The French revolution led to the overthrow of the absolutist monarchy and the adoption of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen. Photo:Shutterstock

July 4 and July 14 are the national days of the US and France respectively. The first commemorates the adoption of the Declaration of Independence by the Continental Congress in 1776 that transformed the rebellion by the 13 North American colonies against Great Britain into a revolution that led to the establishment of the US as an independent nation.

Le quatorze juillet marks the start of the French revolution of 1789 with the storming of the Bastille prison that led to the overthrow of the absolutist monarchy and the adoption of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen by the French National Constituent Assembly.

Only 13 years separate the two historic landmarks in modern history. In fact, the red, white and blue colours of both the US and the French flag, a mere coincidence, one might add, were not the only existing similarities between the newly-emerging nation in the north American continent on the one hand and one of the dominant political and military European powers on the other.

Both revolutions were grounded in the same philosophical thrust. At the time of the French Revolution, Thomas Jefferson, the main author of the US Declaration of Independence, was serving as a diplomat in Paris where he worked closely with the Marquis de Lafayette, who was also a close friend of George Washington and fought for the US in the American revolutionary war. Lafayette was one of the authors of the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen, a task in which the French revolutionaries were assisted by Jefferson. Both declarations are daughters of the Enlightenment.

Whereas it is claimed that the American Declaration was highly influenced by the English political philosopher John Locke, who exerted a profound influence on modern liberalism, the French document owes much to Geneva-born Jean-Jacques Rousseau.

In 1762, Rousseau published ‘The social contract’, a treatise on ‘Principles of political right’, which helped to inspire political reforms in Europe and argued against the supposedly-divine right of absolute monarchs to govern nations and peoples.

In 1754, Rousseau had written his ‘Discourse on inequality’, a dissertation that explores the link between human nature and inequality between human beings.

Rousseau conceived of “two kinds of inequality among the human species; one, which I call natural or physical, because it is established by nature, and consists in a difference of age, health, bodily strength, and the qualities of the mind or of the soul: and another, which may be called moral or political inequality, because it depends on a kind of convention, and is established, or at least authorised by the consent of men. This latter consists of the different privileges, which some men enjoy to the prejudice of others; such as that of being more rich, more honoured, more powerful or even in a position to exact obedience”.

He concludes that inequality that is established by positive right alone “clashes with natural right, whenever it is not proportionate to physical inequality”.

Maltese society still faces significant challenges in trying to come to terms with the reality of diversity

‘The social contract’ opens with the powerful phrase: “Man is born free; and everywhere he is in chains. One thinks himself the master of others, and still remains a greater slave than they.” In essence, Rousseau argues that sovereignty should rest with the people, while outlining the fundamentals for a legitimate political order within a framework of classical republicanism, just like Locke whose ideas on the latter are reflected in the US Declaration of Independence.

The Declaration of Independence practically starts with the phrase that “all men are created equal”. Moreover, it adds that “they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”.

Article 3 of the French Declaration proclaims in similar fashion that “All men are equal by nature and before the law”.

All men have “sacred and inalienable rights” and that government is instituted in order to guarantee to each individual the enjoyment of such rights.

Leaving aside for now the violent period France experienced after the revolution, and the American civil war almost a century after its independence, undoubtedly both revolutions are landmarks in modern history since they marked the beginning of the end of the claim by absolute monarchs to govern by divine right as well as to the creation of the notion of a State founded on a separation of powers and on the rule of law.

Over the past decades we have witnessed a further development in the evolution of the modern State with the entrenchment of civil rights and civil liberties in our political and juridical systems.

On July 2, 1964, US President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits any kind of discrimination based on race, colour, religion or national origin and, finally, led to desegregation at federal level. Normally, civil rights would now refer to the basic right of each individual to be free from any unequal treatment based on certain characteristics such as race, sex, religion, age, disability, national origin and sexual orientation.

The term ‘civil liberties’ refers to rights enshrined in a Constitution or other legislation or established by judicial process and would include rights such as the right to vote, freedom of speech and freedom of religion.

Following amendments unanimously approved by the Maltese Parliament in 2014, article 32 of the Maltese Constitution lists as the grounds for non-discrimination race, place of origin, political opinions, colour, creed, sex, sexual orientation or gender identity whereas article 45 affords protection from differential treatment of individuals on the basis of any of such grounds.

Incidentally, I find it rather disturbing that the website of the Maltese Parliament contains outdated Maltese and English versions of our Constitution that do not include the amendments introduced by Act XX of 2011 and by Acts VII and X of 2014, the latter being the law which added sexual orientation and gender identity to the list of grounds for non-discrimination.

The latest amendments to the versions of the Constitution on the website of the Maltese Parliament were signed into law in September 2007.

However, Maltese society still faces significant challenges in trying to come to terms with the reality of diversity.

The Daboma Jack incident will, I hope, at least shock some people into realising that beneath the surface of what appears to be a tolerant society, there are a significant number of individuals who bear a profound dislike or inherent fear of anyone who may be different from him or her.

Moreover, these individuals are not limited to some category that may be classified as ‘uneducated’. We find persons who claim to be of high standing who make racist statements. Others feed on religious sentiment to reinforce bigotry or sow fear when it comes to sexual orientation or gender identity.

As we commemorate le quatorze juillet on Tuesday, and this year I do so for the first time as a proud newly-instituted Chevalier de l’Ordre National du Mérite of the French Republic, let us never forget that great declaration that “All men are equal by nature and before the law”.

Irrespective of whether one is religious or not, that is whether he or she holds that human dignity is inherent in the human person qua human, or because he or she is created in the image and after the likeness of God, our equality is our birth right and does not depend on any other characteristic that may make one person different from another.

Moreover, the laws a State enacts on behalf of society must guarantee this equality in every respect, including in aspects such as the right to have a family.

This is not to be regarded as some generous concession whereby a majority may be ‘tolerating’ a minority but something which is being done because it is right.

Indeed, many atrocities might have been committed in the name of Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité, however, the ideals that underpin both the American and the French declarations are still valid today more than ever and should continue to enlighten us all as we strive to mould a society that is fairer and more just and where equality becomes part of the mindset of each and every individual who truly appreciates his or her dignity as a human being.