- What is the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights?
- Why is December 10
celebrated as "Human Rights Day?"
- Are governments legally
required to respect the principles outlined in
the UDHR?
- Can the principles of
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights be
enforced?
- Are all rights in the
Universal Declaration regarded as equally
important?
- Does the UDHR
successfully incorporate different concepts of
human rights?
- Does the UDHR balance
the rights of the individual with the needs of
the community?
- Why does the Universal
Declaration ring true for persons from all
cultures?
- Did developing nations
participate in the drafting of the UDHR of Human
Rights?
- Is the UDHR relevant to
nations that gained their independence after its
adoption?
- Does the 50-year old
UDHR adequately address current human rights
dilemmas?
- After adopting the
Universal Declaration, what was the next step?
- Is the United States a
party to any international human rights treaties?
- What tools does the
United Nations have for protecting human rights?
- What can I do to uphold
the principles of the Universal Declaration?
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is the
primary international articulation of the fundamental and
inalienable rights of all members of the human family.
Adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on
December 10, 1948, the UDHR represents the first
comprehensive agreement among nations as to the specific
rights and freedoms of all human beings.
Among others, these include civil and political rights
such as the right not to be subjected to torture, to
equality before the law, to a fair trial, to freedom of
movement, to asylum and to freedom of thought,
conscience, religion, opinion and expression. The rights
outlined in the UDHR also include economic, social and
cultural rights such as the right to food, clothing,
housing and medical care, to social security, to work, to
equal pay for equal work, to form trade unions and to
education.
Originally intended as a "common standard of
achievement for all peoples and all nations", over
the past fifty years the Universal Declaration has become
a cornerstone of customary international law, and all
governments are now bound to apply its principles.
Because the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
successfully encompasses legal, moral and philosophical
beliefs held true by all peoples, it has become a living
document which asserts its own elevating force on the
events of our world.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights was adopted
late in the evening on December 10, 1948. For this reason
people throughout the world have chosen to celebrate this
date as Human Rights Day. We celebrate not only
to mark the achievements of those who came before us, but
also to renew our own faith in and commitment to the
Universal Declaration and to the principles it sets
forth.
This reaffirmation is crucial to the protection of
human rights. December 10 is also an opportunity for us
to educate ourselves about the importance of respect for
every person. Each year on December 10, people all over
the world act in solidarity to reinforce their pledge to
a world defined by the equal and inalienable rights of
all human beings. Human Rights Day is an opportunity for
each successive generation to endorse the principles of
the Universal Declaration with a renewed sense of
commitment.
Yes. While the record shows that most of those who
adopted the UDHR did not imagine it to be a legally
binding document, the legal impact of the Universal
Declaration has been much greater than perhaps any of its
framers had imagined.
Today, direct reference to the UDHR is made in the
constitutions of many nations that realized their
independence after the document was adopted. Prime
ministers, presidents, legislators, judges, lawyers,
legal scholars, human rights activists and ordinary
people throughout the world have accepted the Universal
Declaration as an essential legal code. Dozens of legally
binding international treaties are based on the
principles set forth in the UDHR, and the document has
been cited as justification for numerous United Nations
actions, including acts of the Security Council.
As oppressed individuals turn increasingly to the
Universal Declaration for protection and relief, so
governments have come to accept the document not just as
a noble aspiration, but as a standard that must be
realized. Because it is universal, a central and integral
part of our international legal structure, the Universal
Declaration is widely accepted as a primary building
block of customary international law -- an indispensable
tool in upholding human rights for all.
Yes. A founding principle of the United Nations is
"to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in
the dignity and worth of the human person [and] in the
equal rights of men and women..." The Universal
Declaration recognizes respect for human rights as the
"foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the
world." Accordingly, along with the UN Charter, the
Universal Declaration has provided the moral and legal
basis for United Nations action, including action by the
Security Council, against violators of human rights.
Actions undertaken by the United Nations have included
the dispatch of UN investigators, called Special
Rapporteurs, to monitor and report on abuses, the
establishment of human rights field missions in
trouble-spots where the UN conducts peacekeeping
operations, and the imposition of economic and political
sanctions.
Of course the struggle to fully implement human rights
is ongoing. In recent years, the UN Security Council has
created two international tribunals to bring to justice
those individuals responsible for acts of genocide and
other crimes against humanity committed in Rwanda and the
former Yugoslavia. The UN is currently working to
establish a permanent International Criminal Court that
will hold individual human rights abusers accountable and
vigorously pursue justice for the individual victims of
genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes.
But enforcement of human rights principles goes beyond
the UN system. Countries have included the language and
principles of the UDHR in their national constitutions,
and in their statutory laws and regulations. Lawyers
appeal to the principles of the Universal Declaration as
they litigate in defense of clients. Non-governmental
organizations like Amnesty International and Human Rights
Watch use the powerful principles and language of the
UDHR to advocate for the release of political prisoners
and the relief of those who suffer abuse. As these
organizations and others have demonstrated, public
exposure and condemnation of rights violations has proven
to be a surprisingly effective remedy.
Yes -- although there are some differences of opinion
about how to realize the rights and freedoms in the
Universal Declaration. The separation of the various
rights set forth in the UDHR into two legally binding
International Covenants reflected some of these
differences in approach to implementation.
Many Western countries argued that economic, social
and cultural rights were not "justiciable"
– for instance, if an individual lacks adequate
food, clothing or shelter, it may be difficult, in a
court of law, to determine who is responsible for the
circumstances. It was also recognized that the UDHR
encompassed both "positive" and
"negative" rights. Positive rights (e.g. the
right to education) require that someone do something to
ensure a specific right, while negative rights (e.g. the
right not to be subjected to torture) demand that someone
not do something.
In their work, the UDHR drafters brought together
rights given varying ideological emphasis throughout the
world. Civil and political rights were more heavily
emphasized in liberal-democratic countries while economic
and social rights were aggressively advocated by what
were then (in the late 1940's) Communist countries.
Unfortunately, the two were pitted against one and other,
with the Soviet bloc countries arguing that economic and
social rights had priority over civil and political. This
was a thinly disguised effort to cover up Soviet
disregard for and violation of basic civil and political
rights. As the Soviet system opened up in the 1980s,
nations acknowledged that all rights are interdependent,
and that implementing one "set of rights" was
no excuse for failing to implement the other.
As standard practice, most countries have ratified the
two human rights Covenants simultaneously. The two
treaties were adopted by the General Assembly at the same
time to demonstrate that one "basket" of rights
was not to have priority over the other. In fact, the
international community has come to the firm recognition
that all human rights are indivisible, interdependent,
interrelated and interconnected.
Yes. The drafting of the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights represented the first time in history that
people from cultures throughout the world worked together
to formulate a comprehensive and common vision of
inalienable human rights. In the UN General
Assembly’s Third Committee alone, there were 85
meetings held with a total of 1,400 separate votes taken
on various issues concerning the drafting of the
Declaration (this is after the Commission on Human Rights
had completed its work!). For nearly three years,
representatives of various nations labored to enumerate
and articulate the specific rights and freedoms that had
been more broadly guaranteed to all in the UN Charter.
Remembering that the world was embroiled in the
ideological controversies of the Cold War, this was an
incredibly complicated and difficult task. Yet the final
document encompassed rights and freedoms given varying
emphasis by both Western democratic and Communist
countries. The Universal Declaration reflects different
beliefs as to the philosophical basis of human rights and
balances traditional civil and political rights with
economic, social and cultural rights.
The drafters of the UDHR struggled through a multitude
of sometimes subtle and sometimes stark differences in
linguistic, cultural, political, and philosophical
values. The world’s major legal systems and legal
philosophies were considered in stages of the debate as
were, to varying degrees, the most widely practiced
religious beliefs, including Buddhist, Christian,
Confucian, Hindu, Islamic and Jewish traditions. Under
the chairmanship of Eleanor Roosevelt, the Commission on
Human Rights successfully reached a shared understanding
of what constitutes the inalienable rights and freedoms
of all human beings in every corner of the globe.
Yes. The UDHR addresses the rights of the individual
human person. Yet these rights are often realized only in
community with other people. Therefore, the Universal
Declaration sets forth individual rights in the context
of a larger society.
The UDHR’s Preamble speaks of "the human
family," the need to develop "friendly
relations between nations" and the determination of
the "peoples of the United Nations" to promote
"social progress." Article 22 regards
"everyone as a member of society," Article 27
speaks of the right to freely participate in "the
cultural life of the community" and Article 28
addresses the need for "a social and international
order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in [the]
Declaration can be fully realized."
Finally, Article 29 says, "Everyone has duties to
the community in which alone the free and full
development of his personality is possible." The
Article goes on to say that in the exercise of his or her
rights and freedoms, "everyone shall be subject only
to such limitations as are determined by law solely for
the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for
the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just
requirements of morality, public order and the general
welfare in a democratic society."
At the same time, the Universal Declaration makes it
clear that none of the rights and freedoms in the UDHR
may be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles
of the United Nations. While the Universal Declaration
recognizes the inalienable rights and fundamental
freedoms of the individual human being, it also
recognizes that human beings live in community with one
another, and that this community is vital to the complete
human person.
The authors of the UDHR strove to understand and
articulate their differing cultural traditions and
convictions throughout every stage of their complex work.
In fact, most of the debate and discussion centered on
negotiating differences in cultural and historical
perspective. A special group was employed to sort out the
differences in meaning of every word of each article as
translated through the official languages of the United
Nations.
This process of debate and discussion had an
importance of its own. Never before had such a diverse
group of people come together to explain the values and
traditions that define the core nature of their
respective societies. It was a real international
learning experience. In many ways, the debate helped to
illuminate the ideological differences that drive
decision making on the most crucial international issues.
In the end though, those involved in this three year
process held the rights enumerated in the UDHR to be
truly universal -- belonging to members of every society
and culture. They agreed that the Universal Declaration
reflected shared convictions and beliefs. The rights were
regarded as transcending national, social and cultural
boundaries.
All of these rights are necessary to the person who
would realize his or her full potential as a human being.
As such, they represent a universal standard that has
meaning for all people.
Yes. A number of developing nations actively
participated in the UDHR drafting process. In fact, it
was the representative of Panama who submitted a draft
declaration of fundamental human rights and freedoms in
the first session of the UN’s General Assembly, thus
officially putting a declaration on the UN’s agenda.
Numerous proposals from countries such as Chile, Cuba
and India were debated and adopted during the UDHR’s
drafting process. The constitutions of fifty-five nations
were introduced and considered during the deliberations.
Nations voting in favor of the UDHR’s adoption
included Afghanistan, China, Ethiopia, India, Liberia,
Pakistan, Thailand and all of the UN Member States from
Central and South America. It should also be noted that
two of the more important contributors to the framing of
the UDHR, India’s Hansa Mehta and Lebanon’s
Charles Malik, were from developing countries.
Individuals in developing countries commonly turn to
the Universal Declaration in claiming both civil and
political as well as economic and social rights. The UDHR
says, that "Everyone has the right to take part in
the government of his [or her] country", it also
says that "Everyone has a right to a standard of
living adequate for the health and well-being" of
both self and family. Developed and developing countries
alike endeavor to make all these rights a reality.
Yes. With the realities of a post-war world, many of
today’s countries were colonies or not yet
independent when the UDHR drafting process took place.
Yet these new democracies have consistently embraced the
principles of the Universal Declaration as they emerge
from under the weight of military dictatorships,
theocracies, and periods of colonial, authoritarian or
totalitarian rule.
At the time that the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights was adopted, there were only 58 Member States to
the United Nations. Today there are 185 members. As they
have gained their freedom, these new Members States have
often integrated the UDHR directly into their national
constitutions and have affirmed and reaffirmed their
faith in the Universal Declaration through numerous UN
resolutions and international human rights treaties.
Individual citizens in these new nations often point
to the Universal Declaration as a primary source of
inspiration in their own struggles for independence,
sovereignty and self-determination. Even once oppressed
countries that abstained from voting on the UDHR in 1948
(such as apartheid South Africa and those in the former
Soviet bloc) have endorsed the Declaration as a sound and
necessary instrument for preserving human rights in every
nation on earth. Adherence to the principles of the UDHR
has become a moral prerequisite for full participation in
the community of nations.
Yes. The UDHR sets forth a framework for realization
of the full scope of human rights and freedoms. By
design, it is an open-ended and forward-looking document.
For instance, Article Two says, that everyone is entitled
to all the rights and freedoms set forth in the
Declaration, "without distinction of any kind, such
as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or
other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth
or other status." By adding the phrase, "or
other status," the UDHR’s framers recognized
that with time other kinds of discrimination might
attract public attention, and they worked to anticipate
this.
Unfortunately, the challenges that the UDHR addressed
in 1948 are still very much present in our world.
Governments continue to torture and murder individuals
because of their beliefs, their ethnicity, or their
opinions. Millions across the globe remain
"ill-housed, ill-clad, ill-nourished." And, if
we ask ourselves which of the rights, framed in 1948,
might be dismissed today, we find that none may be. Who
would argue that torture or slavery is necessitated by
the demands of modern life or of a global economy? Those
who have suggested that the rights enumerated in the
Universal Declaration are outdated, seem to do so in an
attempt to justify oppressive measures that undermine
those rights.
Respect for the rights of every individual is enduring
and the struggle against human rights violators, ongoing.
More and more, individuals throughout the world have
formed groups to document the suppression of freedoms set
forth in the UDHR and to demand that the Declaration be
fully respected in their own societies. The continued
violation of human rights - and the achievements of
ordinary citizens who turn to the UDHR for defense - both
highlight the increasing relevance and importance of the
Universal Declaration. The urgent need to protect these
rights is more compelling than ever.
While the significance of the Universal Declaration
cannot be overestimated, it is important to remember that
the UN Commission on Human Rights which drafted the
document was also charged with drafting a legally binding
international treaty on human rights, and with creating
effective measures of implementation.
After many years of negotiations, it was ultimately
decided that what had been imagined as a single human
rights treaty should actually be two treaties or
"Covenants." The rights acknowledged in the
Universal Declaration were separated into these two
distinct Covenants, respectively, the "International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights" and the
"International Covenant on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights," both of which were adopted by the
General Assembly in 1966. They entered into force in
1976, and have been ratified by more than 130 states.
Taken together, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
along with the two legally binding Covenants form the
"International Bill of Rights."
The Covenants were drafted and adopted as legally
binding international treaties meant to ensure full
protection of the rights proclaimed in the Universal
Declaration. They elaborate the rights proclaimed in the
Declaration in more specific language and they also
elaborate the limitations on these rights. Each of the
Covenants is monitored by a committee of experts which
reviews the performance of states in upholding the agreed
upon provisions.
Over the last 50 years, the rights set forth in the
UDHR have been reiterated and affirmed in numerous
international human rights treaties dealing with specific
populations or with specific rights and freedoms. The
rights have also been incorporated into regional human
rights treaties and documents such as the "European
Convention of Human Rights," the "European
Social Charter," the "African Charter of Human
and Peoples Rights," and the "Helsinki
Accords."
The United States has signed and ratified the
"International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights" (but not the Covenant’s Optional
Protocol, which would allow Americans to seek remedy
through the UN for alleged rights violations by the US
government). And President Carter has signed the
"International Covenant on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights" for the U.S., but the U.S.
government and the people of the United States have not
yet generated the political will necessary to ratify this
Covenant. While Americans generally recognize civil and
political rights as human rights, they have not always
shared the same understanding with regard to economic,
social and cultural rights (such as the rights to food,
clothing, housing and health care).
The U.S. has ratified a number of other human rights
treaties including the "Convention on the Prevention
and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide," the
"International Convention on the Elimination of
Racial Discrimination," and the "Convention
against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading
Treatment or Punishment." The first of these (the
Genocide Convention) was signed only in 1988, putting the
U.S. well behind most other countries in ratifying human
rights treaties. In addition, the U.S. has consistently
attached reservations to the human rights treaties that
it has ratified. These reservations have evoked criticism
from many non-governmental organizations that argue they
limit the legal impact of the treaties in the United
States.
Still other important treaties remain unsigned or
un-ratified. For instance, every country in the world --
except the U.S. and Somalia -- has ratified the
"Convention on the Rights of the Child." And,
President Clinton has recently joined millions of women
and men throughout the country in calling on the U.S.
Senate to give its "advice and consent" to
ratify the "Convention to Eliminate Discrimination
against Women" – an important international
treaty which sets forth the rights of women to equality
with men.
Based upon the conviction that governments have an
obligation to protect the human rights proclaimed by the
UDHR, the United Nations has created a number of
mechanisms and procedures to influence the conduct of
governments that violate these rights.
The Commission on Human Rights is the primary
international forum for addressing human rights
violations. The Commission has created a number of
specialized bodies to monitor and report on human rights
problems such as torture, free expression, violence
against women and religious freedom worldwide. Its
Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and
Protection of Minorities sets standards and conducts
studies of new human rights issues. There is also a
Commission on the Status of Women. Each of the six major
international human rights treaties established an expert
Committee that monitors the respective treaty.
Recently, the UN created the post of High Commissioner
for Human Rights. Establishment of this high-level
position will help make human rights even more central to
the work of the UN by giving these issues the political
stature and voice they need in the international arena.
This post was fiercely advocated for decades by
non-governmental organizations that wanted to see human
rights defended by a real champion at the global level.
In recent years, the UN Security Council has created
two international war crimes tribunals (for atrocities in
Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia). The UN is currently
working to establish a permanent International Criminal
Court that will hold violators accountable and vigorously
pursue justice for the individual victims of genocide,
war crimes and crimes against humanity.
Finally, the UN strives not only to protect human
rights, but to promote them as well. The UN offers
technical assistance to countries, publishes human rights
information and makes human rights counselors and
educators available at the request of governments. Of
course, many of the UN’s specialized agencies are
actively engaged in human rights issues as a component of
their work, including UNICEF, UNESCO, the International
Labor Organization, and the UN High Commissioner for
Refugees. Election monitoring in post-conflict situations
is an example of how the international community helps
promote civil and political rights, while emergency
relief operations promote rights such as the right to
food and shelter.
Read the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Familiarize yourself with those human rights and
fundamental freedoms that belong to you. Defend these
rights for yourself and for those who struggle in their
own defense.
The Preamble of the UDHR says that every one of us
should "strive by teaching and education to promote
respect for these rights and freedoms" because a
"common understanding" of them is of the
"greatest importance" to their full
realization. Tell your friends, family, neighbors,
teachers, and colleagues about the UDHR. Tell everyone!
As you move through your day at work or school or
home, pause to ask yourself if all of your rights and
freedoms are fully respected. Are the rights of those
around you respected? If not, why? Can you change
something by letting someone know that the standards set
forth in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights are
not being met?
The members of the National Coordinating Committee for
UDHR50 have created an Action Agenda that will give you
some great ideas about how you can get involved in
protecting and promoting human rights today. Remember
that as Eleanor Roosevelt said, respect for universal
human rights begins in "small places, close to
home." She recognized that ultimately, the
protection and promotion of human rights is "IN YOUR
HANDS!"
National Coordinating Committee for
UDHR50.
Copyright © Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt Institute.
All rights reserved.
Revised: August 27, 1998.
|