There is also a debate about whether all rights are natural or legal. The fourth President of the United States, James Madison, represented Virginia in the House of Representatives and held that there are rights, such as a jury trial, which are social rights that derive neither from natural nor positive law (which are the basis of natural or statutory rights), but from the social contract from which a government derives its authority.  The above discussion of rights was written largely from the perspective of Anglo-American law and philosophy. It should be noted, however, that there is an aspect of legal rights that is found among continental European writers, but of which there is no trace in the Anglo-American tradition. It is the description of rights as “subjective” (subjective rights; subjective rights). It is said that human rights are equally acquired by all. A conventional consequence of this statement is that everyone has a duty to protect and promote the human rights of all others. In practice, however, the responsibility for the protection of human rights generally rests with national Governments and international intergovernmental bodies. Philosophers such as Thomas Pogge (1995) argue that the moral burden of guaranteeing human rights should fall disproportionately on these institutions, precisely because they are best placed to carry out this task effectively. According to this interpretation, non-governmental organizations and individuals play an important role in supporting the global protection of human rights, but the responsibility must lie with relevant national and international institutions such as the Governments of nation-States and bodies such as the United Nations and the World Bank.
It could be argued, for example, that human rights can be adequately guaranteed by the existence of reciprocal duties between individuals throughout the world. However, such a “privatization” of human rights would not take into account two particularly salient factors: individuals tend to give priority to the moral claims of their relatives, especially members of their own family or immediate community; The ability of individuals to perform their duties is largely determined by their personal financial situation. As a result, global inequalities in the distribution of wealth fundamentally undermine the ability of people in poor countries to reciprocate those living in richer countries. Such reasons underlie Pogge`s insistence that responsibility lies with national and international institutions. Adequate protection and promotion of human rights requires both that nation-States ensure the adequate provision of services and institutions to their own citizens, and that nation-States work together in international institutions to ensure the global conditions necessary for the protection and promotion of the human rights of all. It is also known as the subject of the law. A legal claim to which a person is entitled and which can be distinguished as the rightholder, subject or “person” of “inheritance”. Therefore, there can be no legal right without a subject or a person who possesses it. Subject here means the person to whom the rights are assigned. Therefore, a right is unthinkable without a subject or a person who possesses it. The right holder does not need to be certain or precise.
A right that may belong to society as a whole is indefinite. The distinction between moral rights and legal rights as two distinct categories of rights is fundamental to understanding the foundations and potential application of human rights. Legal rights refer to all rights existing in existing jurisdictions. Legal action is a right that enjoys the recognition and protection of the law. Questions about their existence can be resolved simply by identifying the relevant legal instrument or act. It cannot be said that a legal action has entered into force before its entry into force and that the limits of its validity are determined by the competence of the body that adopted the relevant legislation. An example of a legal right would be my daughter`s legal right to an adequate education, as enshrined in the Education Act of the United Kingdom (1944).