This paper asks whether (human) rights enforcement is permissible given that it may entail infringing on the rights of innocent bystanders. I consider two strategies that adopt a rights-sensitive consequentialist framework and offer a positive answer to this question, namely Amartya Sen’s and Hillel Steiner’s. Against Sen, I argue that trade-offs between rights are problematic since they contradict the purpose of rights, which is to provide a pluralist solution to disagreement about values, i.e. to allow agents to act in accordance with their values. I further argue that Steiner’s compensation strategy does not succeed in avoiding trade-offs so it falls prey to the same criticism. I propose a non-trade-off solution that is implicit in the accounts discussed and is more consistent with the meta-ethical framework advocated by Sen. This solution relies on an enforceable duty to share in the costs of rights enforcement hence it entails a degree of redistribution for enforcement purposes.
KeywordsConflicts of rights Trade-offs Enforcement Consequentialism Agent-relative reasons Pluralism
- Dworkin, Ronald. 1984. Rights as trumps. In Theories of rights, ed. Jeremy Waldron, 153–167. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Hart, H.L.A. 1984. Are there any natural rights? In Theories of rights, ed. Jeremy Waldron, 77–91. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Nagel, Thomas. 1979. The limits of objectivity. The Tanner lectures on human values. Available at http://www.tannerlectures.utah.edu/lectures/documents/nagel80.pdf. Accessed 1 April 2011.
- Nozick, Robert. 1974. Anarchy, state and utopia. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
- Sen, Amartya. 1982. Rights and agency. Philosophy & Public Affairs 11: 3–39.Google Scholar
- Sen, Amartya. 1990. Welfare, freedom and social choice: a reply. Recherches Economique de Louvain 56: 451–485.Google Scholar
- Steiner, Hillel. 1990. Putting rights in their place. Recherches Economique de Louvain 56: 391–408.Google Scholar
- Steiner, Hillel. 1994. An essay on rights. Oxford, UK & Cambridge, USA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
- Steiner, Hillel. 2008. Self-ownership and conscription. In The Egalitarian conscience: essays in honour of G.A. Cohen, ed. Christine Sypnowich, 88–102. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Thomson, Judith Jarvis. 1992. The realm of rights. Cambridge, MA & London, England: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
- Waldron, Jeremy (ed.). 1984. Theories of rights. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar