The Principle of Subsidiarity and whom Responsibility for Promoting it and Human Right Lies

The principle of subsidiarity was first developed in the encyclical Rerum novarum of 1891 by Pope Leo XIII, in an attempt to articulate a middle course between laissez-faire capitalism on the one hand and the various forms of communism, which subordinate the individual to the state, on the other. The principle is now one of the main tenet of Catholic Social Teaching and the Roman Catholic Church. In it common terms it can be explained to mean “part of”. For full human right to be realized, there is the need to recognize the fact that we are all part of one human family. In his book, The Vison of Catholic Social Thought: The Virtue of Solidarity and the Praxis of Human right, Clark was emphatic that the duty to create the conditions for greater exercise of human rights is the duty of individuals, families, communities, nations and the international community. This means when we recognize that every human being, no matter the condition or social status is created in the image of God, we will be respecting people’s dignity to live. This principle has been applied in many ways to the benefit of human development. For instance the European Union commission still applies the subsidiarity principle in dealing with it member states since 1995 especially in it legislations.

According to Pope Francis, the many situation of inequality, poverty and injustice are signs not only of a profound lack of fraternity but also of the absence of a culture of solidarity. New ideologies, characterized by rampant individualism, egocentrism and materialistic consumerism, weaken social bonds fueling that “throw away” mentality. The right of people are severely disrespected in our days because solidarity is gradually losing it place and value. One class of people who have responsibility to promote solidarity is the individuals in society. It is a simple fact that we cannot live and exist well independently of others, we are interdependent beings. A philosopher, Thomas Pogge posits that individuals and citizens bear the duties and obligations to respect, promote and protect human rights. Human right and solidarity are interrelated because solidarity can be founded when human rights are respected. This can be achieved through equality, mutuality, and reciprocity (Clark, 2014). It means with individuals as agents to promote human right and solidarity, we need to do unto others as we want to be done unto (Matthew 7:12). We are all one family in the world. Building a community that empowers everyone to attain their full potential through each of us respecting each other’s dignity, rights and responsibilities makes the world a better place to live.

Apart from individuals who are bearers of human right themselves, it is the responsibility of states and nations to promote human right and solidarity of their citizens. We are caught in the real grips of internationalization and globalizations. Nations are forming alliances with others nations as a result of the globalization. These alliances and trade agreement comes with terms and conditions which are at times unfavorable. The state has the responsibility to protect the right of the people and the common good by ensuring the basic right human right of the people are not trampled on with such agreements. Nations also have to ensure that they themselves ensure the autonomy of every individual so to ensure their absolute freedom and not oppress them. It should also ensure there is rule of law which prevent other citizens especially the affluent from maltreating the poor and the vulnerable in whichever form.

Due to globalization, traditional agents of justices have been expanded to include what is called the secondary agents (Clark, 2014). These secondary agents include Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), Transnational Corporations (TNCs), and Transnational Networks. In most cases the secondary agents better foster human right and solidarity because they are better equipped as agents of justice than the state and individuals. They have the technical know-how to handle issue of human right and solidarity and are very competent in their executions.

Subsidiarity and solidarity are interrelated per my view. If we create systems that make people feel a part of (subsidiary), their views are respected and are allowed to participate in all form of activities, they become very mutual, they reciprocate the respect they are enjoying and therefore solidarize with people. This leads to respect for the right and dignity of all people.


It can be concluded that the responsibility to promote solidarity and human right lies on every human entity, national states, businesses and corporations.


Clark, M. J. (2014).  The Vision of the Catholic Social Thought: The Virtue of Solidarity and the Praxis of Human Rights. Minneapolis: Fortress Press.


My Take on Social Justice

Social justice can be defined as the inclusion of everyone in the full benefits of society and empowerment of people to participate fully in the economic, social, and cultural life of the country. This ensures the common good of the people. Social Justice ensures that both benefits and burdens are shared among actors of society without discrimination. There has been a rising inequality between the rich and the poor, developed and developing nations and various inequalities even within same state. Social justice has not been a topic of discussion in the past until recently when the United Nations adopted the principle in the Copenhagen Declaration at the UN General Assembly.

The United Nations effort to ensure sustainable development will not come to fruition if social justice is not entrenched. There is a high negative correlation between poverty and social justice if you ask me. When few people have access to potable water, access health care, education, decent work and other factors then the Sustainable Development Goals’ 2030 target cannot be attained. This means poverty will still bedevil the majority of people. Other areas where social injustice can obstruct development is if the few with huge resources engage in economic activities that affect the environment directly in a negative way. Examples of such activities like unconventional farming practices, indiscriminate lumbering and taming of wild and aquatic lives affect the environment badly.

Social justice rests on two major principles; the principles of equity and equality. Equality is the situation in which the society is free of discrimination and everyone is treated equally. In this case we can make mention of a socially just society where the number of people who are enrolled in quality schools, access quality health care, eat healthily have both the poor and the rich in their large numbers as well as children and women and not huge percentage difference like is being experienced in Ghana now. Another principle is equity; where Equity refers to the qualities of justness, fairness, impartiality and even handedness. With this principle, the issue of redistribution of resources comes to mind where much should be given to those who need it most. Sustainable development can be achieved in a just manner through this way.

Abstract of My Recent Paper I Presented at Stockton University, New Jersey, USA

Justice by the People’s Court: Mob Action, Vigilantism and the Rule of Law in Ghana

                                                             Desmond Asamoah1


The 1992 constitution of the Republic of Ghana and the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Right both entrenches equal human right which guarantees suspected wrong doers the right of hearing in organized and competent courts of jurisdiction. Unfortunately, some Ghanaians choose the threat of mob action and vigilantism as a way of settling civil misunderstanding and dealing with suspected wrongdoings such as armed robbery, pickpocketing, rape, murder among other crimes instead of the established legal procedures. In 2017 alone, over five (5) cases of mob action was reported in Ghana with the most recent victim being a Major in the Ghana Army who was mobbed and killed on a special duty to halt illegal mining activities. These ways of dispensing justice is inhuman and alien to the rule of law as enshrined in the 1992 Constitution of Ghana. Utilizing primary data collected through interviews with purposively selected stakeholders such as the police, lawyers, parliamentarians, civil society organizations and civilians, the study ascertained some possible causes and consequences of mob action and vigilantism in the current constitutional dispensation. The study revealed loss of trust in the judicial system and its apparatus, legal procedure adoption failures, long and costive litigation procedures as some of the causes of the upsurge of mob action and vigilantism in Ghana. The study concludes by observing that, mob action and vigilantism robs suspects of the opportunity to exercise their full rights as entrenched in the constitution, thus downplaying the relevance of constitutional rule and rule of law in Ghana.



Keywords: Vigilantism, Rule of Law, Ghana, Civilians




Every invention and discovery is a breakthrough to human limitations. One of the marvelous inventions in the last century is the internet. It has tremendously transformed the flow of information, which is one of the basic requirements for human development. The realization of many of the UN declared human rights and SDGs depend on information. Education for all, health improvement, hunger alleviation, environmental/ecological care, and poverty alleviation will be achieved if people are able to have access to the right information. In view of this, the UN human right number 19 declares that “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers” (emphasis mine).

Nevertheless, some important information to give basic access to the Internet are right protected, hence not accessible to many people and nations. This has created what is called the digital divide. What happens is that most important scientific research articles that appear in journals on the Internet, besides being bought, charge certain fees any time they are accessed. I agree with the Public Library of Science (PLOS) which argues on their site that this doesn’t make sense since published articles on the internet are published once and for all, unlike hard copies which the authors have to pay for new printing cost anytime a reprinting or new edition is done.

This restriction and apparent impediment to the realization of a human right has given birth to the Open Access movement and campaigns for Free Open Source Software (FOSS). Their main concern, as presented by Burns, is that the digital literature must be free in terms of fee, running the program for any purpose, studying how it operates, modifying the program and distributing copies. Three declarations of this movement in Budapest, February 14, 2002; Bethesda, June 20, 2003; and Berlin October 22, 2003 are considered capstones. Seaming the three declarations together I come to understand Open Access as a comprehensive source of human knowledge and cultural heritage, to which copyright holders give free access to all users, permitting them to download, and use the full text without any legal implications.

Those who may be against free open sources of information may argue that this will kill the motivation for hard-work and industry. Information is an intellectual property so what will be the motive of laboring intellectually and having nothing of one’s own? The argument here is that if scientific research information has to be made free, what will come on the internet at the end will be very porous. Furthermore, the so called developing countries will continue to be dependent on brains from the developed world; they will just be spoon-fed, always receiving the fish without knowing how to fish. The argument from this side is that researchers from developing countries can always source for funds that sponsor scientific works.

I argue for free open source of information from the angle that information is also a common good. It is part of the basic necessary things that the human being needs to attain fulfillment. The common good many times needs one person to discover it but the usage is by all. A Ghanaian adage says “it takes one man to kill an elephant but an entire village eats it” and “the cock may belong to only one person but it crows to wake up the entire household”. The invention of the airplane by the Wright brothers is today a heritage to humanity. From that first simple aircraft invented in 1930, today engineers have built upon it to create war planes and airbuses. I think the most important motivation and drive for research should not just be money but the contribution one makes to the advancement of humanity and culture. The name of Marconi who invented the radio will never be lost just as Dr. Albert Salk who also invented the polio vaccine has carved a niche for himself in the medical mausoleum.

The free open source of information does not target just western researchers alone. The argument is that since most of these researchers are funded by agencies, government and universities, the results of their findings should be for free public consumption. The tax payer has somehow contributed to their findings therefore the same tax payer should not pay for what they have contributed to sponsor.

Rarely do inventors start from no where. There is always a take-off from where somebody stopped. Therefore with open access, researchers will not need to start from zero but continue to build on what others have already done. This will save time, expedite research work and accelerate development. It will save money as well since one will not have to waste resources to do the same research someone has already done so well.

In addition, free and open access will mean that teachers and students will be able to build their own customized libraries and archives. This will be possible because they will be able to download and save articles and books they will need for their works and make them easily accessible on their computers.

Today access to the Internet is no longer a luxury but a necessity. It has now become a matter of social justice. It is a common good. For society to be just, all people must have access to what is considered basic necessity for the proper functioning of human beings in that society. One of such things as we have seen above is information. All barriers and restrictions should be removed to encourage people to freely but responsibly seek and exchange information. There will be no justice if some people are deprived an available basic necessity just because they have no money to pay. Ultimately, the distribution of information is a principle of equity and justice as Virginia Eubanks asserts.

We must look at global development as total and holistic. Our world is not developed if some countries can travel to and fro the moon, while others still struggle to have potable water. Dr. Kwame Nkrumah of Ghana once said “the independence of Ghana is meaningless until it is linked with the total liberation of Africa”.

In my opinion, the possession of information can create a third force of power, with politics and money being the first and second respectively. As usual those who have the source of power control. They are usually not the majority but the minority. When power is handled only by the capitalist the poor suffer more. What I can see is the capitalization of information if everything is restricted. In this case the digital divide will become wider since this essential commodity will be controlled by market variables. This is what the free open source wants to mitigate.

In order not to extinguish the zeal for scientific research, free open resource software should be sponsored fully by governments. Open access movements should form associations that have license to provide platform for authors who would like to publish for free as PLOS has done. In conclusion I think the strength of the argument for Free Open Source Software (FOSS) and Open Access is the principle of justice, equity, the common good and solidarity.


The Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, (2005). Compendium of the Social Doctrines of the Church. Vatican City: Libreria Editrice.

Arhin, K. (1995). The Life and Work of Kwame Nkrumah. Accra: Africa Research and Publications.

Eubanks, V., (2011). Digital dead end: Fighting for social justice in the information age (Chapter two). Retrieved from St John’s University Libraries database.

Burns, S. C., (2011). Social justice and an information democracy with free and open source software. Information, Society and Justice, Volume 4, (2) 19–28.

United Nations. (n.d.). Universal declaration of human rights. Retrieved from

What the open-access movement doesn’t want you to know. (n.d.). Retrieved from

Benefits of open access journals. (n.d.). Retrieved from

Suber, P., (n.d.). Open access overview. Focusing on open access to peer-reviewed research articles and their preprints. Retrieved from

Read the Budapest open access initiative. (2002, February 14). Retrieved from

Bethesda statement on open access publishing. (2003, June 20). Retrieved from

Berlin declaration on open access to knowledge in the sciences and humanities. (2003, October 22). Retrieved from

Freedom of opinion and expression has been entrenched in many constitutions today including Ghana where I come from. This was made possible through the consensus building which established the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This means people now have the right to express their opinion, share information and demand for one whether responsible or not.

Right to freedom of speech and expression of opinion (article 19) of the Universal Declaration of Human Right is the right step especially after a post war conflict that bedeviled the whole wide world.

To me, this right seem to have been curtailed for a lot of people including me since I did not have the media to express it. Thankfully, the influx of social media and advancement in information sharing erupted my awareness and that of many and increased the rate at which people put information across.

This Universal Declaration of Human Rights has a significant impact on social justice. It gives people the right to access information and accountability from governments and their agencies without prejudice, gives people the right to criticize the activities of those who are in authority and occupiers of public offices. It also gives people the liberty to share information with others no matter the nature of it. I think this is the way to uncover the many rot in the system especially in government.

The right to expression of opinion has really been significant. There has been transition of political power recently in Ghana where wild allegation were made against the outgone government that their officials leaving office stole cars belonging to the state while some bought theirs below their market value ( Upon critical interrogation and investigation by the national security and other security agencies, most of the allegations were found out to be true so these cars were returned to the state which saved the tax payer. This was made by a private media house which in a case without the law couldn’t have done.