Human Rights and Climate Change in England

                        When it comes to human rights, England is far ahead of its time. In fact, the history of human rights in the United Kingdom dates back farther than any other country in the world. King John of England issued the Magna Carta, a major proponent of human rights legislature, in 1215. This document became known for its support of habeas corpus, whereby a human being cannot be detained or imprisoned unlawfully. In the 1600s John Locke, an influential Englishman of the Enlightenment insisted that life, liberty, and possessions were properties of a human being that were unalienable.  He is quoted as saying that every person is equal and free but may have to exchange some of their liberties to advance in society. Locke also assisted in authorizing England’s Bill of Rights in 1689, which prohibited cruel and unusual punishment and created a shift toward the rule of law – limiting the power of the monarch and government officials. In comparison to modern times, not much has changed. England is still at the forefront of the human rights movement, is home to some of the most influential human rights activists, and continues to issue legislation in support of the rights of it’s citizens. However, when it comes to environmentalism the country unfortunately lags behind.

            “You have the right to enjoy your property peacefully,” reads Protocol 1, Article 1 of the Human Rights Act, issued in 1998 and adopted by the United Kingdom in 2000. This Act is composed of sections that codify the protections established by the European Convention of Human Rights, an international treaty overseen by the European Council and focused on protecting human freedoms. Unfortunately, Protocol 1, Article 1 does not ensure a clean and healthy environment for those whose properties it protects. Rachel Godfrey a research intern at the Institution of Environmental Sciences, wrote in her article The Political Aspects of Environmentalism inthe U.K. that, “Environmental activists are silenced once economic stability and success is seen to be under threat and the voices of those arguing that the economic costs of environmental protection are too great to carry greater weight (Godfrey 8).” Environmentalism is a human rights practice that is consistently placed on the back burner when it becomes too costly.  In fact, it seems somewhat ironic that an issue affecting all human beings is not valued as priceless.

            That’s not to say there aren’t any English organizations attempting to change this injustice. The Human Rights Watch is a nonprofit nongovernmental international org that was established in 1978. The Watch works extensively with local groups to press for changes in policy and promote human rights. According to the organization’s website, “As the world urbanizes and industrializes, and as effects of climate change intensify, environmental crises will increasingly devastate the lives, health, and livelihoods of people around the globe. A lack of legal regulation and enforcement of industrial and artisanal mining, large-scale dams, deforestation, domestic water and sanitation systems, and heavily polluting industries can lead to a host of human rights violations.” The HRW has intervened in Kenya when a factory poisoned a community:

They have also been actively combatting Zimbabwe’s water and sanitation crisis:

The Human Rights Watch also sets a perfect example for combatting eurocentrism. Although based in England, they are proactive across the globe and intervene in a variety of right movements including: Children’s Rights, Disability Rights, LGBT Rights, and Women’s Rights. More specifically, they act in coherence with Farish A. Noor’s article Beyond Eurocentrism, which states, “In our rapidly changing global environment, we are now confronted with stark socio-political realities that cannot be simply ignored. Lifestyle and quality of life vary significantly among different sections of the globe. The lifestyles pursued in many of the developed areas of the world community have serious consequences for other areas of the world as well (Noor 49).”

            Why is it that a country known throughout the history of the world as being a major player in the human rights movement is so lenient when it comes to an emerging issue as urgent as that of environmentalism? Although there are organizations in addition to the Human Rights Watch that are beginning to recognize and combat the effects of waste and climate change in third world countries around the world, what they must realize is that change starts with those of us who have the means to make a difference. If countries like England do not take proactive measures themselves they cannot successfully implement these measures in countries like Kenya and Zimbabwe who are dealing with the brunt of these environmental issues.