GOOD GOVERNANCE AND HUMAN RIGHTS, A WRITEUP 

Good morning, everyone.

Today’s presentation is about good governance — and why promoting and respecting human rights is at the heart of it.

The group that I mentored looked into how human rights strengthen societies. We also conducted a small survey among you to see how well fundamental rights are being practiced. Unfortunately, the results weren’t very encouraging. But honestly, they reflect the kind of civic culture we’ve built over the years.

Human rights are meant for humans — not for a population that ranks 164th out of 193 countries on the Human Development Index. In our system, human rights seem to belong only to a privileged few — those who fit a certain mold set by the powerful.

Governance is not just about running institutions, but about ensuring justice, fairness, and public participation. Human rights are the backbone of dignity and equality. Together, they create a system where the state serves the people.

Our Constitution is one of the best constitutions, as far as human rights provisions are concerned.   The Constitution protects citizens and sets up the framework of the executive, legislature, and judiciary. It defines their powers and limits. It’s what separates democracy from tyranny, and liberalism from fascism. Instead of protecting our rights, it itself is susceptible to undue influences.

During a survey conducted by my previous atelier group, we tried to measure the existence of the rule of law. The result was 34 out of 200 — a number that speaks for itself. The survey on human rights showed almost the same trend. So, who’s responsible for this state of affairs? Not “them” — us. You and me. We are the hands through which the governments act.

A common citizen can commit a crime, yes — but not a human rights violation. A human rights violation occurs when someone with government authority breaches the rights protected by the Constitution, the law, or international human rights standards.

When a government makes laws or policies that clash with these rights, it’s directly responsible for violating them. When it fails to act against violations committed by its own officials, it’s indirectly responsible.

We, as a nation, are good at signing treaties and ratifying conventions. We’re even better at drafting laws and policies. But when it comes to implementation, our enthusiasm fades.

The organization I work with — the Centre for Governance Research and the National Initiative Against Organized Crime — has been assigned by UNODC to monitor Pakistan’s progress under the UN Convention Against Transnational Organized Crime (UNTOC).

In the first phase, we assessed how far we’ve gone in aligning our laws with the Convention. On paper, the results were excellent — almost a hundred percent compliance. But now that we’re reviewing how those laws are being implemented, we’re struggling to find the right words to describe the reality. Who is responsible for non-compliance? No one else but we, who are responsible for implementing the provisions of law. When we resort to extrajudicial actions, the common man follows suit. He has lost trust in all the essentials of governance. In democratic countries, when a person is wronged, he says, “ I shall see you in court”. But here he says, “ I shall see you on the doomsday”. I know for sure that every one of you believes in good governance, human rights, and fundamental freedoms, but feels at a loss practicing these values. So, let’s get started…