Paper 1 Topics: Human Rights (Cambridge (CIE) AS English General Paper): Revision Note
Exam code: 8021
Paper 1 essay summary
Paper 1 of the CIE AS English General Paper is the essay component
You will select one question from a list of ten options to write an essay of approximately 600-700 words
The questions concern contemporary issues
Here, we will focus on the theme of human rights, which falls into the topic area of economic, historical, moral, political and social issues. The theme can include:
Human development and rights around the world
Social inequality
The media and censorship
These questions are designed to promote argument and evaluation rather than mere description.
Why human rights matter in Paper 1
Many General Paper human rights questions ask you to explore what constitutes human rights and how these are allowed and/or restricted around the world.
The exam is not testing your specialist knowledge, but rather your ability to think critically, write clearly and use examples effectively, which are all part of the Assessment Objectives.
To achieve a Level 5 essay, you will need to:
Select and apply relevant information and examples (AO1)
Analyse and evaluate arguments from more than one perspective (AO2)
Communicate fluently and accurately in a formal style (AO3)
Remember, your essay on any topic is rewarded for balanced thinking. Avoid one-sided answers, as examiners look for essays that weigh different points of view before drawing a conclusion.
Paper 1 exam-style essay questions on human rights
1. The right to uncensored information
To what extent should governments limit media freedom to protect citizens from harmful content and disinformation?
To answer this question, you can draw heavily on the information contained in the revision notes indicated below on the ethical and social implications of censorship, such as the tension between the fundamental human right to freedom of expression and the role of the state in maintaining public order and security.
Arguments for limiting media freedom could explore the need to protect vulnerable communities from content that may incite violence or discrimination. They could refer to the reasons for internet censorship, which include restricting harmful content, preserving cultural norms, and combating disinformation. In times of emergency, censorship may be necessary for national security.
Counter-arguments could argue that freedom of expression is foundational to democratic societies and that ethical implications demand transparency and accountability in content censorship decisions to prevent abuses of power. Limiting media freedom can hinder access to accurate and diverse information, jeopardising informed decision-making in a democracy.
You can read more about this topic in the following revision notes:
2. The erosion of civil liberties
Evaluate the view that the increasing use of surveillance technology is inherently incompatible with protecting fundamental human rights and privacy.
To answer this question, you can draw heavily on the information contained in the revision notes indicated below on surveillance and human rights, particularly focusing on the conflict between security measures and civil liberties.
Arguments that surveillance is incompatible with rights should reference that surveillance is a means of controlling people's behaviour, and that critics warn of overreach and privacy invasion, arguing it undermines civil liberties. This approach often results in ethical concerns when censorship measures rely on invasive surveillance, and may reinforce existing social inequalities through disproportionate targeting (such as ethnic profiling). The increasing use of smart devices monitoring everyday behaviour also decreases privacy in public spaces.
Counter-arguments could focus on the legitimate uses of surveillance, such as its role in limiting criminal activity and generating evidence. It provides a protective function against unlawful and anti-social activities and may sometimes be justified, potentially overriding the right to privacy where criminal acts have been committed.
You can read more about this topic in the following revision notes:
3. Censorship as a political tool
To what extent does government censorship of the arts and media indicate a disregard for human rights?
To answer this question, you can draw heavily on the information contained in the revision notes indicated below on how authoritarian regimes use mass media control, such as the extreme example of Nazi Germany.
Arguments supporting that censorship is a definitive sign of rights disregard could explore how censoring information denies basic political rights and civil liberties. Evidence can be drawn from historical examples, such as the Nazi regime, which banned thousands of writers (such as Lenin's work due to Communism) and burned books to eliminate anti-Nazi ideas and opposition. This political suppression was often accompanied by severe human rights abuses, including sending opponents and minorities (such as Jewish people and homosexuals) to concentration camps.
Counter-arguments could argue that censorship is sometimes justified by the stated need to preserve cultural norms or heritage or to prevent the spread of harmful or unlawful content. Furthermore, restrictions on speech are often imposed when there is a risk to national security.
You can read more about this topic in the following revision notes:
4. The silent violation
Evaluate how effective international action has been in addressing human rights abuses in countries where governments restrict media freedom.
To answer this question, you can draw heavily on the information contained in the revision notes indicated below on geopolitical interventions and the difficulty of promoting human rights in non-transparent states.
Arguments highlighting the difficulty or ineffectiveness of intervention could emphasise that censorship reduces the level of opposition within a country, limiting the visibility needed to justify international action. When freedom of expression is lacking, it is harder for minority groups to improve their situation or for international bodies to scrutinise abuses. Interventions using financial aid can be misappropriated by corrupt regimes (such as Haiti, which received large amounts of aid with limited results).
Counter-arguments focusing on effectiveness or necessary actions could discuss how international bodies and NGOs encourage intervention, using diplomacy and peaceful interventions (such as Amnesty International petitioning oppressive governments). Trade embargoes are used to encourage a country to change its actions. Development aid (financial and military) can be provided with attached conditions to force recipient countries to stop human rights abuses.
You can read more about this topic in the following revision notes:
Role of government and international government organisations
Human rights, international law and international agreements
For an example of a full, top-scoring model answer for this topic, please see our Human Rights Model Answer.
Unlock more, it's free!
Did this page help you?
