20] Canadian law professor John Humprey and French lawyer Rene Cassin were responsible for much of the cross-national research and the structure of the document respectively, where the articles of the declaration were interpretative of the general principle of the preamble. The document was structured by Cassin to include the basic principles of dignity, liberty, equality and brotherhood in the first two articles, followed successively by rights pertaining to individuals; rights of individuals in relation to each other and to groups; spiritual, public and political rights; and economic, social and cultural rights. The final three articles place, according to Cassin, rights in the context of limits, duties and the social and political order in which they are to be realized.[20] Humphrey and Cassin intended the rights in the UDHR to be legally enforceable through some means, as is reflected in the third clause of the preamble:[20]

Some of the UDHR was researched and written by a committee of international experts on human rights, including representatives from all continents and all major religions, and drawing on consultation with leaders such as Mahatma Gandhi.[21] The inclusion of both civil and political rights and economic, social and cultural rights[20][22] was predicated on the assumption that basic human rights are indivisible and that the different types of rights listed are inextricably linked. Though this principle was not opposed by any member states at the time of adoption (the declaration was adopted unanimously, with the abstention of the Soviet bloc, Apartheid South Africa and Saudi Arabia), this principle was later subject to significant challenges.[22]

Because of the divisions over which rights to include, and because some states declined to ratify any treaties including certain specific interpretations of human rights, and despite the Soviet bloc and a number of developing countries arguing strongly for the inclusion of all rights in a so-called Unity Resolution, the rights enshrined in the UDHR were split into two separate covenants, allowing states to adopt some rights and derogate others. Though this allowed the covenants to be created, it denied the proposed principle that all rights are linked which was central to some interpretations of the UDHR.[23][24]

Human Rights Treaties

In 1966, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights ( ICCPR) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights ( ICESCR) were adopted by the United Nations, between them making the rights contained in the UDHR binding on all states.[26] However, they came into force only in 1976, when they were ratified by a sufficient number of countries (despite achieving the ICCPR, a covenant including no economic or social rights, the US only ratified the ICCPR in 1992).[27] The ICESCR commits 155 state parties to work toward the granting of economic, social, and cultural rights (ESCR) to individuals.

Numerous other treaties ( pieces of legislation) have been offered at the international level. They are generally known as human rights instruments. Some of the most significant are:

The United Nations

The United Nations (UN) is the only multilateral governmental agency with universally accepted international jurisdiction for universal human rights legislation.[29] All UN organs have advisory roles to the United Nations Security Council and the United Nations Human Rights Council, and there are numerous committees within the UN with responsibilities for safeguarding different human rights treaties. The most senior body of the UN with regard to human rights is the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. The United Nations has an international mandate to:

...achieve international co-operation in solving international problems of an economic, social, cultural, or humanitarian character, and in promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion.

Indivisibility and categorization of rights

The most common categorization of human rights is to split them into civil and political rights, and economic, social and cultural rights.

Civil and political rights are enshrined in articles 3 to 21 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and in the ICCPR. Economic, social and cultural rights are enshrined in articles 22 to 28 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and in the ICESCR. The UDHR included both economic, social and cultural rights and civil and political rights because it was based on the principle that the different rights could only successfully exist in combination:

This is held to be true because without civil and political rights the public cannot assert their economic, social and cultural rights. Similarly, without livelihoods and a working society, the public cannot assert or make use of civil or political rights (known as the full belly thesis).

Another categorization, offered by Karel Vasak, is that there are three generations of human rights: first-generation civil and political rights (right to life and political participation), second-generation economic, social and cultural rights (right to subsistence) and third-generation solidarity rights (right to peace, right to clean environment). Out of these generations, the third generation is the most debated and lacks both legal and political recognition. This categorisation is at odds with the indivisibility of rights, as it implicitly states that some rights can exist without others. Prioritisation of rights for pragmatic reasons is however a widely accepted necessity. Human rights expert Philip Alston argues:

He, and others, urge caution with prioritisation of rights:

Some human rights are said to be " inalienable rights". The term inalienable rights (or unalienable rights) refers to "a set of human rights that are fundamental, are not awarded by human power, and cannot be surrendered".

The adherence to the principle of indivisibility by the international community was reaffirmed in 1995:

This statement was again endorsed at the 2005 World Summit in New York (paragraph 121).

Universalism vs cultural relativism

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights enshrines, by definition, rights that apply to all humans equally, whichever geographical location, state, race or culture they belong to.

Proponents of cultural relativism suggest that human rights are not all universal, and indeed conflict with some cultures and threaten their survival.

Rights which are most often contested with relativistic arguments are the rights of women. For example, female genital mutilation occurs in different cultures in Africa, Asia and South America. It is not mandated by any religion, but has become a tradition in many cultures. It is considered a violation of women's and girl's rights by much of the international community, and is outlawed in some countries.

Universalism has been described by some as cultural, economic or political imperialism. In particular, the concept of human rights is often claimed to be fundamentally rooted in a politically liberal outlook which, although generally accepted in Europe, Japan or North America, is not necessarily taken as standard elsewhere.

For example, in 1981, the Iranian representative to the United Nations, Said Rajaie-Khorassani, articulated the position of his country regarding the UDHR by saying that the UDHR was "a secular understanding of the Judeo-Christian tradition", which could not be implemented by Muslims without trespassing the Islamic law.[77] The former Prime Ministers of Singapore, Lee Kuan Yew, and of Malaysia, Mahathir bin Mohamad both claimed in the 1990s that Asian values were significantly different from western values and included a sense of loyalty and foregoing personal freedoms for the sake of social stability and prosperity, and therefore authoritarian government is more appropriate in Asia than democracy. This view is countered by Mahathir's former deputy:

To say that freedom is Western or unAsian is to offend our traditions as well as our forefathers, who gave their lives in the struggle against tyranny and injustices.

- Anwar Ibrahim in his keynote speech to the Asian Press Forum title Media and Society in Asia, 2 December 1994

Singapore's opposition leader Chee Soon Juan also states that it is racist to assert that Asians do not want human rights.[78][79]

An appeal is often made to the fact that influential human rights thinkers, such as John Locke and John Stuart Mill, have all been Western and indeed that some were involved in the running of Empires themselves.[80][81]

Relativistic arguments tend to neglect the fact that modern human rights are new to all cultures, dating back no further than the UDHR in 1948. They also do not account for the fact that the UDHR was drafted by people from many different cultures and traditions, including a US Roman Catholic, a Chinese Confucian philosopher, a French Zionist and a representative from the Arab League, amongst others, and drew upon advice from thinkers such as Mahatma Gandhi.[22]

Although the argument between universalism and relativism is far from complete, it is an academic discussion in that all international human rights instruments adhere to the principle that human rights are universally applicable. The 2005 World Summit reaffirmed the international community's adherence to this principle:

State and non-state actors

Companies, NGOs, political parties, informal groups, and individuals are known as non-State actors. Non-State actors can also commit human rights abuses, but are not subject to human rights law other than International Humanitarian Law, which applies to individuals.

Multi-national companies play an increasingly large role in the world, and are responsible for a large number of human rights abuses.[83] Although the legal and moral environment surrounding the actions of governments is reasonably well developed, that surrounding multi-national companies is both controversial and ill-defined. Multi-national companies' primary responsibility is to their shareholders, not to those affected by their actions. Such companies are often larger than the economies of the states in which they operate, and can wield significant economic and political power. No international treaties exist to specifically cover the behavior of companies with regard to human rights, and national legislation is very variable. Jean Ziegler, Special Rapporteur of the UN Commission on Human Rights on the right to food stated in a report in 2003:

In August 2003 the Human Rights Commission's Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights produced draft Norms on the responsibilities of transnational corporations and other business enterprises with regard to human rights.[85] These were considered by the Human Rights Commission in 2004, but have no binding status on corporations and are not monitored.[86] Additionally, the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 10 aims to substantially reduce inequality by 2030 through the promotion of appropriate legislation.[87]

Human rights vs national security

With the exception of non-derogable human rights (international conventions class the right to life, the right to be free from slavery, the right to be free from torture and the right to be free from retroactive application of penal laws as non-derogable[88]), the UN recognises that human rights can be limited or even pushed aside during times of national emergency - although:

the emergency must be actual, affect the whole population and the threat must be to the very existence of the nation. The declaration of emergency must also be a last resort and a temporary measure

-  United Nations. The Resource[88]

Rights that cannot be derogated for reasons of national security in any circumstances are known as peremptory norms or jus cogens. Such International law obligations are binding on all states and cannot be modified by treaty.

Legal instruments and jurisdiction

The human rights enshrined in the UDHR, the Geneva Conventions and the various enforced treaties of the United Nations are enforceable in law. In practice, many rights are very difficult to legally enforce due to the absence of consensus on the application of certain rights, the lack of relevant national legislation or of bodies empowered to take legal action to enforce them.

There exist a number of internationally recognized organisations with worldwide mandate or jurisdiction over certain aspects of human rights:

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) is the United Nations' primary judiciary body.[89] It has worldwide jurisdiction. It is directed by the Security Council. The ICJ settles disputes between nations. The ICJ does not have jurisdiction over individuals.

The International Criminal Court (ICC) is the body responsible for investigating and punishing war crimes, and crimes against humanity when such occur within its jurisdiction, with a mandate to bring to justice perpetrators of such crimes that occurred after its creation in 2002. A number of UN members have not joined the court and the ICC does not have jurisdiction over their citizens, and others have signed but not yet ratified the Rome Statute, which established the court.[90]

The ICC and other international courts (see Regional human rights above exist to take action where the national legal system of a state is unable to try the case itself. If national law is able to safeguard human rights and punish those who breach human rights legislation, it has primary jurisdiction by complementarity. Only when all local remedies have been exhausted does international law take effect.[91]

In over 110 countries national human rights institutions (NHRIs) have been set up to protect, promote or monitor human rights with jurisdiction in a given country.[92] Although not all NHRIs are compliant with the Paris Principles,[93] the number and effect of these institutions is increasing.[94] The Paris Principles were defined at the first International Workshop on National Institutions for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights in Paris on 7-9 October 1991, and adopted by United Nations Human Rights Commission Resolution 1992/54 of 1992 and the General Assembly Resolution 48/134 of 1993. The Paris Principles list a number of responsibilities for national institutions.[95]

Universal jurisdiction is a controversial principle in international law whereby states claim criminal jurisdiction over persons whose alleged crimes were committed outside the boundaries of the prosecuting state, regardless of nationality, country of residence, or any other relation with the prosecuting country. The state backs its claim on the grounds that the crime committed is considered a crime against all, which any state is authorized to punish. The concept of universal jurisdiction is therefore closely linked to the idea that certain international norms are erga omnes, or owed to the entire world community, as well as the concept of jus cogens. In 1993 Belgium passed a law of universal jurisdiction to give its courts jurisdiction over crimes against humanity in other countries, and in 1998 Augusto Pinochet was arrested in London following an indictment by Spanish judge Baltasar Garzón under the universal jurisdiction principle.[96] The principle is supported by Amnesty International and other human rights organisations as they believe certain crimes pose a threat to the international community as a whole and the community has a moral duty to act, but others, including Henry Kissinger, argue that state sovereignty is paramount, because breaches of rights committed in other countries are outside states' sovereign interest and because states could use the principle for political reasons.[97]

Human rights violations

Human rights violations occur when any state or non-state actor breaches any of the terms of the UDHR or other international human rights or humanitarian law. In regard to human rights violations of United Nations laws. Article 39 of the United Nations Charter designates the UN Security Council (or an appointed authority) as the only tribunal that may determine UN human rights violations.[98]

Human rights abuses are monitored by United Nations committees, national institutions and governments and by many independent non-governmental organizations, such as Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, World Organisation Against Torture, Freedom House, International Freedom of Expression Exchange and Anti-Slavery International. These organisations collect evidence and documentation of human rights abuses and apply pressure to promote human rights.

Wars of aggression, war crimes and crimes against humanity, including genocide, are breaches of international humanitarian law.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Human rights are moral principles or norms [1] for certain standards of human behaviour and are regularly protected in municipal and international law.[2] They are commonly understood as inalienable,[3] fundamental rights "to which a person is inherently entitled simply because she or he is a human being"[4] and which are

# data[].attributes.body
How might we make a website to let children keep away from crime