Point one is not how democracy works in most countries. In most cases, decisions are balanced by representatives voting for decisions that are favourable to their constituents. There is representation throughout the legislative process, which allows him rights to be front and centre on certain issues. As for point two, human rights are not static. As things change, especially technology, there will be debate about what constitutes human rights. How do you achieve that in a limited monarchy without a democratic system of some sort to create legislation? Do you have to rely on the benevolence and subjective interpretation of human rights held by the monarchy?