“That is why we should celebrate the UDHR; why we don’t capitulate to critiques of human rights; not because of who wrote it into history, but because of all those who have disrupted history with it” (Amnesty International, 2023).
This year, Human Rights Day doesn’t only offer an occasion to reflect on the condition of human rights around the world. This year, we also have the possibility to reflect on how far we’ve come since 1948 and how we wish to go forward. In fact, this year marks 75 years since the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) was adopted.
Being born right after WWII, the UDHR has often been described as a victors’ project, a Western project, and thus heavily criticized. However, it should be taken into consideration that, at the time it was drafted, “The Egyptian delegate confirmed the “universality” of human rights and their applicability to persons subject to colonial rule or occupation. Women delegates from India, Brazil and the Dominican Republic ensured that equal rights of men and women were affirmed”. So, while criticism, both on the nature of the concept “human rights” and regarding the origin of the UDHR should be taken seriously and tackled, it is important to recognize that this declaration was the outcome of a collective effort. The aim of this collective effort was to create a shared framework to make sure all people could have their basic rights recognised and the possibility to appeal to an internationally recognised document when a violation of these rights was taking place. It created a shared political vocabulary that people could use to raise awareness and ask for help. In other words, the UDHR has certainly served as a valuable framework for human rights activism and policy in the past 75 years. So yes, it is not possible to ignore the problematic origin of this declaration, but we should also acknowledge that if we want to ensure better and safer life conditions for us humans, the animals, and for the planet, we have to shift our focus from what divides us to what unites us. History can sometimes be painful and therefore divisive, however, shared objectives can unite us and help us bring about positive change. What if we defined our identity by where we want to go instead of only by where we come from?
In this light, the UDHR can be seen as an incredibly powerful tool, as conveyed in the quote reported above: “That is why we should celebrate the UDHR […] not because of who wrote it into history, but because of all those who have disrupted history with it”. Positive change and better life conditions have been brought about in the past 75 years. People and communities around the world have appealed to the UDHR to bring about this change. The article continues: “Let’s get the history of the UDHR right. Not by whitewashing it or by ignoring the raging double standards of its implementation. But by paying homage: to those who used its extraordinary disruptive power during struggles for liberation and equality the world over; to those who made the UDHR real and authentic, in their struggle against colonialism and for independence; against bigotry and for equality; against patriarchy and for gender justice; for a world of greater dignity for ‘all members of the human family’” (Amnesty International, 2023). This is a time of homage and reflection.
How far have we actually come in these 75 years? Where do we want to be in 2048, a century after the drafting of the UDHR? Can we imagine ourselves collectively writing a revisited version of the declaration in 2048? A “UDHR drafted by the many, not by a privileged few”? What would that look like? But most importantly: are we ready to be a generation that doesn’t lose hope?
The UDHR consists of a preamble and 30 articles. The preamble includes the following clauses: “Whereas Member States have pledged themselves to achieve, in cooperation with the United Nations, the promotion of universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms” and ”Whereas a common understanding of these rights and freedoms is of the greatest importance for the full realization of this pledge”. It then proceeds to establish the following 30 rights:
1. All human beings are free and equal
2. No discrimination
3. Right to life
4. No slavery
5. No torture and inhuman treatment
6. Same right to use law
7. Equal before the law
8. Right to be treated fair by the court
9. No unfair detainment
10. Right to trial
11. Innocent until proved guilty
12. Right to privacy
13. Freedom to movement and residence
14. Right to asylum
15. Right to nationality
16. Rights to marry and have family
17. Right to own things
18. Freedom of thought and religion
19. Freedom of opinion and expression
20. Right to assemble
21. Right to democracy
22. Right to social security
23. Right to work
24. Right to rest and holiday
25. Right of social service
26. Right to education
27. Right of cultural and art
28. Freedom around the world
29. Subject to law
30. Human rights can’t be taken away
If one looks at the preamble and this list of rights, it sadly isn’t difficult to come up with many instances in which they are neglected or violated. One doesn’t need to think of examples in places far away in order to realize this. Reading the section about the Netherlands in the Amnesty International report 2022/23 is enough: “In October, in Groningen province, the local government issued an emergency regulation imposing a maximum penalty of three months’ imprisonment or a EUR 4,500 fine for anyone providing tents to homeless asylum seekers. […] To alleviate the overcrowding in asylum reception centers, the government introduced a measure delaying the family reunification process, placing it in breach of its obligations under the EU Family Reunification Directive and the right to family life”. On a different topic, “By the end of the year, however, no action had been taken to introduce human rights compliant regulation of algorithms to combat crime or to prohibit the use of nationality and race as risk factors” (p.270). This is all to say that if one looks at the current state of affairs, one could easily lose hope in the future. Yet, we should overcome this feeling and continue to collaborate to bring about systemic change. It is precisely because of the current state of affairs that we have a duty to act in defense of human rights, to speak up about them in our daily life, with our family and friends, with those outside our circles and, most importantly, to plant seeds of hope with our words and actions.
Liliana Gaddi
Additional source:
Hasselaar, J. J. (2020). Hope in the context of climate change: Jonathan sacks’ interpretation of the Exodus and radical uncertainty. International Journal of Public Theology, 14(2), 224-240.
Comments