Human Rights In Post World Wars Era
Earlier, human beings as such had no rights under the traditional international law, which was defined as the law which govern relations between States. This theory about the nature of international law had a number of consequences as far as individual is concerned like treatment of the individual was limited to the domestic jurisdiction of each State and Stateless person does not enjoyed any protection under traditional international law. However, this theory had exception like intervention of other State on humanitarian ground, limitation of sovereignty by treaty and mandates system under the league of nation
The idea of human rights emerged stronger after World War II. The extermination by Nazi Germany of over six million Jews, Sinti and Romani (gypsies), homosexuals, and persons with disabilities horrified the world. Trials were held in Nuremberg and Tokyo after World War II, and officials from the defeated countries were punished for committing war crimes, "crimes against peace," and "crimes against humanity." Neither utilitarism nor scientific positivism, the philosophies that had undermined the natural rights concept, could address the problems. The dominant political paradigm, realism, could not find national interest violated. The language of human rights seemed more appropriate. After the war, the Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunal introduces the subject of gross human rights violations to the international relations. The individual German soldiers were charged of crimes against humanity.The revival of the concept of human rights can thus be seen as a reaction to the horrors of the War. During the next decades, human right movement saw three waves of activism, which can be divided into three phases :

1. Normative Foundation – The first wave got its momentum from the horrors of the World War II. In the aftermath of the war, the United Nations Charter included promotion of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms among the principal purposes of the organization. The UN moved quickly to formulate international human rights norms. In 1948 the Assembly adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR).

The UDHR, commonly referred to as the international Magna Carta, extended the revolution in international law ushered in by the United Nations Charter – namely, that how a government treats its own citizens is now a matter of legitimate international concern, and not simply a domestic issue. It claims that all rights are interdependent and indivisible. Its Preamble eloquently asserts that:

“WHEREAS 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…..”

The influence of the UDHR has been substantial. Its principles have been incorporated into the constitutions of most of the more than 185 nations now in the UN. Although a declaration is not a legally binding document, the Universal Declaration has achieved the status of customary international law because people regard it "as a common standard of achievement for all people and all nations."

During that time League of Nations existed but it was weak and lacked the power to deal with human rights issues and therefore it was expected that the UN Charter shall provide an effective international systems for the protection of human rights but this did not happen because of opposition from the major problems as they had serious problems of their own at that time whereas smaller countries favoured the inclusion of Bill of Rights in the Charter, lacked the political influence. Consequently, the human rights provisions of the Charter as adopted in San Francisco were weak and vague. However, despite the vagueness, the human rights provisions of the Charter had a number of important consequences namely;
a) The Charter internationalized the concept of human rights, though all the matters did not ipso facto come out of domestic jurisdiction
b) Secondly, the obligation of the member States of the UN to cooperate with the organization in the promotion of human rights provided the UN with the requisite legal authority to undertake a massive effort to define and codify these rights.
c) Further, the success of the UN effort is reflected with the adoption of the International Bill of Rights and in the vast number of international human rights instruments in existence today.
2. Institution Building – The 2nd stage in the evolution of international human rights law began in the late 1960s and continued for 15 to 20 years. The second wave of activism was influenced by the newly independent states of Africa and Asia. There were some important conventions and covenants established during the decade: Together with the Declaration the Covenants form the essential written core of international human rights norms. These apart, during this period, two distinct developments took place within the UNs framework. The first focussed on the nature of human rights obligation which article 55 and 56 created for the member States. The phrase “to promote” was somewhat vague but the vagueness was removed by the adoption of ECOSOC resolutions
With the goal of establishing mechanisms for enforcing the UDHR, the UN Commission on Human Rights proceeded to draft two treaties: the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and its optional Protocol and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR). Together with the Universal Declaration, they are commonly referred to as the International Bill of Human Rights. In addition to the covenants in the International Bill of Human Rights, the United Nations has adopted more than 20 principal treaties further elaborating human rights. These include conventions to prevent and prohibit specific abuses like torture and genocide and to protect especially vulnerable populations, such as refugees , women, and children . In Europe, the Americas, and Africa, regional documents for the protection and promotion of human rights extend the International Bill of Human Rights. These documents have powerfully demonstrated a surge in demand for respect of human rights. Popular movements in China, Korea, and other Asian nations reveal a similar commitment to these principles.

3. Implementation and the Post Cold War Period – Although the latter half of the 20th century saw a rapid development of human rights norms-setting in international venues, the political agenda of the Cold War did not favour the issue. The human rights issues remained highly polarized and politicized, as the East and West had countering opinions and the South its own views. The third wave was triggered by the revulsion against the overthrow of the Allende government in Chile in 1973, the fact that Covenants of 1966 entered into force and the beginning of the Carter presidency in the US. In the 1970's the US foreign aid was linked to the human rights performance of the recipients. The middle of the 1970's saw also the rise of the human rights non-governmental organizations such as Amnesty International. The end of Cold War freed many nations in Europe from communist rule permitting them to embark on a process of democratic transformation. The end of the Cold War and its effect on human rights is reflected in part in the text of 1993 Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action adopted at the World Conference on human rights held in Vienna in June, 1993.

The ending of the Cold War in the beginning of 1990's has meant changes in the activity and functioning of the human rights regime. Human rights have become more visible in the political language and the institutions are now more active. It seems there is a new wave of human rights activism going on. Both the General Assembly and Human Rights Commission have become more active. Most importantly, the UN goals of peace-keeping and human-rights protection have become increasingly combined. During the Cold War, genocide in places such as Burundi, East Pakistan and Cambodia were met only by verbal expressions of concern. Now, peace-keepers in El Salvador, Haiti, Guatemala and Rwanda have explicit mandates to investigate human rights violations. Rwanda and Yugoslavia have international tribunals to handle the charges against human rights criminals, first time after Nuremberg.

International human rights commitments is still enmeshed with the complex patterns of international politics, and it is easy to point out cases of janus-faced will to act in some cases and withdraw in some other. The war in Iraq, which was partly justified by human rights claims and the international unwillingness to interfere in Sudan's genocidal civil war is a good example.

However, after the end of the Cold War the international willingness to use the human rights language in international power politics has become larger. Even if this rhetoric hides the true intentions, it tells something about the accepted values of our times.

Governments then committed themselves to establishing the United Nations, with the primary goal of bolstering international peace and preventing conflict. People wanted to ensure that never again would anyone be unjustly denied life, freedom, food, shelter, and nationality. The essence of these emerging human rights principles was captured in President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s 1941 State of the Union Address when he spoke of a world founded on four essential freedoms: freedom of speech and religion and freedom from want and fear. The calls came from across the globe for human rights standards to protect citizens from abuses by their governments, standards against which nations could be held accountable for the treatment of those living within their borders. These voices played a critical role in the San Francisco meeting that drafted the United Nations Charter in 1945.

These apart, the post world war era witnessed a new form of human rights in which has been termed as collective rights or group rights. These rights protect and promote the cause of the vulnerable groups namely; women, children, disabled, minorities etc.

Conclusion
Human rights are fundamental to the stability and development of countries all around the world. Great emphasis has been placed on international conventions and their implementation in order to ensure adherence to a universal standard of acceptability. With the advent of globalization and the introduction of new technology, these principles gain importance not only in protecting human beings from the ill-effects of change but also in ensuring that all are allowed a share of the benefits. The impact of several changes in the world today on human rights has been both negative and positive. In particular, the risks posed by advancements in science and technology may severely hinder the implementation of human rights if not handled carefully. In the field of biotechnology and medicine especially there is strong need for human rights to be absorbed into ethical codes and for all professionals to ensure that basic human dignity is protected under all circumstances. For instance, with the possibility of transplanting organs from both the living and dead, a number of issues arise such as consent to donation, the definition of death to prevent premature harvesting, an equal chance at transplantation etc. Genetic engineering also brings with it the dangers of gene mutation and all the problems associated with cloning. In order to deal with these issues, the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Dignity of the Human Being with Regard to the Application and Medicine puts the welfare of the human being above society or science.[41]

However the efficacy of the mechanisms in place today has been questioned in the light of blatant human rights violations and disregard for basic human dignity in nearly all countries in one or more forms. In many cases, those who are to blame cannot be brought to book because of political considerations, power equations etc. When such violations are allowed to go unchecked, they often increase in frequency and intensity usually because perpetrators feel that they enjoy immunity from punishment.