Y. Immanuel Rajakumar*
ABSTRACT
This paper discusses the global rules and policies with respect to norms and standards of international human rights law. In the context of the WTO, this involves examining the WTO agreement and its annexes- such as the agreement on trade related aspects of intellectual property rights or general agreement on trade in services for their compatibility with human rights. In the context of the World Bank and the IMF , it involves examining their macro-economic policies and poverty reduction strategies for compatibility with human rights law. This paper finds out some rational policy measures to overcome the negative effects of globalization on human rights particularly policy measures relating to protection of rights of indigenous farmers, social, educational and employment rights of the people.

* Assistant Professor of History Wing, DDE, Annamalai University.

 

INTRODUCTION
The first step is an examination of globalization rules and policies for their compatibility with the principles . norms and standards of international human economic right Law of the WTO, this involves examining the WTO agreement and its annexes – such as the agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, and the General Agreement on Trade in services –for their compatibility with human rights. In the context of the World Bank or the IMF, it involves examining their macro-economic policies and poverty reduction strategies for their compatibility with human rights law. It creates a situation to find some solution to the following questions.
·    Are the rules and policies discriminatory in any way?
·    Do they include public interest safeguard?
·    Do they include specific references to the promotion and protection of human rights?
·    Do they promote popular participation in decision- making processes?
·    Do they include mechanisms for special treatment for poorer countries?
·    How do they address impact on the poor?
Impact on Socio-Economic Rights
Globalization has resulted in gross human rights violations for millions of workers particularly women workers, peasants and farmers, and indigenous communities. It has also resulted in serious impairment of the Right to development of countries.  So far as workers are concerned , globalization has resulted in the violation of the fundamental right to work. In their drive for profit, companies, particularly MNCs, have been restructuring their operations on the global scale. The result has been massive  unemployment. In 1995, the ILO announced that one-third of the world’s willing-to-work population was either underemployed or unemployed, the worst situation since the 1930s.
Globalization has also engendered or accentuated the process of the casualization of labour and the informalization of labour. Employers are increasingly resorting to employ workers on part-time, short-term, contracts. They are also resorting to the informal economy by forming out or sub-contracting work, eg. in textiles and electronics. More ominously, many factories which were previously part of the formal economy have moved their operations entirely to non-unionized workforces in new locations and / or sub-contracted units. Here , not only are the wages low , but the legal protection of workers is minimal.
Globalization with its demand for “flexible” labour, has resulted in the “ferminization of labour”.  The point is that the overwhelming majority of female labour is concentrated in low-wage industries such as textile, clothing and foot-wear production. Workers in such industries are not only inadequately protected as rewards health and safety, but they also do not enjoy security of employment in view  to cut costs. Thus, textile workers in South Korea have been retrenched as the result of the relocation of their factories to countries such as Bangladesh and Vietnam.
Mention must also be made here of the fact that the impact of globalization on traditional cottage industries has also adversely affected women workers. Thus, cheap imports have resulted in the closure of a nimber of such industries in India and Pakistan and the retrenchment of the women workers. Globalization has, by intensifying the tendencies towards uneven development of the phenomenon of migrant workers. Such workers especially those who cross national frontiers are subject to a whole range of human rights violations – discrimination, absence of labour protection, low wages, and physical abases and in the case of women sexual abuse.
Globalization poses a serious threat to the right of livelihood of millions of traditional farmers.  As the hitherto protected agricultural sector also, in compliance with the requirements of the GATT Final Act, opened up to imports and as land laws are revised to facilitate corporate farming, there will be inevitable  large-scale displacement of such communities. Fears have also been expressed that the patenting of seeds by multinationals such as Cargill will result in traditional farmers being displaced. This concern has given rise to massive demonstration by farmers, particularly in India. All these developments, and in particular the drive under the WTO regime to make access to food mainly dependent upon market mechanisms, are a threat to food security – the most fundamental of all human rights.
Globalization has provided a new impetus to the destruction of the habitat and livelihood of indigenous communities in many countries. The continuing displacement of such communities will give a consequence of the intensification of such economic activities as mining and logging is a grim reminder of such violations of human rights.
Globalization discourages the role of government in promotion of public welfare. It could be noted that the World Bank’s belief that government should only provide minimum level of social protection. The concern of the OCED Development Assistance Committee to Focus Funding on only basic education and health care. The self-interest of international NGOs in substituting for government provision of services and the move being made within the WTO to open the global market in private health care, education and social insurance.
The unemployment and privatization must be a cause for concern to developing countries, especially low income countries which are reputed to have very large public sector employment. The government of India has introduced voluntary retirement scheme for government employees in the surplus tool in the land mark of downsizing of the departments. Globalization has segmented social policy in the developing countries, due to the presence of different types of social policies in different countries and thereby created zones of exclusion.
Globalization has bought a number of undesirable consequences. These include increased inequality both within and between countries and increased impoverishment, increased vulnerability of people to social risks such as unemployment and crime and changes of exclusion of people, communities, countries and religion from the benefit of globalization. The developed nations are interesting to improve their well-being. This undermines the recipient governments to provide the social service, thereby they preclude the government of third world from implementing human rights obligations. If a government is unable to raise revenue to meet its human rights obligation and it is social injustice.
The full range of health and social services from Child Care Centres, non-profit hospitals and community clinics to private labs and independent physician would have been covered by multilateral agreement on investment. Applying the Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI) rules to grant and subsidies would have considerably restricted the ability of national and regional authorities to manage and regulate health and social services by attracting conditions to the receipt of public money. According to MAI, if a foreign based health or social service providers operating in a country to receive public grants and subsidies on the same terms as similar that of local providers. In the area of international trade and finance, the distribution of benefits has been increasingly skewed in favours of rich countries who have forced others to open up their markets while maintaining their protectionist tendencies. Many countries have begun to find that ignoring the political dimensions of globalization and its costs. Any distortion in this direction could have the effects of reversing economic growth with gross consequences like throwing millions out of work and in same cases embroiling a country ethinic violence as well leaving million below poverty line.
Globalization has generated severe indebtedness. It undermines the capacity of governments to provide educations, health care and social protection. In many countries it is now left to NGOs bottom up initiative to provide a partial network of coverage. Globalization has encouraged the economically rational response of selling off country assets at any price, including assets arising from low level labour costs in order to attract foreign capital. Globalization generates increased oppurtunities for private providers of welfare services to operate in many countries undermining national social service provisions and regulatory policies.

Impact on Farmers Rights
Trade related intellectual property rights have some implication on the development of agriculture  in india.WTO has extended patent rights from 17 to 14 years to a uniform period of 20 years for all commodities. Patent products can be exported after  royalties are paid earlier only process was patented and now product is also patented and protection of new varieties of plant is also provided.  The patent rights under TRIPS confer on the patent holder the right to forbid use, domestic sales and export sale of patent product and process without his permission or authorization from him. It is feared in India that the traditional rights of the farmers to reproduce seeds, plant materials and animal life forms might be affected by once somebody claims that the patent seed, plant variety or animal type was covered under patent protection in the foreign country. Most of the developed countries are interesting in acquiring patents of Indian varieties. Under TRIPS patenting of pepper, amla, barekarle, jackfruit and Ritaaswaganda have been already registered by foreign companies. Patenting of Indian commodities is different for Indians, because of the following:  The fee of patenting is high, difficult to maintain the monopoly power of patent product and the patentees will favour sale of patent.
There is a scope for less dependent on public system for plant breeding research and seed production under the system of globalized agriculture.  Plant Breeders Rights help to produce more improved seeds and increased assess to foreign varieties as well as technology and also good availability of good quality seeds to farmers. However, the plant breeder’s right would bring some disadvantages also. They are
i.    Possibility of imposition of restriction on the free exchange of germplasam.
ii.    Genetic vulnerability caused by genetic uniformity and monopoly of few varieties in the market. Possible takeover of small firms by big firms and even of public research and development units and
iii.    Relative increase in the cost of seeds technology privately owned. There is a feeling among farmers that once seeds are patented the farmers would loose the right to modify, retain or use his seeds and fear.  Hence forth farmers perennially remain dependent on the patent holders for their seed requirement. In order to safeguard the interests of Indian farmers, the Government of India has passed the Plant Varieties Act in 1993.
Objectives of Human Rights Approach
1.    A human rights approach to globalization can provide the mean to channel the benefits of globalization so that they can be shared equitably and fairly both between and within nations. Thus human rights approach require good governance, democracy and the rule of the law at the national level as well as at the international level.
2.    A human rights approach emphasizes the need to protect against increased vulnerability of people and peoples in the globalizing world. Thus a human right approach stresses the need for culturally appropriate social safety nets.
3.    A human rights approach to globalization ensures that poverty eradication becomes an essential objective of the globalization process. However, poverty eradication is not the only objective of the human rights approach to globalization. Human rights including the right to development, and the right of all – rich and poor, adults and children, women and men.
4.    A human rights approach to globalization brings to the rules and politics of trade and finance liberalization. The human rights goals and principles of non discrimination, popular participation,  accountability,  justice and equity and the rule of law should be made into realistic action plan.  It makes the protection and promotion of the social sector more than just  a good idea, it makes it a legal right.
Policy Measures to protect the Rights of Farmers
In order to safeguard the Indian agriculture by the impact of globalization the following policy measures can be considered
1.    The proposed Plant Varieties Act should be amended to reconcile the interests of the seed industry and farmers.
2.    There is a need to protect indigenous seed variety against competition from the multinational companies.
3.    GATT agreement relating to compulsory export from developing countries to the developed countries irrespective of climatic condition should be given up.
4.    A relatively higher rate of subsidy will have to be provided by the State to maintain the per capita level of food consumption.
5.    The grade specifications and standards of agricultural products in India should be harmonized with international standards and specification as soon as possible to facilitate easy flow of international trade.
Policy Measures to promote Human Rights
In order to overcome the negative effects of globalization on human rights the following measures can be considered
1.    There is a need to conduct environmental and social assessment of structural adjustment programmes.
2.    International development assistance should focus on meeting basic social needs.
3.    The government of developing countries should not cut the expenditure on poverty eradication in the name of fiscal reform.
4.    The disinvestment of public sector units should be discouraged as it affects the livelihood of many people.
5.    The conditions laid down by the World Bank and the IMF should not affect the investment in the social, educational and employment programme in developing countries which are essential for growth.
6.    Debt relief should be accelerated as long as the funds thus released are used to alleviate poverty.
7.    The policies persued by the World Bank and the IMF should not affect the implementation of objectives of World summit on sustainable development.

REFERENCES
1.    Clark, Tand M. Barlow, MAI, The Multilateral Agreement on Investment and the Threat to Canadian Sovereignity,  Sroddart Toroniter, 1997.
2.    Kabeer, N., “IDS Social policy programme: What are big issues?” Paper tabled at DFID, Social Policy Research Meeting, London, May 13- 14, 1999.
3.    Tomasevski, K, Between Sanctions and Election: AID donors and their Human Rights Performance, printer, London, 1997, p.240.
4.    UNDP Human Development Report, Human Development Office, New York, 1999.
5.    Yusuf Bangura, Public Sector Restructuring UNRSID  Occassional Paper 3, Geneva 2000, p. 19.

Leave a Reply