Prioritisation of Human Rights in Transitional Countries

The widely accepted idea of interdependence and indivisibility of human rights refutes any suggestion of a hierarchy of rights. However, in praxis a hierarchy in the implementation of human rights causing a precedence of certain rights over other does exist. States and political actors might be restrained from implementing all human rights at an equal footing due to the scarcity of their resources and capacity to promote the social and economic rights or political costs to promote the civil and political rights. In fact the states mostly face a situation where there is an inconsistency between the limited resources and multiplicity of objectives to pursue. Both economic constraints and political costs make it very complicated, at least in the short term, to implement all human rights at an equal footing. Particularly, transitional countries -as they deal with several issues such as political concurrence between different forces and interests- are forced to consider the scarcity of resources and political costs in implementing human rights. Through prioritization of certain rights over others, transitional countries do not only deal with the scarcity of resources or balance political costs, but they also establish human rights within their particular socio-political and cultural context. This article will look at some structural priorities in the implementation of human rights in the transitional post-uprising countries in the MENA region and will illustrate how the political costs and scarcity of resources gave rise to the priorities in the implementation of human rights. In doing so it will give evidence from two uprising countries in the region Tunisia and Morocco, after the 2011 uprisings. In addition to the analysis of secondary sources it will provide evidence from insights obtained from semi-structured interviews with political and civil society actors from various political backgrounds and parties.