Human Rights Education in Asian Schools Volume V
SEA Writeshop: Developing Human Rights Lesson Plans
The idea of holding a workshop on developing human rights lesson plans for Southeast Asian educators (SEA Writeshop)1 was agreed upon at the 1999 Southeast Asia Pilot Teacher Training Workshop in Bali, Indonesia, organized by the National Human Rights Commission of Indonesia, the Center for Human Rights Studies (PUSHAM) of Universitas Surabaya, and the Asia-Pacific Human Rights Information Center (HURIGHTS OSAKA).2 At that time, only the Filipinos had undergone such a workshop, and it was, therefore, agreed that the Philippine experience should be shared with Southeast Asian educators.
By 2001, Indonesia and Thailand had produced their own human rights lesson plans on various subjects. Vietnam added more human rights modules to modules on civics education. The Malaysian Human Rights Commission shows keen interest in developing materials for human rights education in schools.
The SEA Writeshop, held in Manila in June 2001, was as much a training in planning human rights lessons as a sharing of experiences in making them.3
The SEA Writeshop had the following objectives:
- Develop human rights teaching guides for elementary and high schools in Southeast Asia, focusing on basic concepts and principles of human rights and contextualized in each country's culture, beliefs, and practices.
- Provide a venue for Southeast Asian human rights educators to share and exchange experiences in teaching human rights in the formal basic educational system.
- Formulate a Southeast Asian human rights education vision and mission.
- Review human rights standards and principles to identify core human rights concepts for basic education.
- Reexamine linkages between human rights and Southeast Asian cultures to help translate human rights concepts into educational materials.
- Train educators to relate human rights lesson plans to the school curriculum.
- Identify various strategies to infuse human rights into the formal educational curriculum.
- Identify programs for extra- and cocurricular activities and/or human rights community-based activities.
- Prepare an action plan to lobby for human rights education in the region.
- Strengthen linkages among human rights educators in Southeast Asia.
Twenty-six educators from Cambodia, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand, and Vietnam attended the SEA Writeshop. They were schoolteachers, education researchers, curriculum developers, and nongovernmental organization (NGO) workers.
The SEA Writeshop's nine-day program had the following major components:
Setting the Tone
- review of human rights education programs, principles, approaches, strategies, and methods; and formulation of a Southeast Asian vision and mission for human rights education;
- writing of human rights teaching guides;
- teaching demonstration of the teaching guides developed; and
- planning of follow-up activities.
Yoshio Kawashima, director of HURIGHTS OSAKA, stressed:
Our schools are major social institutions. We look to them to enlighten our children, to mold their character and behavior. We sometimes even expect schools to perform beyond their capacities. It is, therefore, proper that we devote time, effort, and resources to help our schools help our children not only understand but, more important, exercise their human rights in school, at home, and in society.
We need to look at how our teachers can effectively teach, and how our children can enjoy learning about, human rights. This workshop is aimed at seeing how this issue can best be addressed. The teaching guides that we are developing in this workshop will synthesize Southeast Asian experiences and reflect actual experiences as well as new concepts. But the bottom line remains the same: the teaching guides are meant to help our teachers perform their human rights education work meaningfully and effectively.
Then assistant secretary of the Philippine Department of Education (DepEd), Fe A. Hidalgo, explained the purpose of the SEA Writeshop:
Why are we here? We came here for the common purpose of bringing effective and efficient human rights education one step closer to fulfilling our vision of minimizing human rights violations in this region. The SEA Writeshop is the first in a multistage project to campaign for the development of human rights education in Southeast Asia by focusing on elementary and secondary education.
The chair of the Philippine Commission on Human Rights, Aurora P. Navarrete-Recina, stressed the importance of activities after the SEA Writeshop:
With the expertise, experiences, insights, and special knowledge and orientation of the participants the writeshop will be a success. Allow me, however, to remind you that the yardstick for measuring the accomplishment of your mission is beyond this stage. It is in the programs that you will implement in your countries. You will be judged by how the programs enable teachers to become more conscious of human rights to mold the minds and attitudes of young people. Your efforts should significantly increase extracurricular human rights programs for ASEAN youth and students. You are called upon to ensure a respectable level of increase in human rights literacy among schoolteachers, government officials, and students. And you are expected to substantially contribute to reshaping your countries' educational systems by veering them away from a teacher-dominated environment and redirecting them to child-centeredness.
It will serve you well, therefore, if in the course of your deliberations and planning you would underscore the importance of pooling your resources and exchanging notes among yourselves and among your colleagues at home. As you set out your vision and mission in this activity, do remember, however, that you will not only be helping one another promote human rights in our region, but you will also be helping one another dispel lingering doubts about the Asian commitment to human rights.
Vivien Escott, an official of the Canadian International Development Aid in Manila, pointed out:
Recently, Education Secretary Raul Roco proposed the abolition of the Reserve Officers Training Corp (ROTC), which is mandated by the National Defense Act of 1991 in the tertiary curriculum, as it has been documented that problems and scams related to violence arise from ROTC activities. The Filipino public perceives the ROTC program as instilling a culture of militarization in fourthyear high-school, and college students.
She went on to stress that a network of civilsociety organizations in the Philippines supports this proposal, and added that, in lieu of military training, peace and human rights should be taught in high schools and colleges. The network proposes a "peace and human rights curriculum catering to both female and male students, which would involve them in proactive and nonviolent efforts such as grassroots peace-building initiatives."
General Introductory Sessions
A session to clarify participants' expectations of the SEA Writeshop followed. Participants were asked: What do you expect from this workshop? Their answers and expectations are summarized below:
- Learn about human rights awareness.
- Share experiences and knowledge of human rights in different Asian countries.
- Get in-depth explanations from resource persons about concepts and principles of human rights.
- Realize that human rights education is not difficult and that it is not meant to remain a dream.
- Develop human rights education lessons and guides that can be used in Indonesia.
- Learn how to integrate human and child rights into the curriculum or in all subjects at different levels of education.
- Learn how to teach human rights with a multiplier effect.
- Learn how to "echo" human rights education to other trainers and teachers.
Understanding country situations
To define how the SEA Writeshop would relate to the actual state of human rights education, each country delegation reported on their national contexts.
Elzy Ofreneo, director of the Education, Research and Training Office of the Commission of Human Rights (Philippines), synthesized the group presentations as follows:
- In some countries, human rights education is supported by legal mandate, and identified vision, mission, and goals.
- The participants of the educational programs vary. Some are potential victims of human rights violations, including vulnerable groups, children, women, etc.
- Institutions posing a threat to human rights education vary from country to country.The government is one such institution.
- Prevailing doctrines, historical background, political situation, economic situation (including economic liberalization and government economic policies) in the countries are threats to and opportunities for human rights education.
- Educational approaches and technologies are important components in human rights education. Human rights should not be taught in a theoretical manner.
- Supporting structures such as mandate are either undefined or nonexistent in some countries.
- In some countries, people involved in human rights education are restricted from doing their work, sometimes even arrested.
Clarifying the sociocultural contexts
The sociocultural contexts of Southeast Asian countries were reviewed to analyze the conditions under which human rights education in schools programs operate. The country reports, as synthesized by Jefferson R. Plantilla, chief researcher of HURIGHTS OSAKA, generally speak of the existence of at least three major religions (Buddhism, Islam, and Christianity) and the presence of a variety of societal structures.
Mr. Plantilla identified four important issues related to Southeast Asian sociocultural contexts:
The reports represent a range of positive to negative sociocultural contexts for human rights education. Cambodia and Indonesia are on the positive side of the spectrum. The Cambodian government, NGOs, and society believe that Buddhist principles can be used to explain human rights. Teaching Buddhist principles to elementary-school children is considered as indirectly teaching human rights. The term "human rights" is gradually introduced as students go up the educational ladder. Indonesian educators also believe that traditional values can be used to teach human rights concepts.
The Malaysian government, however, thinks that the concept of human rights does not fit the country's multiracial society scheme. The Malaysian case supports the "Asian values" argument against the universality of human rights by insisting on defining human rights according to each country's values.
The negative perception of human rights can be remedied if people are flexible enough to accept the idea of human rights. Economic conditions may also change perceptions of human rights.
Members of the middle class, or those with some resources or influence in society, have a big role in the field of human rights education. They form the bulk of those who are educated, engaged in business, or employed in the government. In Thailand in 1992, for example, the middle class played a big role in changing the government by using modern communication technologies such as mobile phones. In Malaysia, however, some of the middle class are detached from societal issues, and their lack of interest is summed up by the word tidakapathy
The role of the middle class depends on their awareness of the societal conditions. Human rights, therefore, may or may not be promoted by members of the middle class.
The rights language
How should the concept of human rights be introduced? Some believe that the education process should use the words "human rights" from the start to emphasize the value of promoting the language of human rights as defined in international human rights instruments. Others, however, believe human rights must be introduced carefully and gradually, using known principles or values.
Whichever approach is employed, human rights language should eventually become part of the language of the mass media, schools, government, and the public.
Use of experiences
The presentations show that responses to different sociocultural contexts vary, representing efforts to make human rights relate to local cultures and useful in guiding the development of human rights education programs. Linking the sociocultural context to human rights is a risk and a challenge. What is clear--
and what matters most--is that there is always a constant search for the right answer, formula, or approach.
Review of human rights principles and practices
Ms. Ofreneo explained the general human rights principles, major international human rights instruments, and role of the United Nations (UN). She pointed out that the principles of equality, nondiscrimination, universality, indivisibility, and interdependence govern the idea of human rights. She added the principle of balancing of rights, which limits the exercise of rights when they affect the rights of others. She also mentioned the different classifications of human rights according to source, recipient, aspect of life, struggle for recognition, and derogability. Finally, she mentioned the basic international human rights documents, the process of their adoption by the UN, and how states become part of international agreements. During the open discussion, she explained how international human rights agreements are enforced; the UN human rights mechanism; and the government obligation to respect, promote, and realize human rights.
Challenges to human rights education
Mr. Plantilla stressed that human rights education is not merely a means to learn about human rights but also to realize them. Human rights education can, therefore, be defined as human rights empowerment.4 He said that the basic challenge of human rights education is translating human rights concepts into a form that affects behavior, attitude, and knowledge. Human rights education in schools translates human rights concepts into realities faced by students. It also integrates the study of human rights into the curriculum and extra- and cocurricular activities, and uses human rights principles in teaching and learning. Since the workshop focused on teaching materials, the challenge was to develop human rights-related lesson plans for various subjects.
Mr. Plantilla also stressed the issue of sustainability of programs. Human rights education programs should not last for just a few years as if they were mere projects. They should be sustainable over a longer period. A multidisciplinary approach is necessary, as when teachers face traumatized students. They need the help of professionals such as psychologists or psychiatrists. The programs should also be multileveled and develop as students climb the educational ladder. The programs should also be multi-institutional by linking the schools to other institutions such as national human rights institutions, NGOs, and education research institutes. This creates a support mechanism not only for the schools but also, and most important, for the teachers, who carry the burden of implementing human rights education programs.
Last, Mr. Plantilla pointed out the major challenge of misunderstanding of human rights by teachers, parents, and the public.
Why teach human rights?
Sirilus Belen of the Centre of Curriculum and Educational Facilities Development Office Educational and Cultural Research and Development, Ministry of Education and Culture (Indonesia), explained the concept of vision and mission, tracing their Latin roots. The vision is what people would like to happen in the future. The mission is what people must do to realize the vision. He stressed the importance of finding a vision and a mission in developing human rights education programs. He reviewed the vision and mission of the Southeast Asia Pilot Teacher Training held in Bali, Indonesia, in 1999. (See Human Rights Education in Asian Schools
, volume 3.)
He then pointed out the common vision for Southeast Asian educators: a country where people have the knowledge, values, attitudes, and skills to build a society governed and guided by the principles of
- social justice,
- gender equality,
- sustainable development,
- peace and happiness,
- universality of human dignity,
- unity in diversity,
- cultural enrichment and preservation,
- respect for people's rights and liberties,
- good governance,
- mutual help,
- enhanced spiritual values,
- development of the potentials of children and young people,
- elimination of human rights violations, and
- living together in harmony with nature.
Suggested ways of teaching human rights
Valai na Pombejr, Adviser, Asia-Pacific Network for International Education and Values Education, presented approaches, methodologies, and strategies for human rights education. She first stressed the importance of teaching, which means that through a "dynamic, holistic, and integrative teaching/learning process, the teachers, administrators, school personnel, learners, and their parents work together for human rights (human dignity and rights, social justice and peace)."
She reminded participants that human rights education is a much wider concept than the study of legal and constitutional texts and mechanisms. Human rights must permeate the whole of school life, the ethos and organization of the school, as well as the content of the curriculum.
The approaches of human rights education, she said, should
- go beyond the traditional characteristics of academic study (acquiring knowledge, developing skills, and forming attitudes) and encourage students to reflect on what their learning about human rights means for them personally and to translate their understanding and concern into valuebased action;
- adapt to the educational level of the students, such that human rights concepts can be taught at an early stage while the more abstract concepts can be introduced later;
- be learner-centered, with a dynamic interaction between the learner and teacher; and
- be multidisciplinary and touch every dimension of the human experience.
Thus, the study of human rights should not be confined to social studies or any other single subject area, but infused in a variety of content areas in the curriculum, and utilize different resources and perspectives.
Ms. Valai explained that the teacher must be convinced about the value of human rights education. Teacher training, therefore, is important. The teacher must be an exemplary, open-minded strategist or methodologist who knows how teaching will affect students' attitudes and values.
Last, she stressed that human rights education must be seen within its cultural background, citing how she related Thai traditional values to human rights.
Core concepts, values, and learning themes in teaching human rights
Maria Serena Diokno, director of the Jose W. Diokno Foundation, talked about its project to train teachers and develop teaching materials for human rights, in partnership with the Department of Education, Culture and Sports (now called DepEd). She said that since the foundation could not assume that schoolteachers would understand its materials, it had to do two things: train teachers to understand human rights from the teachers' (rather than lawyers') point of view, and adapt materials to the students' level. Teachers should also be clear on why they should teach human rights: human rights are universal and the law requires that they be taught.
The foundation produced teaching modules for primary and secondary social studies, Filipino, and English. The modules contain the objectives (based on the learning competency under the school curriculum), materials (stories, statistics, documents, etc.) that are needed to discuss human rights, the step-by-step procedures of participatory methodologies (which need not be strictly followed by the teacher if the situation calls for a different procedure). The modules are designed to help the teachers teach human rights.
Before the modules were printed, teachers were invited to test them and express their opinions on how they should be adjusted.
Preparing Human Rights Lesson Plans
Ideas vary on how to integrate human rights into the curriculum, ranging from the use of a single subject such as civics, to the infusion of human rights concepts into different subjects. The participants agreed to explore various subjects to develop human rights lesson plans.
The human rights lessons developed at the SEA Writeshop assumed the following:
- School curriculums are already set and cannot be easily amended to accommodate human rights education as a separate subject.
- Curriculums and available teaching materials should be reviewed to find out how human rights concepts can be discussed within the existing subject areas.
- A common framework for developing materials is needed so that participants can better understand the materials.
- Drafted materials will be tested in the various countries to determine how they suit school curriculums.
Two types of documents were drafted during the SEA Writeshop. The first is the human rights curricular framework, made up of the following:
- human rights issues affecting people at various levels--personal, community, country, regional, and international;
- core values to be taught per subject and year level; and
- human rights concepts that relate to the core values (see Annex).
The second document is the lesson plan. A common format for lesson plans was adopted. While following a standard lesson plan format, it has additional elements that integrate human rights concepts into the subject:
|HUMAN RIGHTS LESSON PLAN|
|Title||: (Idea for the lesson)|
|Human Rights Concept||:|
- Reading materials, references
- Teaching resources
- Vocabulary/Definition of terms
- Links (Where to ask for help)
- Sources of other relevant information
- Opener (priming, unlocking of terms/vocabulary, drill, etc.)
- Development of activities
- Process and learning outcome
- Co- and extracurricular
Lydia N. Agno, professor of the College of Education of the University of the Philippines, presented the guidelines for writing lesson plans:
K-W-L technique (exploratory activity)<5>
Identifying target clientele (Grade/Year levels)
Identifying concepts/Concept clusters (human rights concepts)/Content of instruction
a. Choose human rights concepts
b. Formulate concept clusters
c. Write generalizations, basic understanding
Choosing readings for the content of instruction
c. Original stories, poems, songs
Identifying appropriate teaching strategies
a. Role play
b. Class debate
c. Panel discussion
e. Cooperative learning
f. Tri-question approach<6>
g. Social analysis approach
h. Goal analysis approach
i. Four A's approach<7>
Formulating instructional objectives
a. Cognitive domain (thinking)
b.Affective domain (attitude)
c. Psychomotor domain
Identifying values drawn from the lesson
a. Indigenous values
b. Universal values
Identifying skills developed in the lesson
a. Academic skills (reading, viewing, writing, verbalizing, listening, and interpreting and creating graphics, maps, charts, and graphs)
b. Research skills (identifying and defining a problem, formulating hypotheses for solutions, locating and gathering data, drawing conclusions)
c. Thinking skills (proficiency in describing, defining, classifying, hypothesizing, analyzing, and generalizing, which are activated in problem solving as well as critical thinking)
d. Social skills (essential for working with others, and for being an effective follower and leader)
Social skills can be categorized as those that are related to and necessary for living and working with others:
a. Respecting the rights of others
b. Being sensitive to their feelings
c. Being willing and able to assist others when necessary
Social skills relate to sharing, planning with others, and participating with others in group activities.
Identifying appropriate evaluation instruments
a. Informal evaluation (use of headlines, newspaper articles, anagrams, My Favorite Idea, teacher observation)
b. Formal evaluation (use of rating scales, learning checklist, essay tests, true-or-false tests, multiple choice tests, matching tests, completion tests).
Writing the lesson plans
With the ending of the general presentations about human rights concepts, sociolcultural contexts, human rights education challenges, approaches, and vision, the second half of the SEA Writeshop was devoted to writing exercises, testing of the lesson plans, and planning.
The participants, grouped per country, discussed the development of a human rights curricular framework and agreed on which issues their lesson plans would cover.
The drafted documents were then presented to all participants and commented on by a panel of educators. Mr. Belen suggested some guidelines for the panel members for commenting on the draft human rights curricular framework and lesson plans.
The panel members commented on the objectives, materials for teachers and students, teaching procedure, and the core values and human rights concepts:<8>
- Time frame for each lesson plan. Each lesson plan should fit the time allotted. Several short lesson plans can cover the lesson if necessary.
- Link between lesson plans. The series of lesson plans should be linked.
- Statement of objectives. Each lesson plan should have clear and specific objectives.
- Congruence between parts of the lesson plan. All parts of the lesson plan must be congruent with each other.
- Congruence between framework and lesson plans. The core values listed in the human rights curricular framework must be congruent with the human rights concept in the lesson plans.
- Application component. Each lesson plan should have an application component. Students should be asked to commit to undertake the activities discussed in the session.
Each panel member was later assigned to help a country delegation improve the initial lesson plans. The modified lesson plans were presented in a plenary session.
Each delegation was requested to make eight lesson plans as final output. Due to time constraints, however, some delegations were not able to do so. At the end of the writeshop, 46 lesson plans were prepared (Annex). Delegations that failed to develop eight lesson plans submitted the remaining lesson plans after the writeshop.
The 46 lesson plans were still in draft form. The participants were requested to review, test, and revise them in their respective countries.
To allow interaction among the participants, students, and teachers, a teaching demonstration using the lesson plans was held in primary and secondary schools in Manila.
Some guest teachers were apprehensive about language, thinking that their English might not be understood by the students. It was explained that some guest teachers feared the same thing during the 1999 Bali training. As the Bali and Manila teaching demonstrations show, however, students interact very well with foreign guest teachers, especially as the schools were highly rated: Aurora Quezon Elementary School, and the Manila Science High School, both in Manila and both considered "effective public schools" because of their high academic rating.
The guest teachers were divided into two groups--one for the primary level and another for the secondary. The guest teachers chose the subject and materials used. Several delegations requested audiovisual aids (such as Filipino songs, posters, and newspapers). The Malaysian, Indonesian, and Philippine delegations taught primary-level classes, while the Thai, Cambodian, and Vietnamese delegations taught the secondary-level classes.
The one-hour allotment for teaching was exceeded because some guest teachers used two one-hour lesson plans. The teaching demonstration was later evaluated at the school by the guest teachers and some teachers, and in a plenary session held the same day.
All the guest teachers appreciated the teaching demonstration and were happy to find out that the students enthusiastically discussed human rights. The guest teachers and students enjoyed the session, and the guest teachers also found that the subject of human rights was not new to the students. The guest teachers also appreciated the cooperation of the teachers and the school heads.
Observers noted that the guest teachers interacted well with the students and employed participatory methodologies, and one guest teacher had particularly creative questions. The guest teachers used Philippine songs and the Philippine law on the press, but some of the songs turned out to be unfamiliar to the students. An observer suggested letting the students listen to the songs instead and ask them to reflect on their message.
The students were smart and interacted easily with the guest teachers, one of whom pointed out that it was difficult to determine how effective the lesson plans are if tested only in good schools. Teaching demonstrations should be held in average and below-average schools with underprivileged students to determine the lesson plans' impact. One guest teacher said that since lesson plans are meant to be teaching guides, then teachers have to adjust the lesson plans to suit average students. Lesson plans can also be made more complex for students who have already taken human rights education lessons or are academically advanced.
The final session of the SEA Writeshop was on making action plans. Juan R. Banquicio Jr., then director of the National Educators Academy of the Philippines, DepEd, explained that the planning exercise had two stages. The first consisted of answering two questions: What issues, concerns, and/or problems have surfaced that need to be addressed? What can be done by whom to resolve or respond to them? The country delegations reported their output in the plenary session.
In the next stage, the initial outputs were used to develop the country action plans. Since the delegations were composed of representatives of different agencies, it was stressed that as much as possible an interagency plan for the country be made. The plans, consisting of objectives, activities, timetable, resource requirements, agency responsible, and expected outcome, were submitted by the delegations from Indonesia, Philippines, Thailand, and Vietnam at the end of the writeshop. Most of the plans include activities to develop the human rights curricular framework and lesson plans, and train teachers and other school officials.
1. The original name of the writing workshop uses "ASEAN." To avoid the perception that this project is officially supported by ASEAN, an intergovernmental institution, this article uses "Southeast Asia."
2. See the full report of the Bali training in Human Rights in Asian Schools
, volume four, pages 57-64.
3. The Southeast Asia Writing Workshop on Developing Human Rights Lesson Plans was jointly organized by the Philippine DepEd; Philippine Commission on Human Rights; and the Asia-Pacific Human Rights Information Center (HURIGHTS OSAKA). The writeshop was held in Manila on 19-27 June 2001. Financial support was provided by the organizing institutions as well as by SEAFILD, which also funded the 1999 Bali training.
4. This idea was raised by Clarence Dias, president of the International Center for Law in Development (USbased), in "Peace, Development and Human Rights: From Grassroots Perspectives in Asia," in Initiating Human Rights Education at the Grassroots
, Clarence J. Dias (ed.), (Bangkok: Asian Cultural Forum on Development, undated).
5. KWL refers to the following questions:
- What do you know about the topic?
- What more do mo want to know about the topic?
- What have you learned?
6. The three questions are: What happened? Why did it happen? What were the consequences?
7. Four A's refers to activities, analysis, abstraction, and application.
8. Members of the panel of commentators:
- Valai na Pombejr
Adviser, Asia-Pacific Network for International Education and Values Education (APNIEVE)
- Sirilus Belen
Centre of Curriculum and Educational
Facilities Development Office
Educational and Cultural Research and Development Ministry of Education and Culture (Indonesia)
- Sarawut Pratoomraj
Coordinating Committee of Human Rights Organizations of Thailand
- Felice Yeban
Professor, Peace and World Order Studies Unit
Philippine Normal University (Philippines)
- Corazon Echano
Curriculum Development Division
Bureau of Secondary Education
Department of Education (Philippines)
- Lydia A. Agno
Professor, College of Education University of the Philippines (Philippines)
- Noel Miranda
Education Program Specialist
Bureau of Secondary Education
Department of Education (Philippines)
- Ana Elzy E. Ofreneo
Education, Research and Training Office
Commission on Human Rights (Philippines)
- Celinia Balonzo
Professor, College of Education University of the Philippines (Philippines)
ANNEXSample Human Rights Curricular Framework
|Issues||HR Concepts||Core Values|
|1||Self||- Sexual abuse||- Right to special care|
- Right to protection
|2||Family||- Parental neglect|
- Broken homes
|- Right to parental guidance||- Love|
|3||Community||- Environmental degradation (e.g. improper garbage disposal)|
- Indecent houses in crowded urban areas (e.g. slum areas, squatting problems)
|- Right to quality environment|
- Right to decent living
- Right to property
- Healthful living
|4||Country||- Police brutality|
- Inadequate assistance to the poor
- Preservation of traditional culture
|- Right to humane treatment|
- Right to social and medical assistance
- Right to preserve one's cultural diversity
|- Human dignity|
- Concern for others
- Care and protection
- Respect for cultural diversity
|5||Region||- Drug abuse|
- Child labor
- Child prostitution
|- Right to protection from the use of prohibited drugs|
- Right to rest and leisure
- Right to protection from all forms of exploitation
|- Care and protection|
|6||Global||- Environmental degradation (e.g. depletion of the ozone layers, global warming)||- Right to quality environment||- Safety and protection|
- Healthful living
|Issues||HR Concepts||Core Values|
|1||Community||- Traffic congestion in urban areas|
- Vote buying
- Land grabbing
- Labor dispute
|- Right to public order and safety|
- Right to vote
- Right to own a property
- Freedom of expression
|- Public order|
|2||Country||- Graft and corruption|
- Poor and inadequate social services
|- Right to access to public service|
- Right to social welfare
- Immediate assistance
|3||Region||- Continuing gap between the rich and the poor|
|- Right to equality|
- Right to equal access to public service
- Right to work
- Right to gainful employment- Right to gainful employment
- Gainful living
- Productive living
|4||Global||- Political detainees|
- Ethnic discrimination
- Terrorism in Asia
|- Right to liberty|
- Right to due process
- Freedom from discrimination
- Right to security of persons
- Right to access to court
- Unity in diversity