Human rights and collective goods: a non - individualistic approach

This article proposes that Razian account of rights has to be read as “double dimension rights”, instead of an interest theory of rights. In such a new reading of Raz ́s account of rights, two attributes of Razian rights are highlighted: the “whydimension” and the “how-dimension.” In particular, the “why-dimension” gives due consideration to the relationship between rights and collective goods; it indicates that rights are adopted, first, in order to preserve a certain moral, public or political culture, and, second, in order to protect inherent public or collective goods, which serve the communal peace. In Razian thinking the initial idea of rights is not just to set limits in the name of “communal peace” or aiming to protect an individual and their personal autonomy from the demands of “collective goals”. Razian rights relate to autonomy and the protection of the well-being of the right-holder but are not restricted to it. He supports the view that most if not all rights are not side-constraints. The main idea of rights is not just to protect individuals, as if they were isolated from the political community. Much more than this, rights enable people to live together harmoniously by preserving collective goods. The well-being of the community is also a matter of rights, and in these terms Raz’s approach escapes individualism. The second attribute of the double dimension, namely the “how-dimension” of rights indicates the practical significance of rights. From this perspective, rights can be seen as a checks and balances mechanism, or a weapon against state sovereignty. Moreover, one of the main functions of how-dimension rights is their dynamic character, which implies that from old rights, inevitably, new duties can be created. This article focuses mainly on the “why-dimension” and in particular on the notion “collective goods”.