CC BY
8n o
R
H T H H
E
c
K H
E
HAYRH
UDC 327.7
K.A. Suyunova
THE EMERGENCE OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND CONTRIBUTION OF NON-WESTERN
COUNTRIES AND CULTURES
With signing of Charter of the United Nations (UN) on 26 June 1945 HR started to receive great acknowledgement within the system of international law. Despite the long history of human rights many controversial issues still remain in the sphere. Some scholars argue that since the discourse on HR as we know it today originated in Western culture, HR are primarily a Western cultural construct and may not apply to other cultures.
Key words: human rights, universality, Western phenomenon, cultural relativism, Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
As an acknowledgement of one of the urgent issues of today's world, human rights (HR) are given high priority in international relations and development policies. HR are generally understood to be inalienable fundamental rights to which a person is inherently entitled.
It must be noted that HR started to receive such great acknowledgement within the system of international law with signing of Charter of the United Nations (UN) on 26 June 1945. In particular, all UN member-states agreed to take best endeavors for the protection of HR. Nevertheless, many controversial issues still remain in the sphere of protection of HR in spite of all the efforts. Moreover, there is no universally accepted legal system in our modern world with a single and precise set of opinions on the concept.
Edward Said and Shirin Ebadi all their lives reminded that all people, as participants in the construction of the eternal world of humanity, share such universal values as HR, justice and dignity. As the world underwent radical changes in response to certain intellectual currents, it became increasingly possible to observe the emergence of common elements of rights in various cultures, religions, and nations. One of the most acute debates in the field of HR is related to the question of whether HR are universal or exclusively a Western phenomenon. [4]
© Suyunova K.A., 2021.
Supervisor: Yasir Yilmaz - Department of History, Faculty Member, Professor at Palacky University in Olomouc, Czech Republic; Austrian Academy of Sciences, IHB - Institute for Habsburg and Balkan Studies.
For example, some scholars argue that since the discourse on HR as we know it today originated in Western culture, HR are primarily a Western cultural construct and may not apply to other cultures. In other words, HR are not necessarily universal. This position is usually described as "culturally relativistic", a term that is not legal, but rather philosophical. [2]
A striking example is the statement of J. Donnelly that initially the concept of HR and human dignity were not clearly separated and formulated, which in retrospect led to a distortion of the concept of HR and the false assumption that HR developed in other cultures than in the West. He argues that if in non-Western cultures the focus is attributed to human dignity, and in no way to HR. While in the Western understanding, the focus is given to the very essence of HR, which is completely alien to other non-Western cultures and religions. Jack Donnelly went on to arrogantly assert that although the idea of HR was first formed in the West in Modern times, this approach is particularly suited to modern social, political and economic conditions and therefore has a broad contemporary meaning even in the "third world". [3]
There is also another group of scientists who recognize the contribution of other traditions and theorists to this field. These scholars, while recognizing that modern concepts of international HR may have evolved largely from Western thought, suggest that its fundamental principles have precedents in other traditions and cultures, as well as in religion (both Western and non-Western). The values of justice, freedom of conscience, religious tolerance, and protection of life and property have all been part of the thinking of all the world's major religions, cultures, and civilizations. [7]
In this group, the view is expressed by Surya P. Subedi, an international lawyer and doctor of philosophy in international law. In his vision, despite the fact that the modern concept of HR is considered Western, the principles of HR, their basis originates not only in Western, but also in other civilizations, which in turn rejects the position of those who consider HR exclusively a Western concept. He argues that such vociferous statements only demonstrate the electoral values of the nineteenth century - the values of the peak period of colonial rule, when the entire world was divided into parts because of the West's "capture, divide and rule" policy. Thus, he believes that dictating and imposing their point of view, they did not fully take into account the events that took place before this period, ignoring the very nature of HR, based on universal values inherent in all major civilizations of the world. [8]
Another scholar of Pakistani origin, Abul a'la Maududi, argues that people in the West have a habit of attributing everything good to themselves, including HR. It is interesting to discuss his point of view on the claim that the concept of HR appeared with The Magna Carta. He claims that the truth is that until the seventeenth century, no one even knew that this document contained the principles of trial by jury, Habeas corpus, and parliamentary control over taxation. He suggests that the people who wrote The Magna Carta would be very surprised if they were told that their creation also contains all the ideals and principles of HR. The point is that they had no such intention and were not aware of the concept of HR that is now attributed to them. [5]
It is ironic that not so long ago, at the end of the nineteenth century, many scholars and politicians could not imagine that HR equally belong to all people. For example, although the United States Constitution emphasized in writing that all people should receive equal treatment, discrimination was still widespread in practice at those times. Equal rights were simply not granted to groups such as African Americans, native Americans, women, and other minorities. In fact, equality was understood in a very narrow sense. Meanwhile, it is clear that in modern times there has been a shift in the definition of equality to an idea that is much more inclusive. [7]
We would like to start by discussing the legal component, which is relevant in international documents, rather than the moral one. The key text for us today in this sense is the Universal Declaration of HR, adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1948. [1]
Despite the fact that unauthorized interventions continued to occur and the prolonged cold war, the creation of the United Nations marked the beginning of an unprecedented focus on HR on the part of the international community. Under the auspices of the UN, a database of key HR documents was developed, and the Universal Declaration of HR (UDHR) became the "common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations". [7]
The fact that non-Western cultures have also had a great influence on the development of modern HR instruments, in particular the UDHR, which will be discussed further, may seem impenetrable. In this case, we return to the fact that Western scientific circles are constantly trying to shape the entire Islamic world under a single form.
We may encounter the example of Jamil Baroudi in various academic publications. According to some scholars, Baroudi is an example of how Islam is generally negative about HR. In their arguments, they refer to the objections and arguments made by the representative of Saudi Arabia at the UN meeting regarding certain articles of the UDHR. In fact, these generalized conclusions have no basis and are generally short-sighted. [7]
Admittedly, Baroudi did object to the inclusion of a clause on freedom to change religion (Article 18 UDHR). However, this statement did not suggest Islam as the reason for his objection, as some observers mistakenly believe. Second, we should pay close attention to the fact that Baroudi was actually a Christian of Syrian origin, not a Saudi or Muslim. [6]
However, this view was opposed by some Muslim delegates who expressed a negative position. For example, Indian delegate Mohammad Habib referred to the Constitution of India, which guarantees the right to convert or be converted, and this provision applies to Muslims in India, who made up approximately 15-20% of the population. [9]
The foreign Minister of Pakistan and head of the delegation to the UN in 1948, sir Mohammad Zafrullah Khan and his delegation were very sensitive to this issue and felt it necessary to protect the honor of Islam. Sir M. Zafrulla explained: "the teachings of Islam were based on the Koran... which argued that neither the faith nor the conscience that gave birth to it could be binding. Islam did not formally condemn lack of faith, but hypocrisy". Thus, he insisted that the Koran itself presupposes freedom of religion and that this case in no way concerns Islam. [9]
But Article 18 UDHR was not the only bone of contention. According to Waltz, there were also objections to article 16 of the UDHR on marriage and family, which gave equal rights to both men and women to choose their spouses at their own will. Among Baroudi's suggestions was that instead of granting equal rights, women should be entitled to "full rights defined in their country's marriage laws". Baroudi's proposal was strongly rejected by the Pakistani delegate on the grounds that his proposed wording "would allow countries with laws that discriminate against women to continue to apply them".
Again, this circumstance does not in any way prove Islam's or any other non-Western religion's hostility to HR. And the strangest thing is that observers forget about the US position on this issue, where laws criminalizing interracial marriage were still widely applied at the time of the debate. The US strongly opposed the proposal to ban restrictions on marriage based on race, nationality or religion. [6]
If you look at the contributions made by Muslim-majority States, it is noteworthy that some countries, including Iraq, Libya, Morocco and Pakistan, have sent women as UN delegates to work on HR. One of the prominent participants in the drafting of UN pacts was the Iraqi delegate Bedia Afnan. It is noteworthy that the Iraqi delegate insisted on the inclusion of a new General article recognizing gender equality in the work of the Third Committee.
The proposal was received very negatively and was disputed by many delegates, including Western ones. The opposition point of view was that the need to highlight this article does not make sense, since the Charter proclaims the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family. However, Bedia Afnan, not content with treating women as insignificant and secondary, strongly stated that her delegation "considers it necessary to clearly state the equality of women with regard to economic, social and cultural rights". [6]
Her goal was achieved the hard way. After much debate and discussion, most States agreed, and Bedia Afnan's perseverance paid off. Afnan's proposal is formulated in article 3 of both the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), which requires States parties to ensure the equal right of men and women to the rights set forth in both covenants.
Thus, we can conclude, that human rights have a logic and a long history of their own. This stems from the fact that they have originated in domestic constitutional documents before becoming part of the corpus of international law, and that they regulate the relationships between the State and individuals under their jurisdiction. Statements about human rights being a Western phenomenon only demonstrate the values of the peak period of colonial rule, when the entire world was divided into parts because of the West's "capture, divide and rule" policy.
Thus, we believe that dictating and imposing this point of view, we risk to ignore the events that took place before this period, as well as the fact that non-Western cultures have also had a great influence on the development of modern HR instruments, in particular the UDHR, which neglects the very nature of HR, based on universal values inherent in all major civilizations of the world.
Bibliography:
1.Clapham A., Human Rights. A Very Short Introduction. 2nd, Rev. Ed, Corby: Oxford University Press, 2015.
2.Darraj S.M., The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Chelsea House P., 2010.
3.Donnelly J., Human Rights and Human Dignity: an Analytic Critique of Non-Western Conceptions of Human Rights, Washington, D.C.: American Political Science Association, 1982.
4.Manners I. The constitutive nature of values, images and principles in the European Union in Sonia Lucarelli, Ian Manners Values and Principles in European Union Foreign Policy (p.p.19-41), Routledge, 2006. (Article)
5.MaududI A., Human Rights in Islam, New Delhi: Markazi Maktaba Islami Publishers, 2016.
6.Mayer A.E., Islam and Human Rights: Tradition and Politics, S.l.: ROUTLEDGE, 2019.
7.Saeed A., Human Rights and Islam: an Introduction to Key Debates between Islamic Law and International Human Rights Law, Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2018.
8.Subedi S.P., Are the Principles of Human Rights Western Ideas-An Analysis of the Claim of the Asian Concept of Human Rights from the Perspectives of Hinduism, Cal. W. Int'l LJ 30, 45, 1999. (Article)
9.Waltz S.E., Universal Human Rights: The Contribution of Muslim States, Human Rights Quarterly 26, November 2004 (799-844). (Article)
SUYUNOVA KUMUSHAKHATOVNA - Erasmus Mundus Euroculture Master of Excellence student, University of Udine, Italy and Palacky University in Olomouc, Czech Republic.
