A Criticism of the Most Important Western Philosophical Theories of Rights

Western legal philosophers did the vast investigations regarding the nature of rights. Those extensive researches produced varied theories in this subject. Nowadays, among different philosopher's and lawyer's views, the most supported theories of the meaning of rights are called Benefit/Interest theory and Will/Choice theory.Notwithstanding different interpretations of Benefit/Interest theory, its adherents believe in the axiom that: a duty-bearer should give the benefit to the right-holder in each process of rights. This axiom can be criticised by some cases of rights in which either there is no interest for the right-holder like God or there is no correlated duty. According to Will/Choice theory, the nature of rights is that the right-holder can have control over the duty-bearer in doing the duty. There are some problems with this theory: Criminal law and inalienable rights are not compatible with Will/Choice theory. This theory can be criticised too by those rights which have no correlated duty. Thus, natural divine rights of God and some kinds of rights in Hohfeldean division show that Will/Choice theory is null.