are there circumstances where human rights may be curtailed?

human rights is defined as, fundamental rights, esp. those believed to belong to an individual and in whose exercise a government may not interfere, as the rights to speak, associate, work, etc.
human rights can be in the form of freedom of expression, voting, socio-economic rights, and many more.

from the first passage, in paragraph 1,2 and 3. it has mentioned that there are times where human rights can be curtailed. a few reasons include, "the primacy of duty to the community over human rights." and also, "we should co-operate with the leaders and also, leaders are expected to me dominant" and lastly, "restriction of rights is justified if it could provide prosperity and economic progress"

in the context of my country, this is very true, the government has done a good job in providing us with certain rights like education where rules are set to make sure everyone has a primary education. the government can also proudly say that it has improved singaporeans standard of living. the classic example would be how we improved from a fishing village to a urban country with obvious developments that can be seen everywhere.

however, i feel that our rights should not be totally curtailed. as seen in passage 2, "freedom of expression in singapore- is most commonly championed by human rights groups."

in sinagpore, we only have one source of newspapers which is from the singapore press holdings which is controlled by the temasek group is under the government. in this case singapore is kind of lacking in freedom of expression. since singapore is gradually progressing, we should start considering in our human rights. Whereby we should have freedom of speech, so that our voices can be heard and not have most of the decisions made by our government.