Revisiting interdependence in times and terms of crisis

Abstract

Scholars and lawyers have long debated the meaning of the interdependence of human rights. Revisiting that question in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic demonstrates both that the substantive enjoyment of many human rights is practically interdependent and that that relationship is neither logically nor functionally necessary, as much of the literature imagines. This article introduces the idea of negative interdependence, a term that highlights how crises can trigger chain reactions of rights violations and deprivations that disproportionately affect oppressed and vulnerable people. It argues that negative interdependence provides a crucial analytical and critical framework for the political project of securing the equal enjoyment of human rights for everyone.

Notes

1 “Since human rights and fundamental freedoms are indivisible, the full realization of civil and political rights without the enjoyment of economic, social and cultural rights is impossible. The achievement of lasting progress in the implementation of human rights is dependent upon sound and effective national and international policies of economic and social development” (International Conference on Human Rights 1968).

2 Whelan attributed this sanctity only to indivisibility; I have taken the liberty of applying his description to the entire locution.

3 Scott explored the possibility that, legally, interdependence might be understood as a kind of interpretive permeability among rights, a fascinating argument I cannot engage here (see Quane 2012).

4 Basic rights are just those necessary to the secure enjoyment of (all) other rights (Shue 1996).

5 It is impossible to provide absolute surety; attempts to do so would lead to myriad inefficiencies and absurdities. It is better to think probabilistically about minimizing the likelihood of violations (see Shue 1996; Pogge 1999, 2000).

6 I use the term “negative interdependence” to contrast this empirical focus on insecurity from claims that the actual enjoyment of rights is conditioned on the enjoyment of other rights.

7 For a discussion of a democratic methodologies for analyzing injustice, see Goodhart (2018: 139–162) and Ackerly (2018).

8 See Pittsburghers for Public Transit (PPT 2020a).

9 For transparency, I want to disclose that I am a member (financial supporter) of PPT and also of the steering committee for the Pittsburgh Human Rights City Alliance, in which PPT participates.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Michael Goodhart

Michael Goodhart is professor of political science at the University of Pittsburgh and director of its Global Studies Center.