45126-Invest. Qual-No111

Policies on Poverty, Exclusion and Inequality●Tension between courts’ traditional tendency to specifyoperating rules for public bodies that are found to have violatedrights and the standards and outcomes that are becoming thefocus of the best policy systems.These tensions must be taken into account in any discussion ofsocio-economic rights. They do not make justiciable socioeconomicrights impossible, since various types of courts in variouscountries (including Ireland) are moving towards new types ofrulings. In these rulings, courts specify general standards rather thanoperating rules, and delegate to the affected parties (includingadministrators, professional but also the citizens whose rights havenot been secured) the task of solving problems.The Mutual Dependence of Rights, Capacities and IdentitiesDespite debates on the foundation of rights, there is fairly widespreadagreement that rights, certainly core civil and political rightsto freedom and equality, are part of our identity as members ofdemocratic societies (Dorf, 1996). This identity is determinedjointly with the capacities of individuals and groups to exercisecitizenship or personhood (Raz, 1986). The extension of rights tonew groups involves recognition of their capacities and redefinitionof their identity.The Need for a New Conception of RightsThere is a need to find a conception of rights, and an approach torights, that can both recognise the many complexities outlinedabove, and still acknowledge the widespread conviction that rightsought to be respected and the belief that their extension andevolution is closely associated with enlargement of our understandingof humanity and citizenship (Dorf and Sabel, 1998). Someelements of such a conception are outlined in Section 8.3.5.ConclusionThe Council remains convinced of the validity of core socioeconomicrights. However, in view of the complexities listed above,it does not presume that they can always deliver the simplicity that367