Educational Research (ISSN: 2141-5161) Vol. 2(8) pp. 1431-1437 August 2011
Available online@ http://www.interesjournals.org/ER
Copyright © 2011 International Research Journals
Full Length Research paper
A reflection of human rights issues in the junior and
senior secondary school social studies syllabi
(curricula) of public schools in Botswana: views of
inservice teachers at the University of Botswana
Koketso Jeremiah
BOX 404594 Gaborone, Botswana, Telephone: (267) 355 2972, Fax: (267) 318 5096
Email: jeremiahk@mopipi.ub.bw
Accepted 25 July, 2011
This study reports an investigation of the coverage of human rights by the junior and senior secondary
school Social Studies syllabi (curricula) of public schools in Botswana. Initially, a document analysis of
the two syllabi revealed that the coverage in the junior secondary school Social Studies syllabus was in
the ratio 1:35 and 2.8 in percentage. In the case of the senior secondary Social Studies syllabus, the
ratio was 1:38 and the percentage coverage was 2.6. The study surveyed 12 inservice Social Studies
teachers enrolled for the B.Ed. (Secondary) degree at the University of Botswana. The study sought to
investigate the views of the sampled inservice teachers on the coverage of human rights in the junior
and senior secondary school Social Studies syllabi as revealed by document analysis. The study
revealed that the sampled teachers knew the definition of human rights, and as it would be expected,
they had various definitions which differed only in wording, but in essence they were basically the
same. Furthermore, the study revealed that the inservice teachers knew the importance of studying
human rights in junior and senior secondary schools, and the difference between human rights and
civil rights. On the coverage of human rights on the two syllabi, respondents said it was low and
suggested that it be increased. Respondents also made various comments as to the status of the
coverage of human rights by the two syllabi. However, the most outstanding comments were: (1)
Human rights were so important that they needed to be protected and those who violated them should
be severely punished; and (2) Human rights should be effectively taught so that students should
thoroughly understand them. The findings had implications for a variety of stakeholders in the
education system including teachers, education policy makers and teacher training institutions.
Keywords: Syllabi, public schools, human rights, civil rights, Botswana.
INTRODUCTION
Human rights are entitlements that every human being is
entitled to because of being human. Examples include:
right to life, liberty, security of persons, freedom from
slavery or servitude, freedom from torture or cruel,
inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, and right
to recognition of someone as a person before the law.
Human rights are very important to humanity because if
respected they act as the basis for freedom, justice and
peace throughout the world. Once they are respected by
the international community, human rights promote an
array of development spheres, for example, social,
political, and economic development resulting in the
improvement of people’s standards of living (Isa and
Feyter, 2006; Universal Declaration of Human Rights
1848-1998, 2008; Mihr, 2009; Ishay, 2004). This paper
discusses the fact that the junior and senior secondary
Social Studies syllabi or curricula in Botswana do not
sufficiently deal with or cover the topic human rights. It
draws evidence from document analysis and interviews
with teachers. It is important to point out at this juncture
that respect for human rights will definitely ensure that
peace is achieved and maintained through the world
1432 Educ. Res.
(Lucas, 2009; Heistein, 2009; Harrison, 2011). The
syllabus or curriculum is an essential vehicle that can be
used to transmit knowledge and repect for human rights
throughout the world. The issue about coverage of
humjan rights by the Social Studies syllabi in Botswana is
just a starting point in that direction. This paper deals with
the theories of studying or understanding human rights
and the views of teachers as evidence that the topic
human rights is not sufficiently dealt with or covered in
both the junior and senior secondary schools’ Social
Studies syllabi, with particular reference to Botswana.
Theories of studying/understanding human rights
There are many theories of human rights. As a result,
only two of these will be discussed here. The first one is a
pure theory while the second one is not a theory per se
but a list of elements that the author considers inportant
for any theory of rights that is designed to be
comprehensive.
Hohfield’s theory of Rights – An Example of a theory
on human rights
In his theory, Hohfield (Rainbolt, 2001) distinquishes
between eight related elements (called relations) within
the rights domain and they are: claims, duties, liberties,
no-claims, powers, liabilities, immunities and disabilities.
These terms, according to Hohfield, coincide with legal
usage, that is, when used in legal language they suit well.
This Hohfieldian terminology is vital in that it allows
scholars and other interested readers to clearly
distinguish between different kinds of rights and hence
avoid confusion that arises in the classification of rights.
Hohfield’s theory is explained by referring to the owner
of a truck who has a claim against others that they do not
drive his/her truck; others have a duty to the owner of the
truck that they do not drive the truck. All Hohfieldian
elements or relations, as they are typically called, consist
of three parts or components: two agents and a content.
An example Hohfield gives to illustrate the operation of
claims and duties in the real world is as follows: Madeline
has a claim with respect to Geoff that Geoff not drive
Madeline’s truck. In this example, Madeline and Geoff are
the agents and the content is “that Geoff not drive
Madeline’s truck.” Geoff has a duty not to drive
Madeline’s truck. Claims and duties correlate, hence they
are referred to as correlatives. The driving of Madeline’s
car by Geoff, the action, is the content.
If Madeline sells or gives Geoff a pass to drive her
truck, then that pass grants Geoff a liberty to drive
Madeline’s truck. As a result of the pass, Madeline now
has a no-claim with respect to Geoff. Just like the
relationship between claims and duties, liberties and noclaims are correlatives. Rainbolt (2006) succinctly
summarizes this relationship when saying: “X has a
liberty with respect to Y that X do A if only if Y has a noclaim with repect to X that X do A”(p2).
Furthermore, Madeline can change Geoff’s duty to
refrain from driving her truck into a liberty do drive her
truck; she has the power to do so. Geoff has the
reponsibility to have his duty to refrain from driving
Madeline’s truck changed into a liberty to drive the truck;
this responsibility, which is also, to a certain extent, risky,
is termed liability (Rainbolt, 2006). A liability is a situation
that has the potential to put the culprit into trouble, if not,
precarious condition. Immunity exists when one cannot
change another person’s relation. For example, suppose
Madeline and Geoff do not know each other, that is, they
are strangers, would she allow Geoff to drive her car with
a self imposed liberty? Such a move would be illegal.
Since an act of that nature conducted by Geoff could not
change Madeline’s position of not allowing Geoff to drive
her truck, then Madeline enjoys immunity to Geoff’s
intention. Put in another way, Geoff’s inability to give
himself liberty to drive Madeline’s truck can also be
termed disability, because he is unable to do it.
Hohfieldian vocabulary is very useful as it allows readers,
researchers, human rights scholars, and others to
distinquish between various types of rights, for example,
claim-rights, immunity-rights, liberty-rights, and powerrights (For more on these, see Wellman, 1985).
(Hohfield’s theory appears in his book entitled
Fundamental Legal Conceptions, published in 2001.)
Another author who has written widely about rights is
Feinberg (1973). Feinberg, like other scholars on human
rights, has distinquished institutional rights from noninstitutional rights. According to Feinberg, institutional
rights are entitlements created by institutions such as
states, corporations, clubs and games.Human rights
created by institutions are created by law, which is also
an institution, although in a sense different from the
perspective in which institions such as corporations and
states are viewed. (It is hoped that the reader will
understand this distintion without problems.) Noninstitutional rights exist independent of, or are not
associated with, institutions. Non-institutional rights are
subdivided into several categories, for example, they
include conventional rights (those created by custom,
such as rules governing formation of a line or queue at a
ticket counter) and moral customs of a culture (for
example, in some cultures a man has a conventional right
to practise polygamy, i.e. marrying many wives). Moral
rights are those rights conferred on the basis of moral
rules and principles (Feinberg, 1973).
Understanding theories of human rights may be
complex because of their (rights) philosophical nature,
but it is worth acquiring if people are to understand
human rights and respect them so that peace can prevail
throughout the world. Sen’s (2004) theory follows below.
If one considers the questions or elements of this theory
each time he is reading a theory on human rights, then
Koketso 1433
the theory is more likely to be understood better.
Elements of a Theory of Human Rights (Sen, 2004)
The elements of this theory are, in fact, a number of
questions:
(1)
What kind of a statement does a declaration of
human rights make?
(2)
What makes human rights important?
(3)
What duties and obligations do human rights
generate?
(4)
Through what forms of actions can human rights
be promoted, and in particular whether legislation must
be principal, or even a necessary, means of
implementation of human rights?
(5)
Can economic and social rights (the so-called
second generation rights) be reasonably included among
human rights?
(6)
Last but not least, how can proposals of human
rights be defended or challenged, and how should their
claim to a universal status be assessed, especially in a
world with much cultural variation and widely diverse
practice? (Sen, 2004, p318-319).
Human rights are fundamentally ethical demands. They
are not largely related to legal demands, so they do not
always need legislation. Legislation, though necessary, is
not central to the realization of human rights. If legislation
is used, it is primarily on the periphery of human rights
enforcement (Sen, 2004). It (legislation) protects human
rights against violation.
The importance of human rights lies in the fact that they
are founded on freedoms, that is, freedoms are the
foundation (or basis) of human rights (Sen, 2004).
Human rights generate reasons for which human
rights-promoting (or safegaurding) agents refer to when
identifying obligations for the realization of human rights
to which certain duties are attached (Sen, 2004). In short,
human rights identify reasons which in turn identify
obligations and there are duties attached to these
obligations. These reasons can support both “perfect”
and “imperfect” obligations (Sen, 2004). Perfect
obligations are those that are specific such as the right
not to subject others to torture. The would-be torturer
simply needs to refrain or desist from subjecting others to
torture. That is a straightforward demand. However, the
ways in which the would-be torturer needs to do to
prevent or refrain from torturing others and the
suggestions that would be practically possible are not so
clear; these constitute a category of obligations referred
to as imperfect obligations (Sen, 2004).
There are various forms of actions through which
human rights can be promoted. Legislaion is obviously
one of them. Others include: public discussion, advocacy
and appraissal (Sen, 2004). Legislation involves enacting
laws to protect the violation of peoples’ rights or citizens.
Public discussion, advocacy, and appraisal are measures
that are often implemented by organizations to protect
the violation of human rights. Legislation deals with what
is often described as the “legislation” route. In the case of
protecting human rights carried out by organizations,
there are two distinct ways perculiar to the type of
organization involved. When the protection of human
rights is undertaken by the United Nations through the
enforcement of the demands of the Universal Declaration
of Human Rights (1948), this is termed the “recognition”
route.Non -governmental organizations such as Amnesty
International and Human Rights Watch promote (or
protect) human rights through activities that include
support (advocacy), publicising and criticizing human
rights violation. In some cases they organize public
discussions so people can exchange ideas and hence
understand human rights violations and devise some
strategies of promoting human rights. In all these
activities, appraisals are included to understand the
levels of human rights violations occurring in different
parts of the world. There are also some organizations,
though broad in their mandates, do also promote human
rights. These include OXFAM, Red Cross, Save the
Children, Action Aid, and Medicins Sans Frontier. These
organizations fall within what is called the “agitation”
route (Sen, 2004).
Human rights can include second generation rights.
Some second generation rights cannot be realized
because of lack of institutionalization but this does not
exclude them from the domain of human rights (Sen,
2004). Second generation rights include: social,
economic and cultural rights while first generation rights
include: civil and political rights.
Not all human rights are protected, defended or
challenged. Only those human rights that survive public
discussion are protected. These are human rights that
the general public feels they are important and should,
therefore, be respected across national boundaries or
globally (Sen, 2004). Understanding the theories of
human rights, the importance of human rights and ways
in which they may be protected is therefore fundamental.
That is why human rights are included in the junior and
senior seconadry school Social Studies syllabi in
Botswana and there is concern about the amount of their
coverage.
Coverage of Human Rights in the Junior and Senior
Secondary Social Studies Syllabi/Curriculla of
Botswana
In the Junior Certificate Social Studies Syllabus (Ministry
of Education, 1994) human rights are reflected under
General Objective: 6.1.1 which reads: Understand and
appreciate the basic principles of governing and the
rights and obligations of the governed at the national and
international levels. The specific objectives covered
under this general objective are: 6.1.1.1 Identify at least
1434 Educ. Res.
ten basic human values from the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights, 6.1.1.2 Describe the principles of a major
conflict in human values that resulted in war/armed
struggle in the last twenty years, 6.1.1.3 Describe how
the Front-line States and the Southern African
Decvelopment Community dedicate themselves to the
realisation of some basic human values or virtues, 6.1.1.4
Describe the ideal positive (based on mutual respect and
reciprocity) relationship between basic human values ,
those who govern and the governed, 6.1.1.5 Justify the
aggregation of basic human values through international
organisations and/or multi/bi-lateral agreements, and
6.1.1.6 Describe the major features of Botswana’s
constitution that relate to basic human rights and
responsibilities. In addition, human rights issues are
reflected under general objective 7.1.2 which reads:
Understand the forms, content and guidelines of
Botswana’s foreign policy and those for others toward
her. The specific objective that reflects human rights
issues in this general objective is 7.1.2.3 which reads:
Explain the major principles that guide Botswana’s
Foreign Policy (consideration for Botswana first, good
neighbourliness/peaceful coexistence, respect for human
rights, creed in non-interference in the internal affairs of
another country, non-alignment, respect of territorial
integrity of another state) (Ministry of Education, 1994).
These specific objectives that deal with human rights are
seven (7) in number out of a total of two hundred and
fourty-eight (248) specific objectives in the entire
curriculum or syllabus, a ratio of approximately 1:35, or
proportion of 2.8%. The rest of the specific objectives,
therefore, account for 97.2%.
With respect to Senior Secondary Social Studies
curriculum (syllabus) (Ministry of Education, 2006),
specific objectives that deal with human rights are
reflected in two general objectives which read: Know and
appreciate citizenship obligations and be ready for
effective participation at both local and national levels,
and: Know and appreciate the impact of globalization on
citizens and workout survival techniques. Human rights
related specific objectives that belong to the first general
objectives are: discuss rights and responsibilities of
citizens and describe the rights and responsibilities of the
state to citizens. Human rights specific objectives that
belong to the second general objective are: explain the
importance of the United Nations Charter of Human
Rights in promoting sound citizenry and evaluate the role
played by organizations such as: International Red
Cross, Amnesty International, International Court of
Justice, UN Peace Keeping Forces, SADC, EU, AU, etc.
in sustaining human life, dignity and peace. The latter
specific objective deals with organizations that work
towards promoting human rights throughout the world
(Ministry of Education, 2006). Specific objectives that
deal with human rights are four (4) out of a total of one
hundred and fifty-two (152) specific objectives in the
entire curriculum (syllabus), a ratio of approximately 1:38,
or proportion of 2.6%. The rest of the specific objectives,
therefore, account for 97.4%.
Statement of the Problem
Document analysis in the preeceding section shows that
specific objectives that reflect human rights account for
2.8 and 2.6% in the Botswana Junior and Senior
Secondary School Social Studies Syllabi, respectively
(Ministry of Education, Botswana, 1994; Ministry of
Education, Botswana, 2006). This study seeks to find out
the views of teachers on the coverage/reflection of
human rights in these two syllabi/curricula with regard to
these low coverage proportions or percentags.
Research Questions
1. What do teachers understand by the term human
rights?
2. What is the importance of studying human rights in
secondary schools in Botswana?
3. What is the difference between human rights and civil
rights?
4. Do teachers think the current coverage/reflection of
human rights in the junior and senior secondary school
Social Studies curricula is fair or adequate?
METHODOLOGY
A sample of 12 inservice teachers doing their fourth and
final year B.Ed (Secondary) degree was drawn. These
teachers had teaching experience in junior secondary
schools which averaged five (5) years. So, they were
adequately experienced. They all held a Diploma in
Seconadry Education which they had obtained from
Colleges of Education. They were enrolled largely to
upgrade their academic knowledge so that they could
perform better and at a higher level once they have
completed their studies. A questionnaire was
administered to the respondents. The questionnaire had
five (5) questions, all designed to capture qualitative data.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
Understanding the term Human Rights
The respondents gave varied answers to the question on
definition of human rights. They defined human rights as
shown on Table 1. The responses in Table are saying
the same thing, although expressed in different ways:
that human rights are entiltlements that human beings
enjoy simply because they are human.
Koketso 1435
Table 1: Definitions of human rights
Definition
(a) Human rights is when individuals
have the Liberty to enjoy themselves
without any Disturbance from the
state [country] which Is governed
(b) Rights which are accorded to
every individual Across the universe
regardless of race, status, Language
and country of origin
(c) Entitlements that people enjoy
because they Are human beings;
individuals are protected By these
rights to live a full normal and safe
life
(d) Basic (natural) rights that all
people are entitled To; God given
rights; natural rights that we are
Born with
(e) Things that give an individual a
set of rules of How to live; guidelines
for a democratic society
(f) Rights which try to help individuals
to enjoy Freedom
(g) Laws that cover human nature,
protect and provide Equality and
fairness in treating or dealing with
Human nature
(h) Basic necessities that give us our
worth as individuals. They have to do
with enjoyment of one’s freedom
Without hurting other people so that
there is peace
Frequency (f)
1
Percentage (%)
8.3
1
8.3
2
16.7
4
33.3
1
8.3
1
8.3
1
8.3
1
8.3
The importance of studying human rights in junior
and senior secondary schools in Botswana
All respondents (100%) said it was important that human
rights be studied in junior and senior secondary schools
in Botswana. All respondents gave basically the same
reason, though in varying expressions. They said that it
was important for human rights to be studied so that they
(students) could practice them or guard against their
violation by other people. The following are examples:
“It is important to be taught, students will be able to
exercise them and not impingy on another person’s
rights.”
“Because it will help students know their rights and
what they are entitled to. They will also help protect
students from abuse and oppression.”
“I think it is of paramount importance to secondary
school students as they will grow up with the knowledge
of human rights and be able to practice them.”
“Because people/students are made aware of their
rights as it is common for people to violate each other’s
rights.”
“This ensures peace and justice to human kind and by
studying them students will ensure that their rights are
not violated one way or another.”
The difference(s) between human rights and civil
rights
Respondents were asked to differentiate between human
rights and civil rights. All (100%) respondents gave
typically the same answer although varied in expression.
They said that human rights are those entitlements
accorded an individual because of being human. The
following are examples of their responses:
“Human rights are those rights accorded to every
indivindual regardless of origin, race, etc. while civil rights
are those rights or entitlements given to a citizen of a
country.”
“(They) are entitlements enjoyed by all humans
regardless of race, gender, etc. while civil rights are
1436 Educ. Res.
specific to a certain country only enjoyed by citizen(s).”
“Human rights are the same in the whole world, every
person in the world, have the same rights whereas civil
rights are formulated by the legislature, thus civil rights
vary from one country to another.”
“This [these] are God given and civil rights are
government given, civil right(s) might differ from one
country to the next whereas human rights do not differ.”
“Human rights are rights enjoyed by everyone globally
while civil rights [are] enjoyed by people of a particular
country.”
“Civil rights are our rights as citizens, the rights we are
entitled to, whereas human rights are our natural, born
rights.”
“Human rights are what [entitlements] each individual
must enjoy while civil rights are what [entitlements] a
citizen must enjoy from the state.”
Civil rights are protected by the constitution, and they
include: protection of a person against disrimination on
the basis of factors such as race, gender, national origin,
religion, and sexual orientation. The respondents were
corect when they said civil rights were those rights
enjoyed by citizens of a particular country.
Coverage of human rights in the Botswana Junior
and Senior secondary school Social Studies
Syllabi/Curricula
Document analysis indicates that human rights are
covered in the Botswana Junior secondary Social Studies
syllabus and the senior secondary Social Studies
syllabus in the proportions 2.8 and 2.6%, respectively.
Respondents were asked if this was a fair coverage, and
to give reasons for their responses. Most respondents
(11 or 91.7%) responded that the coverage in both
syllabi/curricula was not fair and gave several reasons,
basically (summarized) the following:
(a)
More time should be allocated to the teaching of
human rights in the syllabus.
(b)
Increase coverage of human rights in the
syllabus or alteranatively, human rights should be infused
in all subjects so that students should not think the
human rights concept is confined only to Social Studies.
(c)
Human rights should given a higher percentage
of coverage as at this stage students’ understanding of
human rights has improved.
One respondent (8.3%) said for the junior secondary
syllabus the coverage was fair since students only
needed to learn the basics of human rights at that stage
or level. In the case of coverage of human rights in the
senior secondary syllabus, the respondent said: “No, not
enough is covered”, implying that the percentage
coverage at that level needed to be increased.
Comments from respondents
The last question invited comments from the
respondents, vis-à-vis the items on the qesionnaire or
any issue that related to the study. The respondents
came up with varied comments, which include the
following:
(a) “Human rights are very important to us because they
give us our dignity and self-esteem.”
(b) “Human rights is [are] a critical issue so it need
[needs] to be effectively and efficiently taught in schools
so that pupils could relate and know human rights issues
relating to them and the world as [at] large.”
(c) “In deep democracy human rights are not suppressed
with the use of the armed forces.”
(d) “Human right is a very important topic; hence it
should not be taught in an abstract manner.”
(e) “Stern action should be taken to [against] those who
violate human rights.”
(f) “Human rights should be effectively taught in schools
to help students understand themselves and their
surroundings.”
These statements emphasize the importance of huma
rights and urge us to know them and respect or protect
them. The statements further warn us against violating
human rights and suggest that those caught violating
them should be punished.
CONCLUSION
All respondents defined the term ‘human rights’
appropriately even though they used varied terminology
or expressions. Though they used different expressions,
repondents gave the true essence of the importance of
studying human rights in junior and senior secondary
schools in Botswana: that they (respondents) needed to
know their rights so that, in the course of practising them,
they could guard against their (rights) violation by others.
Respondents were able to differentiate between human
rights and civil rights – that human rights were those
entitlements accorded an individual because of being
human and that civil rights were accorded an individual
by the laws of the nation to which he/she was a citizen.
Laws in this context refer essentially to constitutions. As
to whether the coverage of human rights in both the
junior and the senior secondary school Social Studies
syllabi/curricula was fair, most respondents said it was
not fair and recommended, among others, that the
coverage (percentage/proportion) should be increased to
enhance students’understanding of human rights, and
inadvertently, civil rights. Additional comments from the
respondents underscored the importance of human rights
to students, who are future citizens (and leaders) of any
Koketso 1437
nation. The theories of Sen (2004) and Hohfield (2001),
and others (for example, Feinberg, 1973), if understood,
can greatly enhance the understanding of human rights in
the context in which they have been dealt with here and
also in similar contexts outside this sphere of human
rights.
Implications of the findings
The findings of this study have implications for teachers,
teacher education/training institutions, policy makers and
other interested persons and readership. The folowing
are some of the identified implications:
1. Teachers should, where possible, and if the
education policy allows (or other factors, for example,
time constraints), add (infuse) more issues of human
rights as they teach Social Studies.
2. Some teachers have suggested that human rights
issues be taught across subjects in all public junior and
senior secondary schools.
3. Teachers should influence policy makers, through an
appropriate forum, to include more human rights issues
as part of curricula reform.
4. Teacher training institutions should ensure that all
teacher trainees of Social Studies, both pre-service and
inservice take courses on human rights issues before
they graduate.
REFERENCES
Feinberg J (1973). Social Philosophy. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: PrenticeHall.
Harrison J (2011). Human Rights Measurement: Reflections on the
Current Practice and Future Potential of Human Rights Impact
Assessment. J. Human Rights Pract. 3(2):162-187.
Heistein J (2009). Global Youth Connect: A model of youth activism on
behalf of human rights, education and health. Couns.Psychol. Q.
22(1):41-46.
Hohfield WN (2001). Fundamental Legal Conceptions as Applied in
Judicial Reasoning. Burlington, VT: Dartmouth Publishing Company
and Ashgate Publishing Limited.
Isa FG, Feyter K (Editors) (2006). International Protection of Human
Rights: Achievements And Challenges. Bilbao: University of Deusto.
Ishay MR (2004). What are human rights? Six historical controversies.
J. Human Rights. 3 (3): 359-371
Lucas AG (2009). Teaching about Human Rights in the Elementary
Classroom Using the Book A Life Like Mine: How Children Live
around the World. The Social Studies. Pp. 79-84
Mihr A (2009). Global Human Rights Awareness, Education and
Democratization. J. Human Rights. 8:177-189
Ministry of Education, Botswana. (1994). Three-year Junior Certificate
Social Studies Syllabus.Gaborone: Government Printer.
Ministry of Education, Botswana. (2006). Botswana General Certificate
of Secondary Education Teaching Syllabus: Social Studies.
Gaborone: Government Printer.
United Nations General Assembly. (2009). Universal Declaration of
Human
Rights
1948-1998.
Available
at:
http://www.udhr.org/UDHR/udhr.HTM [Accessed 7/21/2010].
Sen M (2004). Elements of a Theory of Human Rights. Philosophy and
Public Affairs. 32(2):315-356.
Rainbolt GW (2006). Rights Theory. Philosophy Compass 1. 300:1-11.
Wellman C (1985). A Theory of Rights: Persons under Laws,
Institutions, and Morals. Totowa: Rowman and Allanheld.