Human Rights

The word democracy, contrary to its antonym autocracy, became progressively sacred-saint.

I grew up in the socialist communism and moulded in a transitional democracy.

Until now, it remains debatable to me, what for real we have been transitioning towards.

Because what has been will not be anymore. Law of a perpetual forming and reforming, or else the principle of movement undergirding the firmament where our existence may come to flesh and light simply prohibits that.

Not possible to allow the same circumstance to shape our reality twice.

The more if it was for real somewhere else and we have just copypasted it. 

The even more, if it was not for real at all, just a utopic scenario, and yet copypasted.

So the outcome of the process will become all over divergent of any of our dare-devilish outlooks.

My way of seizing reality manifests at a deep level of my mind and usually results in fruitful processual thinking.

The visualisation of a process often becomes a stumbling block; when the people talk the progress made, they evaluate from the hindsight, scolding opponents of "not have been able to make enough to induce a notable reversal again" while relaying "from scratch due unreal mess inferred again".

Bipartisanship beyond the horizon when political, economic or otherwise influential stakes are high; political parties frenziedly undertake as many pushbacks on the counterpart as possible.

Whilst at the power they gradually reduce their visionary offset to few workarounds having cut down to size to a jammer of one another.

Hence the things can seemingly be stuck for years, even for decades.

Yet, for nothing is de facto numb, "we" compounding spirits and souls can only grow or wither. 

To upgrade or fall back down on the previous spiritual level where we are still able to keep the control.

My experience teaches me that I can split people into two categories: those who bear the feeling for human rights within, and those, who do not.

You could argue, the facts are more grey than this.

I would oppose, in this case, they are not, within a stretch of one human life. With one addition: the people with strong human rights awareness tend to fuse with the environment harmoniously and forget about themselves by helping others. Those without not always like separation, but separation is what they ultimately achieve.

Empathy expands. This is a natural course of events unless the jammers have interfered.

The mingling ignites the propensity of the human rights-aware within a particular population. That pushes resisting minds to an unbearable exclusion what makes the anti-rights approach less and less popular.

Having said that, human rights-aware are not necessarily who scream the most.

Particularly, not those ones who at the behest of a false ego subvert the efforts to alter the corrupt status quo.

On the contrary, human rights-aware strive for balance to be found on the cross junction of the horizontal and the vertical, dwelling on the personal cross while meddled in the chaotic events, able to accept the burden as it is. Focused on surmounting the challenges rather than talking endlessly how others block them to come over.

They use the time they have, striving to make the next time better than the last time, rendering the next day ever meaningful than yesterday.

The other category, on the other hand, spans from 10 to 1 from the most egomaniacal examples of history to the undercover psychos, on the surface friendly and warm, in the inner space, however, to catch the attention ready to blow themselves in any imaginable way.

Despite the vast lecture they spread wherever they are, they prefer the intake, not to partake. To incarcerate, not liberate.

Foggy prospects as regards their transformation, nonetheless the life circumstance and growing experience provide for a chance to mould.

And believe or not, it can happen. Once they accept occasional or frequent setbacks as an opportunity to change or come across someone with higher evolved consciousness than theirs.

Because the one who aids must be at least at the same level as you are. Moreover, the one chipping in for uplift thus breaking your karma must be above your level.

That is why it is so important, whom we hang around with.

Having said that, the karma poke comes true either as an effect of the auto-propped universal laws or through a higher-than-you being. Or both.

Its effect can reverberate in multiple ways, unfolding unpredictably and sweepingly it is called black swan or force majeure.

Enjoying human rights entails visiting their flip side, a corresponding obligation.

In a democracy, once an idea pops in one's enlightened mind, the natural course of events would be to verify the solution by the legal team following governmental steps closely, by default.

Before it will be laid down or provided by law, an independent national institution may also be mandated to scrutinise leaders' creativity or innovation.

For sake of human rights scrutiny, such institution may constitute a by public funds established human rights institute, an independent national human rights institution or a human rights department of a respective ministry spelling out the idea or a proposal.

After having the operational or legislative proposal duly annotated or questioned by state administration or other governmental bodies, it ought further to be submitted to upon private or mixt funds operated bodies and institutions, i.e. foundations, associations and NGOs, for a shorter or longer public consultation. Along this way, they will get pronounced upon the substance of the matter from the view angle of their business purpose.

This is how the extrajudicial way is shaped in general.

We can observe that in recent time, this ordinary course of events is not maintained or even skipped over in many countries, incl. the mine.

The operational, legislative or by decree constituted changes are not disclosed in a timely, effective, transparent way to have them consulted by the relevant stakeholders.

Who weighs in are all but people with the business scope human rights, and what it scales up is the exacerbation of negative feelings across all social networks.

The measures aggressively limiting free enjoyment of fundamental rights and freedoms are consulted a posteriori.

Many times, public witnesses contradicting, opposing legal standpoints whilst the to-be-regulated operation has already been launched and the unduly debated human rights limitations put in full swing.

Triggered to flatten the pandemics curve, governmental manoeuvres have multiple times acknowledged that legal intervention and formal checks lag.

It not only undermines the due process of creation of law; persisting doubts upon the legal base for the adoption of highly intrusive emergency measures have proven as correct: the legal base was often insufficient and had to be adjusted or even formed ex-post.

Money does not outweigh everything and not all can be adequately outweighed.

Supreme or Constitutional courts' decisions post validating or dissenting the measures do not come to the effect of prevention.

And the general public has stayed non-informed or ill-informed way to too long time.

This all casts dubiety upon the current efficiency of the enacted checks and balances of the state of law, wherever it is deemed to be instaurated, in mine and many other countries.

This is unacceptable: each government must hence sweep before the door properly, remodel hierarchical asymmetry of the decision-making by a few at the top and the rest taken as inexpedient administrative clerks, duly balance the powers and keep the by the law prescribed deadlines for consultation.

And above all, water down the rising communication chaos before it leaks.

The whir leakage is already devastating; veal-fattened pigs who call themself officials must go, and politicking to stop.

Bad articulation of issues, professional negligence and theatrical exhibitions have already cost too many lives.

It has compromised us, indirectly executed many and we must say stop.

Do not allow further infraction into your right to life.

No death penalty.

European Charter of Fundamental Rights

Article 2 - Right to life

1. Everyone has the right to life

2. No one shall be condemned to the death penalty or executed.