LivingRights
LivingRights is a structured inquiry tool for exploring how rules, laws, and policies hold up against human rights principles. It facilitates debate and critical thinking at every level: from fairness and equality in daily life, to proportionality, legal obligations, and constitutional analysis. Work through 8 dimensions, watch five live meters respond, and compose a draft rule from the analysis.
How it works
Choose a statement
Pick from 100 curated statements grouped by level — from "Everyone should be allowed to say what they think" (ages 6–10) to "States may suspend rights in emergencies" (university and above). Or type in any rule you want to examine — a school policy, a proposed law, anything.
Answer 8 questions
Eight questions sharpen your analysis: who the rule applies to, what problem it solves, how it would be enforced, what evidence supports it, who benefits and who is harmed, whether people would accept it, and what safeguards exist.
See real-time analysis
As you answer, five meters update live — Rule of Law, Safeguards, Enforceability, Feasibility, and Social Support. The tool also cross-checks your rule against CRC and UDHR articles, marking whether it supports, risks, or potentially violates them.
Draft and compare
Your answers automatically compose a draft rule. Edit it directly to make it yours. Save multiple rules in one session to compare approaches, then export your full analysis.
Choose your level
Select the level that fits your audience. The tool will load matching statements and adjust the analysis depth accordingly.
Exploring fairness and how rules affect daily life
e.g. "Everyone should always be allowed to say what they think."
Understanding how rules are made, changed, and challenged
e.g. "Children should be allowed to vote on school rules."
Questioning who rules protect — and who they leave out
e.g. "The government may monitor phones to prevent crime."
Analysing competing rights and the trade-offs in law-making
e.g. "Hate speech should be criminalised."
Applying legal frameworks to complex, emerging questions
e.g. "Algorithms may decide over people's rights."
Evaluating policy proposals against international obligations
e.g. "Emergency powers should become structural."
Interrogating the foundations of law, power, and human rights
e.g. "Justice and law are fundamentally incompatible."