The interplay between corruption, economy and human security form a complex system, of which one part is embedded in cooperation between governments and international agencies. As an introduction to this immense problema, I recommend my recent book (see below). One of the most interesting results was strong correlation between Corruption Perception Index (CPI) and GNI (PPP) per capita. Thus CPI correlated also with many indicators related to decent living. I wish you best luck in studying it and remain willing to answer any questions my approach may give reason to ([email protected]).

Book Missing a Decent Living for Everyone: Success and Failure in...

In my view yes, given that the recent WHO Commission on Social Determinants of Health firmly linked inequalities in health and early death to human rights violations - “Social justice is a matter of life and death. It affects the way people live, their consequent chance of illness, and their risk of premature death.”  See WHO Commission on Social Determinants of Health. Closing the gap in a generation: Health equity through action on the social determinants of health. Geneva. WHO 2008. Available at http://www.who.int/social_determinants/thecommission/finalreport/en/index.html

I may be wrong, but I'm skeptical about the effective action of international or multilateral organizations. In other words, in crucial situations, the strongest country does what he wants, and nobody can oppose any resistance. Thus, critical issues such as human rights, unfortunately, are completely neglected, treated as "luxuries" of academics or diplomats forums; but without merit due attention of the international community.

I think, according my intelectual thinking onmatter of human rights and his relations that all depend of us as leaders to put on our agenda the domion of human rights above our political and cultural as well social and religion conceptualizations on behave of people are suffering all kind of injustice.

Thanks to you all for your contributions to this discourse, and the valid points raised both for and against the promotion of a cosmopolitan approach to the UN Post 2015 Development Agenda. I agree that corruption, inequality and structural factors hinder  progressive realisation of universal human rights  for marginalised communities in developed and developing economies, in accordance with the Vienna and Durban Declarations. On the other hand, reparative work through the promotion of universal human rights plays an important role where human rights violations are identified, e.g. promoting race equality in education  and employment for people of African descent,. For the UN Post 2015 Development Agenda to be achieved, universal human rights should become more accessible equally, globally and generally,  including individuals belonging to vulnerable groups.

Many a time the developed countries use this human right as tag to impose their political agenda. These rights will be universally accessible by all only some consensus  is arrived between the states for implementing the same in the municipal level first and then to global level. 

@G. Raja Sekar The Vienna Declaration 1993 asserts universal human rights should be progressively realised by UN member states, regardless of whether they are developed, emerging or developing economies. Sadly, accessibility to universal human rights may be deterred by structural factors such as historical, cultural, political and economic interests in sovereign states. These should be monitored and held accountable for not realising statutory obligations to respect, protect and fulfil the universal human rights of their citizens.

My book Human Rights, What Are They Really? addresses these issues at least indirectly. It presents a complete theory of human rights which, if implemented, would automatically cure most of the problems implicit in the above discussion. For example, the right of every person to compensation for the exploitation of natural resources because of common ownership thereof, would alleviate poverty to a large extent. The problem from my point of view is that true fundamental rights are not acknowledged and implemented by governments.

@ R. S. Higgins, I have to agree as a human rights student the difference between theory and practice is alarming even where regional and international treaties have been signed. the empirical evidence shows that progressive realisation of universal human rights often leads to poor accountability of governments in their obligations to respect, protect and fulfil the rights of citizens. The SERAC case provides an example where  environmental degradation and socioeconomic exploitatation of citizens was highlighted by the AU as the failure of a member state to meet its state obligations. See http://www.chr.up.ac.za/index.php/browse-by-subject/410-nigeria-social-and-economic-rights-action-centre-serac-and-another-v-nigeria-2001-ahrlr-60-achpr-2001.html

Ade,  I perused the referenced web site and first have to tell you that I don't believe "social and economic rights" are true human rights. They can be traced to the proposition that need begets a right to have that need fulfilled by other people. I don't see an implicit link between need and a right. Rather, that link must be put in place by those who want it to exist. In doing so they will refer to their morality (which is chosen), values (also chosen), ability to help, the priority of the matter, and in some cases the danger of helping. The decision to help is optional and optional rights cannot be universal rights which are compelling on everyone.

The actions and inactions of the government in the reference do transgress real human rights, however. It would be too long to elaborate on this here. Instead, I refer to  my web site www.truehumanrights.com and my book on rights that is available there.