A Need for Change: Enforcing Human Rights
Introduction

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights was born out of the hope of preventing another tragedy like the one the world experienced in the years preceding 1948. The relatively few countries that made up the United Nations were learning from two world wars and widespread colonialism and hoped to come to an agreement about how human beings should be treated.[1] When the Global Citizenship Commission got together to examine the Declaration over sixty years after its publication, it reflected upon the many changes the world has undergone (and continues to undergo) since the 1940s. Nations have come into existence or gained independence, the most powerful nations on Earth have changed, and the issue of climate change went from non-existent to urgent, just to name a few.[2] One thing that has not changed, though, is the occurrence of human rights violations.

From the violence against the civilians of Korea and Vietnam that occurred less than a decade after its writing, to the genocide of people in Cambodia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Rwanda, the torture of prisoners in nearly every corrupt government system, to the more recent ethnic cleansing and rampant rape in Ethiopia, the Russian invasion of Ukraine, and the arbitrary punishment of Iranian people who speak up against their government,[3] it is clear that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights failed and continues to fail to do what it set out to do: ensure a safe existence for everyone, no matter where they come from.

Many have recognized this and some of them propose that the Declaration be revised in order to adapt to our current world or include clauses that were not thought of at the time of writing. However, judging by the fact that the world has failed to adhere to the existing articles, it is clear that what the document says does not matter as much as how it is followed. If the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is to carry out its intended purpose, the system surrounding it needs to be reformed in order to allow for more effective enforcement.

Current Enforcement

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is a non-legally binding document. Nehemiah Robinson, the leader of the Institute of Jewish Affairs, called the Declaration a “recommendation,” and theorized that its original purpose was primarily to define what human rights are. It was naively assumed that all the countries who signed off on the Declaration would recognize its importance and choose to modify their laws and constitutions to incorporate the principles of the Declaration. In this case, the document mostly presents a “moral obligation” to countries, not a legal one, and the main consequence for failing to follow it is being judged and ousted from the world stage.[4] Although the authors of the document may have truly believed countries would have the integrity and intrinsic motivation to follow it, the many dictatorships and corrupt systems of the world show that moral force has not been enough.

Those who passed the Declaration as a simple ‘recommendation’ weren’t completely oblivious to the fact that plenty of countries in the world prioritize their self interests over the common good or their moral appearance. One organization that was created to deal with this issue is the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR). The OHCHR tries to prevent violations before they happen by working with vulnerable populations and countries, such as discriminated-against groups and countries that have not incorporated the Declaration’s recommendations into their laws. Their work mostly takes the form of education, such as teaching (and thus empowering) the people about their rights, or training local law enforcement about how they can follow and uphold the Declaration.[5]

This works to prevent violations of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, but when a violation has already occurred, there is only one avenue in which the UN can deal with it. When it becomes apparent and/or an investigation is undertaken to prove a country or group is violating human rights, the General Assembly can pass resolutions condemning the actions of the human rights violator. Unfortunately, these resolutions do only that: condemn. They do not punish the violator unless the Security Council votes on the resolution. For a resolution to pass in the Security Council, nine out of the fifteen members of the Council must vote in favor, and that must include all five of the P5 members: China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States.

Why this system should be reformed will be discussed later on, but for now, assuming a resolution is adopted by the Security Council, punishing a human rights violator usually takes the form of either economic sanctions/punishments or peacekeeping missions.[6] The think tank Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) says peacekeepers “prevent or contain fighting, stabilize postconflict zones, help implement peace accords, and assist democratic transitions.” In other words, the goal of a peacekeeping mission is to minimize human rights violations by promoting peace. They are only to use force if absolutely necessary. The CFR also says that missions have historically had “mixed results” when it comes to aiding conflicts for reasons which will be discussed in the next section.[7]

Issues With Enforcement

Just because the Security Council has the power to enforce human rights doesn’t mean it always will. In many cases (including the recent conflicts in Gaza and Ukraine), little or no action is taken when human rights are at stake because of the P5 veto system. As previously stated, for a resolution to turn into an enforceable mandate, it must receive all five of the permanent members’ votes. Although the P5 can occasionally work together, like agreeing that aid should be given to Afghanistan after the Taliban government takeover, there are plenty of other times when one country’s self-interests overrule not only the desires of nearly every other country (like when the United States recently blocked a humanitarian truce in Gaza despite the pleas of 140 other nations), but they overrule the human rights of millions. Other recent examples of this include Russia blocking aid to Syria and Russia vetoing the continuation of a peacekeeping mission in Mali, which many believe was the result of not only Russian self-interests, but a deal between Mali and Russia.[8]

The fact that five countries can override the safety of so many millions of people has led writers for the Journal of African Foreign Affairs to describe the Security Council as a “global dictatorship.”[9] Ignoring the ethics of this dynamic, this is a problem because it also hurts the credibility of the UN. The nations that did not exist or were excluded when the UN was created, as well as the nations who were colonized by the ones that have the most power in the UN, may intentionally reject the UN because they do not see it as representative or considerate towards their views. Especially when they know that any attempts to stop wrongdoings can be blocked if they negotiate with one of the P5 members, some governments may carry out human rights abuses because they know they will get away with it.

When the P5 does work together to mandate economic sanctions or a peacekeeping mission, it doesn’t always help the situation, either. Researchers Daniel Verdier and Byungwon Woo from Ohio State and Oakland University say that there are risks when it comes to punishing political actors through things like sanctions. Punishments can create a ‘rally around the flag’ effect, in which the offending government manages to convince its citizens that the punisher is posing a threat to them. The offending government may double down on their original position, gaining the support of the now defensive people and making the government less likely to comply with the Security Council’s demand in fear of backlash from their people.[10] Jack Snyder, a writer for Foreign Affairs, echoes this sentiment. Snyder believes that if the global stage uses “shaming” or “attacking” instead of framing their criticism as “sophisticated advice, an investment mindset, and positive inducements,” the human rights violator may take the UN’s attempts to stop the violations as an attack on their culture or national identity, effectively cutting off the chance to reach a diplomatic end to the issue.[11]

As for peacekeeping, the Council on Foreign Relations says that peacekeeping missions are likely to fail unless two conditions are met. First, all parties involved must be open to the presence of the peacekeepers and willing to seek out a peaceful solution. If one party is not cooperating, it should be the job of the United Nations to find a way to reach them or seek out an alternate solution if negotiations fail. Second, there should be “a fitting mandate with sufficient resources to carry it out,” meaning sufficient funding, enough international support, proper training for the peacekeepers, knowledge of and solutions to issues posed by climatic or geographical features of the area, and so on. As of right now, CFR claims, these conditions are not met often enough, meaning many peacekeeping missions do not work. In some cases, the peacekeepers themselves have been accused of carrying out human rights violations (especially sexual assault), for which the perpetrators are rarely held accountable.[12]

Conclusion: Possible Solutions

As has been argued in this paper, history and research have shown that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights has not been successful, likely due to the fact that it is largely unenforceable. Though there are ways for the Security Council to punish violators or intervene in situations where violations are taking place, it is clear that many situations get ignored due to the self interests of the most powerful countries in the world. Even when action is taken, it is not always successful in stopping the violations. What is to be done, then? The solution could begin with reforming the enforcement system. Possibly the clearest change could be restricting or all the way removing the P5 veto power to prevent a selfish economic or political cause from overruling the human rights of others. Even if it were just restricting the veto in cases in which the OHCHR decided there were human rights violations going on, it would surely result in more action than if the veto were allowed to continue unrestricted. Possibly, the entire United Nations system could be reformed to give other organs (in this case the Human Rights Council) the power to enforce the moral codes it espouses. This would call for changing the UN as we know it, but making the Universal Declaration of Human Rights truly universal may be worth the money and politics involved.

This paper’s second argument (that the current methods of enforcement are not always effective) demonstrated why achieving the Declaration’s goals will not be as simple as changing who has the power to enforce it. It will also involve making sure the methods are effective. When it comes to this, the following quote from Jack Snyder at Foreign Affairs should be considered: “Human rights activists do better when they work to strengthen people’s capacity to fight for their own rights, rather than browbeating oppressive leaders in ways that help them mobilize nationalist backlash.” In other words, citizens should be taught how to stand up for themselves, rather than leaders being given the chance to create the ‘rally around the flag’ phenomenon when they are attacked.[13]This also goes back to the previously explained concept of why ‘punishing’ a country for committing abuses may not be the best idea. In some cases, it may be the answer, but I believe the United Nations should focus more on preventing abuses rather than punishing abusers.

To do this, the United Nations should continue working with people on the ground, even in times and areas of peace. If the OHCHR recognizes that a law in a certain country is not adherent to the Declaration, for example, it should work to uphold the Declaration by working with government officials in a respectful manner. It should also work with the average people, teaching them what rights they have and helping them advocate for human rights respecting policies in their local communities. Snyder suggests that there are also certain social conditions which better allow for peace and human rights to flourish in a society. These include the country’s participation in the global economy, military alliances that protect from “authoritarian aggression,” and a system that allows for free speech and free information.[14] The OHCHR should make it its goal to make sure these conditions exist within vulnerable communities.

However, even when these conditions are met and the people are empowered, there is still a chance that human rights will be abused. When this happens, I believe in a similar idea: sending people on the ground to help the issue via methods like peacekeeping missions. However, these missions must be undertaken very carefully. The Council on Foreign Relations says the missions should be “tailored to their environments; guided by clear, inclusive political strategies; and take into account challenges such as climate risks.” This means specific goals, with proper training for the peacekeepers.[15] Possibly most importantly, the peacekeepers or another affiliate of the UN should find a way to get all sides involved in the conflict on board without creating the defensive response discussed earlier. What this looks like will surely vary by the situation, but remaining respectful rather than accusatory is always a good place to start.

Overall, if the United Nations wants to ensure that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights becomes universally followed, reforms should be made to the enforcement system. There should be a well-rounded approach that involves preventing violations by working diplomatically on a small scale, educating those who are at risk of having their rights violated and encouraging changes to local laws. If absolutely necessary, there should be a way to order a peacekeeping mission without the risk of being overridden by a minority of countries, and this mission should be well funded, well prepared, and accepted by all sides of the conflict.

Footnotes:

¹Jacob Dolinger, “The Failure of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights,” The University of Miami Inter-American Law Review 47, no. 2 (2016): 187–96. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26788283

[2] Gordon Brown, The Universal Declaration of Human Rights in the 21st Century : A Living Document in a Changing World, Cambridge: Open Book Publishers (2016): 32. https://login.proxy.marmot.org/login?auth=aims&url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=nleb k&AN=1226958&site=eds-live.

[3] Tirana Hassan, “World Report 2023,” Human Rights Watch, Accessed November 25, 2023. https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2023.

[4] Nehemiah Robinson, Universal Declaration of Human Rights: Its Origin, Significance, Application, and Interpretation (New York, Institute of Jewish Affairs, 1958), 38-52.
https://heinonline-org.hpld.idm.oclc.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.ali/undhro0001&id=67&collection=civil&index=.

[5] Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, “Make Human Rights A Reality for All,” 2019. https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Publications/UNHumanRights_CfS_cmyk_online.pdf

[6] George Chimdi Mbara and Suzanne Graham, “Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine: What Relevance for the United Nations Security Council Reforms?” Journal of African Foreign Affairs 10, no. 2 (August 2023) 98.

[7] Klobucista and Danielle Renwick, “The Role of Peacekeeping in Africa,” Council on Foreign Relations, October 5, 202. https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/role-peacekeeping-africa#chapter-title-0-1.

[8] Richard Gowan, “How the World Lost Faith in the UN,” Foreign Af airs, November 9, 2023. https://www.foreignaffairs.com/israel/how-world-lost-faith-united-nations-gaza.

[9] Mbara and Graham, “Russia’s Invasion,” 87.
https://login.proxy.marmot.org/login?auth=aims&url=https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/russia-s-invasion-ukraine-what-relevance-united/docview/2860275807/se-2.

[10] Daniel Verdier and Byungwon Woo, “Why Rewards Are Better Than Sanctions,” Economics and Politics 23, no. 2 (July 2011): 220–224.

[11] Jack Snyder, “Why the Human Rights Movement Is Losing,” Foreign Affairs, July 21, 2022. https://www.foreignaffairs.com/world/why-human-rights-movement-losing.

[12] Klobucista and Renwick, “The Role of Peacekeeping,”
https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/role-peacekeeping-africa#chapter-title-0-1.

[13] Snyder, “Why the Human Rights Movement Is Losing,”
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/world/why-human-rights-movement-losing.

[14] Snyder, “Why the Human Rights Movement Is Losing,”
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/world/why-human-rights-movement-losing.

[15] Klobucista and Renwick, “The Role of Peacekeeping,”
https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/role-peacekeeping-africa#chapter-title-0-1.

Bibliography

Brown, Gordon. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights in the 21st Century : A Living Document in a Changing World. Cambridge: Open Book Publishers, 2016. https://login.proxy.marmot.org/login?auth=aims&url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login. aspx?direct=true&db=nlebk&AN=1226958&site=eds-live.

Dolinger, Jacob. “The Failure of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.” The University of Miami Inter-American Law Review 47, no. 2 (2016): 164–99. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26788283.

Gowan, Richard. “How the World Lost Faith in the UN.” Foreign Affairs, November 9, 2023. https://www.foreignaffairs.com/israel/how-world-lost-faith-united-nations-gaza.

Hassan, Tirana. “World Report 2023.” Human Rights Watch. Accessed November 25, 2023. https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2023.

Klobucista, Claire, and Danielle Renwick. “The Role of Peacekeeping in Africa.” Council on Foreign Relations, October 5, 2021.

https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/role-peacekeeping-africa#chapter-title-0-1.

Mbara, George Chimdi and Suzanne Graham. “Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine: What Relevance for the United Nations Security Council Reforms?” Journal of African Foreign Affairs 10, no. 2 (August 2023): 85–107.

https://login.proxy.marmot.org/login?auth=aims&url=https://www.proquest.com/scholarl y-journals/russia-s-invasion-ukraine-what-relevance-united/docview/2860275807/se-2.

Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. “Make Human Rights A Reality for All.” 2019. https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Publications/UNHumanRights_CfS_ cmyk_online.pdf.

Robinson, Nehemiah. Universal Declaration of Human Rights: Its Origin, Significance, Application, and Interpretation. New York, Institute of Jewish Affairs, 1958. https://heinonline-org.hpld.idm.oclc.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.ali/undhro0001&id=67 &collection=civil&index=.

Snyder, Jack. “Why the Human Rights Movement Is Losing.” Foreign Affairs, July 21, 2022. https://www.foreignaffairs.com/world/why-human-rights-movement-losing.

Verdier, Daniel, and Byungwon Woo. “Why Rewards Are Better Than Sanctions.” Economics and Politics 23, no. 2 (July 2011): 220–38.

https://polisci.osu.edu/sites/polisci.osu.edu/files/Why%20are%20rewards%20better%20t han%20sanctions.pdf.

Lost in Translation:
Assessing the Limitations of the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights
in the 21st Century

The most widely translated document in human history was authored 75 years ago, by delegates from over fifty countries, convening to delineate the rights indispensable in many treaties, resolutions, and assemblies today. Beginning with “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights,” the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) reflected the wariness of the specter of future war as the atrocities of World War II came into clearer focus.[1] The UDHR was the first step forward in creating a more cohesive global environment, with the potential to contend with conflicts in a manner that would prevent iteration of brutal histories.

In 1948, the UDHR was adopted 48-0, with eight nations abstaining.[2] Enshrining thirty indivisible and unalienable rights endowed upon every human being, the UDHR underscored human rights as the foundation for peace and justice, emphasizing every state’s responsibility to promote and protect them.[3] Despite the UDHR being not legally binding, its fundamental principles have been codified into legally binding constitutions, political and economic frameworks, and international human rights law.[4] Through various contexts, issues, and developments, the UDHR has been fluidly and continuously engaged in global affairs, laying the bedrock for worldwide civil rights struggles since its composition.[5]

Nonetheless, the UDHR does not remain immune to criticism regarding its effectiveness. Amidst tyrannical governments, oppressive regimes, increasing numbers of refugees and internally displaced persons, and a surge in autocracy around the world, the UDHR’s influence is waning. In the grander context of geopolitical maelstrom, warfare, and religious and ethnic strife, fundamental human rights often go ignored. As Ukraine’s quagmire extends into its third year, human rights conflicts occur en masse in Israel-Palestine, and private sector exploitation continues to possess a chokehold over ordinary workers, the world is forced to reckon with a stark reality in which crimes against basic human rights are all too common.

2023 marks the 50^th anniversary of the coup that brought General Augusto Pinochet to power in Chile– a traumatic event for many Chileans. Over the next 17 years, he enforced an authoritarian regime over Chile, torturing, killing, and disappearing over 3,000 people.[6] One of the most flagrant violations of human rights post-UDHR, Pinochet murdered opponents, laid siege to the country, and enforced draconian censorship on the media to stymy “Marxism,” all while the world stood idly by. Pinochet additionally passed the Amnesty Law in 1978, granting amnesty to military personnel who committed crimes against humanity.[7] A sense of fear took hold of the country as chaos ensued, yet international human rights law never held Pinochet accountable.

Another instance in which the topic of human rights accountability has repeatedly surfaced is the Russo-Ukrainian War, in which missiles and Shahed drones have been employed against civilians.[8] Drone strikes and excessive militarization have increased in prevalence across international conflicts, contributing to modern perceptions of human rights violations. As technology advances, comprehensive and unambiguous legislation addressing unmanned aerial vehicles and drone strikes must be introduced and interpreted in international human rights law, utilizing the principles of the UDHR.[9] Russia’s invasion has violated several precepts of the UDHR, ushering calls for Vladimir Putin, president of Russia, to be brought to justice in front of the International Criminal Court (ICC). Based on claims of crimes against humanity, Vladimir Putin and Maria Lvova-Belova have had arrest warrants levied against them, the latter for the deportation of Ukrainian children to Russia. However, an actual trial for either seems incredibly unlikely; to obtain evidence, the ICC can only act with the Russian government’s direct assistance.[10] While the warrant is largely symbolic due to international courts not possessing an unfettered ability to hold leaders in power accountable, it is a triumph for recognition of the UDHR, and for global awareness of human rights.[11]

Denouncement of inhuman treatment and inequality is entrenched within the UDHR. Within the Israel-Palestine War, transgressions of nearly every article in the UDHR have ensued for more than 70 years. The close geographic proximity and history of conflict have caused conflict to bleed over from the armed forces into the civilian realm, engendering the suspension of basic human rights. The Palestinian population in the West Bank and Gaza has continuously suffered under Israeli occupation, experiencing settler encroachment and frequent incursions by the Israeli Defense Forces. Tensions over restrictions on Palestinian self-determination, instances of arbitrary detention, and forced displacement committed by Israel have echoed ever since Israel’s formation.[12] In October 2023, Hamas militants from the Gaza Strip ambushed Israeli civilians, committing grave abuses and taking hostages. Hostility rapidly escalated as Israel declared war on Hamas and began air-striking Gaza, a densely populated region with over two million civilian residents. Integral infrastructure, including refugee camps, schools, and hospitals, has been attacked, drawing condemnation from UN independent experts and the international community alike. Further grievances of a humanitarian crisis in Gaza have been spurred, amidst constant bombardment and the blockading of essential supplies by Israel.[13] With continued perpetuation of human rights violations, civilian populations are reeling under an onslaught that falls from the skies– with global condemnation, but little intervention.

An increasingly fractious global environment has proven a bulwark to the complete fulfillment of the UDHR. However, in some realms, it has been perceived as wholly inadequate in addressing the broader scope of human rights. The most prominent instance of the UDHR’s insufficiency at underscoring key human rights principles is the omittance of the private sector and transnational corporations from its purview. Some of the most blatant and reprehensible exploitation in the 21st century derives from commercial enterprises; from taking advantage of farmers for cheap labor, to overworking garment manufacturers in abysmal conditions, the private sector’s role in human rights abuses must not be underestimated. Private sector accountability has been primarily achieved, if at all, via civil society advocacy. Left out of the human rights discussion for far too long, it is imperative that UDHR discourse finally enshrines private sector nuances.[14]

Human rights violations, such as child labor and human trafficking, are rampant in the production of countless consumer goods, such as chocolate. A lack of regulatory action in cacao farming causes child labor to be globally widespread, with children being forced to engage in hazardous activities for miserable wages, often to the detriment of their education.[15] Child laborers use sharp tools, such as chainsaws and knives, to clear forests, violating international labor laws and a UN convention on eliminating the worst forms of child labor.[16] Allegations of child slavery, which is explicitly condemned in the UDHR, have also risen as children remain under the extreme poverty line, subjugated beneath the wills of private entities. In 2021, chocolate companies Mars, Nestlé and Hershey all faced child slavery lawsuits in the U.S.[17] A lack of transparency in supply chains leaves exploitation rampant, directly contradicting the mainstays of the UDHR. While slavery is explicitly addressed in the UDHR and child labor in international labor standards, UDHR discourse must fully examine the private sector’s gross exploitation, to promote responsible business practices and sustainable development. Leaving the UDHR suitable for present-day exigencies necessitates discussion, under the aegis of the UN, surrounding the private sector-human rights relationship.

Described as “boundlessly idealistic” by National Public Radio, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights attempts to establish a boundary between competing notions of idealism and realism, but ultimately fails.[18] It is an amalgamation of aspirations in a turbulent world, rather than a genuine aggregate of achievable goals. Therefore, the idea of engagement of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is a concept often viewed with circumspection, as there remains no definitive mechanism for enforcement, even through other UDHR-inspired, legally binding declarations. From an economic and political perspective— how much can a country without the economic and/or political means enforce human rights central to the UDHR? Does this render those rights almost illogical as economic inequalities and corruption degrade their impact? It follows that, although fifty-six countries participated in the drafting process, the UDHR was predicated on a largely Western point of view, neglecting the wills of lesser-developed countries. Development, and correlated freedoms, after all, were not rights recognized in the UDHR.[19]

Questions about the international community’s potential to intervene in civil conflict and the extent to which human rights can be enforced have often dominated debates about the effectiveness of the UDHR. Enforcing the UDHR has reached an impasse until these questions are resolved. The extent to which the international community can cite humanitarian reasons as a cause for intervention must be sufficiently defined. The UN possesses no armed forces; consequently, intervention remains subject to states’ discretion.[20] More complications arise in defining accountability for both state and non-state actors in the context of large-scale conflict. An unequivocal definition of the “right to protect” is fundamentally necessary for enforcement of the UDHR, without devolving into diplomatic discord.[21] Notwithstanding, states themselves are the final arbiters of implementation of human rights architecture, regardless of the efforts of activists and non-governmental organizations. A lack of comprehensive monitoring leaves space for states to flout the UDHR with impunity, compromising enforcement.[22]

During its creation, the UDHR considered a variety of social, cultural, and political viewpoints, benefiting from contributions from delegations all over the world; nevertheless, many contend that it is a Western document in nature. Vaunted as the “common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations,” the UDHR utilized Greek, French, and English philosophy, with influence from Abrahamic religions.[23] The multilateralism of the UDHR is thrown into question by a study from the University of Cyprus.[24] Denouncing the West for its “benevolent ignorance” of the economic plight of many around the world, it highlights the Western world’s hypocrisy. From the brutal regimes of European colonization enforced in the past, to the bombings in Iraq perpetrated by the United States under claims of a “War on Terror,” many remain skeptical of “human rights” through the prism of Western thought.[25] While African and Asian countries participated in the drafting process, many were still colonized by European powers, and consequently, participated minimally. Engagement from diverse cultures, minority groups, and ideologies is paramount for a more wide-scale acceptance and respect of human rights. Current baseline acknowledgement is insufficient to dispel perceptions among non-Western countries of the UDHR espousing neoliberal ethos. For instance, imbued within the UDHR is an overt emphasis on individual rights, a patently Western liberal virtue. Therefore, much of the criticism faced by the UDHR is derived from the fact that it draws from individualistic paradigms over communal ones; duty to one’s community is only briefly mentioned in Article 29.[26] In many Asian and African nations, duty to the family and state is integral to social cohesion and prosperity.[27] The importance of community is a cultural tenet repeatedly stressed in Hindu and Buddhist principles, as well as The African Charter on Human and People’s Rights and the Bangkok Declaration, two regional declarations influenced by the UDHR. The UDHR was uniquely “universal” for its time; in the 21st century, however, the UDHR must not remain reminiscent solely of 1940s-era, Western zeitgeist. As constitutions are amended to account for changes in societal viewpoints, the UDHR should not remain bereft of amendments. From the technological development of advanced weapons systems to a decrease in the West’s comparative global hegemony, the world has changed significantly since the creation of the UDHR. Thus, the UDHR should be adapted to accurately represent developments in human rights dialogue. True universality does not simply exist across space, but across time as well.

Does inclusivity matter in defining human rights and suiting them to consider cultural relativism, thereby repudiating ignorance? Or should there be a collective global perception of injustice? Since its inception, this persistent quandary is something the UDHR has repeatedly struggled to define to its detractors, undercutting its credibility. Inherent within the UDHR is the insinuation that Western practices define concepts of justice and fairness, tacitly implying that non-Western traditions do not fit those virtues to the same degree.[28] Thus, universality to many is simply a means by which the West attempts to exert cultural hegemony.[29] To perceive the UDHR in a more equitable manner, the rights and struggles of underrepresented groups must be adequately considered. Minority cultures, marginalized peoples, and Indigenous communities have long been oppressed at the hands of colonialism, imperialism, and genocide. Furthermore, their contributions and economic needs were forsaken by a purportedly “universal declaration.” Interpersonal and cross-cultural dialogue —thereby bolstering “universality”— is vital to consolidating the UDHR. True universality is the reconciliation of cosmopolitan cultural norms, starting with interpreting a more diverse, holistic, and comprehensive conception of the UDHR.

Today, the UDHR remains more crucial than ever. Its goals continue to be invoked, with its versatility suiting a wide variety of contexts. Global calls to justice are all anchored by the keystones of the UDHR, reflected in protests —in Iran for women’s rights, around the world in support of civilians caught in conflict in Israel-Palestine, and within the U.S. due to fundamental rights being blatantly stripped away.[30] While, 75 years on, the UDHR did not institutionalize all its creators hoped, it convinced the common person that their rights were worth fighting for. It heralded the confluence between human rights discourse and globalization. The UDHR’s legacy extends far beyond treaties; it defined the benchmark for global standards of human rights and dignity. Transcending across time as one of the most significant global statements ever made, recommitment to the UDHR will become more crucial than ever. Therefore, it does not require alteration, but rather, multidisciplinary rectification: acknowledgement of and dialogue surrounding its shortcomings in addressing technological development, the private sector, implementation mechanisms, and lack of contribution from underrepresented communities. The UDHR patently affirms that, as equals, every human possesses the “right to life, liberty, and security of person.” A global philosophy shared by all who walk the planet, its legacy will live on as perhaps the most influential human achievement dedicated to the common good.[31]

Footnotes:

[1] Universal Declaration of Human Rights. (1948, Dec 10). Retrieved from United Nations: https://www.un.org/sites/un2.un.org/files/2021/03/udhr.pdf

[2] Stand Up For Human Rights. (2017). The Universal Declaration of Human Rights – Facts & Figures. Retrieved from Stand Up For Human Rights: https://www.standup4humanrights.org/layout/files/The-Universal-Declaration-of-Human-Rights/UDHR%20Facts%20and%20Figures.pdf

[3] Amnesty International. (2023, Sep 18). Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Retrieved from Amnesty International: https://www.amnesty.org/en/what-we-do/universal-declaration-of-human-rights/

[4] Cook, P. (2022, Dec 09). Universal Declaration of Human Rights: Fit for the 21st Century? Retrieved from Geneva Solutions: https://genevasolutions.news/human-rights/universal-declaration-of-human-rights-fit-for-the-21st-century

[5] McNeilly, K. (2023, Jun). ‘If Only for a Day’: The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Anniversary Commemoration and International Human Rights Law. Human Rights Law Review, 23(2). doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/hrlr/ngad003

[6] Vergara, E., & Politi, D. (2023, Sep 05). A Half-Century after Gen. Augusto Pinochet’s Coup, Some in Chile Remember the Dictatorship Fondly. Retrieved from The Associated Press: https://apnews.com/article/chile-pinochet-dictatorship-5d500715f016804990d0898ff6d89907

[7] Yates, A. (2022, Dec 28). The Pinochet Precedent: Convicting Human Rights Violators. (UAB Institute for Human Rights Blog) Retrieved from The University of Alabama at Birmingham: https://sites.uab.edu/humanrights/2022/12/28/the-pinochet-precedent-convicting-human-rights-violators/

[8] Arhirova, H. (2023, Nov 03). Russia Steps up Its Aerial Barrage of Ukraine as Kyiv Officials Brace for Attacks on Infrastructure. Retrieved from AP News: https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-war-drones-missiles-winter-infrastructure-2ab06a274e011eea24f85de462626c02

[9] Noubel, F. (2022, Mar 30). Drone Warfare: Can International Humanitarian Law Catch up with the Technology? Retrieved from Global Voices: https://globalvoices.org/2022/03/30/drone-warfare-can-international-humanitarian-law-catch-up-with-the-technology/

[10] Taub, A. (2023, Mar 22). The I.C.C.’s Arrest Warrant for Putin Is More Than ‘Just Symbolic.’. Retrieved from The New York Times: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/22/world/icc-arrest-warrant-putin.html

[11] Taub, A. (2023, Mar 22). The I.C.C.’s Arrest Warrant for Putin Is More Than ‘Just Symbolic.’. Retrieved from The New York Times: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/22/world/icc-arrest-warrant-putin.html

[12] Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. (2023, Oct 04). Human Rights Council Holds General Debate on the Human Rights Situation in Palestine and Other Occupied Arab Territories. Retrieved from United Nations: https://www.ohchr.org/en/news/2023/10/human-rights-council-holds-general-debate-human-rights-situation-palestine-and-other

[13] Regan, H., & et al. (2023, Nov 02). Airstrikes Blast UN Shelters, Official Says, as Israel Announces Complete Encirclement of Gaza City. Retrieved from CNN: https://www.cnn.com/2023/11/02/middleeast/israel-gaza-hamas-war-jabalya-camp-strike-intl-hnk/index.html

[14] Özler, Ş. İ. (2018, Winter). The Universal Declaration of Human Rights at Seventy: Progress and Challenges. Ethics and International Affairs, 32(4). Retrieved from Carnegie Council:
https://www.ethicsandinternationalaffairs.org/journal/the-universal-declaration-of-human-rights-at-seventy-progress-and-challenges

[15] U.S. Department of Labor. (n.d.). Child Labor in the Production of Cocoa. Retrieved Nov 11, 2023, from U.S. Department of Labor: https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ilab/our-work/child-forced-labor-trafficking/child-labor-cocoa

[16] Food Empowerment Project. (2021). Child Labor and Slavery in the Chocolate Industry. Retrieved from Food Empowerment Project: https://foodispower.org/human-labor-slavery/slavery-chocolate/

[17] Balch, O. (2021, Feb 12). Mars, Nestlé and Hershey to Face Child Slavery Lawsuit in US. Retrieved from The Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2021/feb/12/mars-nestle-and-hershey-to-face-landmark-child-slavery-lawsuit-in-us

[18] Gjelten, T. (2018, Dec 10). Boundlessly Idealistic, Universal Declaration Of Human Rights Is Still Resisted. Retrieved from NPR: https://www.npr.org/2018/12/10/675210421/its-human-rights-day-however-its-not-universally-accepted

[19] Constantinides, A. (2008). Questioning the Universal Relevance of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Cuadernos constitucionales de la Cátedra Fadrique Furió Ceriol, 49-63. Retrieved from https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=3684784

[20] Welch, C. (2015, Dec 17). Universal Declaration of Human Rights: Why Does It Matter? Retrieved from University at Buffalo: https://www.buffalo.edu/ubnow/stories/2015/12/qa_welch_udhr.html

[21] Welch, C. (2015, Dec 17). Universal Declaration of Human Rights: Why Does It Matter? Retrieved from University at Buffalo: https://www.buffalo.edu/ubnow/stories/2015/12/qa_welch_udhr.html

[22] Özler, Ş. İ. (2018, Winter). The Universal Declaration of Human Rights at Seventy: Progress and Challenges. Ethics and International Affairs, 32(4). Retrieved from Carnegie Council: https://www.ethicsandinternationalaffairs.org/journal/the-universal-declaration-of-human-rights-at-seventy-progress-and-challenges

[23] McNeilly, K. (2023, Jun). ‘If Only for a Day’: The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Anniversary Commemoration and International Human Rights Law. Human Rights Law Review, 23(2). doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/hrlr/ngad003

[24] Constantinides, A. (2008). Questioning the Universal Relevance of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Cuadernos constitucionales de la Cátedra Fadrique Furió Ceriol, 49-63. Retrieved from https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=3684784

[25] Howard-Hassmann, R. (2022, Aug 5). Article by Article: The Universal Declaration of Human Rights for a New Generation by Johannes Morsink. Human Rights Review, 23(3), 443-445. doi:10.1007/s12142-022-00666-0

[26] Universal Declaration of Human Rights. (1948, Dec 10). Retrieved from United Nations: https://www.un.org/sites/un2.un.org/files/2021/03/udhr.pdf

[27] African Union. (1981). African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights. Retrieved from https://achpr.au.int/en/charter/african-charter-human-and-peoples-rights

[28] Constantinides, A. (2008). Questioning the Universal Relevance of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Cuadernos constitucionales de la Cátedra Fadrique Furió Ceriol, 49-63. Retrieved from https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=3684784

[29] Mutua, M. w. (2001). Savages, Victims, and Saviors: The Metaphor of Human Rights. Harvard International Law Journal, 201-245. Retrieved from https://digitalcommons.law.buffalo.edu/journal_articles/570

[30] Shaheed, A., & Richter, R. P. (2018, Oct 17). Is ‘Human Rights’ a Western Concept? Retrieved from IPI International Peace Institute: https://theglobalobservatory.org/2018/10/are-human-rights-a-western-concept/

Works Cited

African Union. (1981). African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights. Retrieved from https://achpr.au.int/en/charter/african-charter-human-and-peoples-rights

Amnesty International. (2023, Sep 18). Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Retrieved from Amnesty International: https://www.amnesty.org/en/what-we-do/universal-declaration-of-human-rights/

Arhirova, H. (2023, Nov 03). Russia Steps up Its Aerial Barrage of Ukraine as Kyiv Officials Brace for Attacks on Infrastructure. Retrieved from AP News: https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-war-drones-missiles-winter-infrastructure-2ab06a274e011eea24f85de462626c02

Balch, O. (2021, Feb 12). Mars, Nestlé and Hershey to Face Child Slavery Lawsuit in US. Retrieved from The Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2021/feb/12/mars-nestle-and-hershey-to-face-landmark-child-slavery-lawsuit-in-us

Constantinides, A. (2008). Questioning the Universal Relevance of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Cuadernos constitucionales de la Cátedra Fadrique Furió Ceriol, 49-63. Retrieved from https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=3684784

Cook, P. (2022, Dec 09). Universal Declaration of Human Rights: Fit for the 21st Century? Retrieved from Geneva Solutions: https://genevasolutions.news/human-rights/universal-declaration-of-human-rights-fit-for-the-21st-century

Food Empowerment Project. (2021). Child Labor and Slavery in the Chocolate Industry. Retrieved from Food Empowerment Project: https://foodispower.org/human-labor-slavery/slavery-chocolate/

Gjelten, T. (2018, Dec 10). Boundlessly Idealistic, Universal Declaration Of Human Rights Is Still Resisted. Retrieved from NPR: https://www.npr.org/2018/12/10/675210421/its-human-rights-day-however-its-not-universally-accepted

Howard-Hassmann, R. (2022, Aug 5). Article by Article: The Universal Declaration of Human Rights for a New Generation by Johannes Morsink. Human Rights Review, 23(3), 443-445. doi:10.1007/s12142-022-00666-0

McNeilly, K. (2023, Jun). ‘If Only for a Day’: The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Anniversary Commemoration and International Human Rights Law. Human Rights Law Review, 23(2). doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/hrlr/ngad003

Mutua, M. w. (2001). Savages, Victims, and Saviors: The Metaphor of Human Rights. Harvard International Law Journal, 201-245. Retrieved from https://digitalcommons.law.buffalo.edu/journal_articles/570

Noubel, F. (2022, Mar 30). Drone Warfare: Can International Humanitarian Law Catch up with the Technology? Retrieved from Global Voices: https://globalvoices.org/2022/03/30/drone-warfare-can-international-humanitarian-law-catch-up-with-the-technology/

Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. (2023, Oct 04). Human Rights Council Holds General Debate on the Human Rights Situation in Palestine and Other Occupied Arab Territories. Retrieved from United Nations: https://www.ohchr.org/en/news/2023/10/human-rights-council-holds-general-debate-human-rights-situation-palestine-and-other

Özler, Ş. İ. (2018, Winter). The Universal Declaration of Human Rights at Seventy: Progress and Challenges. Ethics and International Affairs, 32(4). Retrieved from Carnegie Council: https://www.ethicsandinternationalaffairs.org/journal/the-universal-declaration-of-human-rights-at-seventy-progress-and-challenges

Regan, H., & et al. (2023, Nov 02). Airstrikes Blast UN Shelters, Official Says, as Israel Announces Complete Encirclement of Gaza City. Retrieved from CNN: https://www.cnn.com/2023/11/02/middleeast/israel-gaza-hamas-war-jabalya-camp-strike-intl-hnk/index.html

Shaheed, A., & Richter, R. P. (2018, Oct 17). Is ‘Human Rights’ a Western Concept? Retrieved from IPI International Peace Institute: https://theglobalobservatory.org/2018/10/are-human-rights-a-western-concept/

Stand Up For Human Rights. (2017). The Universal Declaration of Human Rights – Facts & Figures. Retrieved from Stand Up For Human Rights: https://www.standup4humanrights.org/layout/files/The-Universal-Declaration-of-Human-Rights/UDHR%20Facts%20and%20Figures.pdf

Taub, A. (2023, Mar 22). The I.C.C.’s Arrest Warrant for Putin Is More Than ‘Just Symbolic.’. Retrieved from The New York Times: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/22/world/icc-arrest-warrant-putin.html

U.S. Department of Labor. (n.d.). Child Labor in the Production of Cocoa. Retrieved Nov 11, 2023, from U.S. Department of Labor: https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ilab/our-work/child-forced-labor-trafficking/child-labor-cocoa

Universal Declaration of Human Rights. (1948, Dec 10). Retrieved from United Nations: https://www.un.org/sites/un2.un.org/files/2021/03/udhr.pdf

Vergara, E., & Politi, D. (2023, Sep 05). A Half-Century after Gen. Augusto Pinochet’s Coup, Some in Chile Remember the Dictatorship Fondly. Retrieved from The Associated Press: https://apnews.com/article/chile-pinochet-dictatorship-5d500715f016804990d0898ff6d89907

Welch, C. (2015, Dec 17). Universal Declaration of Human Rights: Why Does It Matter? Retrieved from University at Buffalo: https://www.buffalo.edu/ubnow/stories/2015/12/qa_welch_udhr.html

Yates, A. (2022, Dec 28). The Pinochet Precedent: Convicting Human Rights Violators. (UAB Institute for Human Rights Blog) Retrieved from The University of Alabama at Birmingham: https://sites.uab.edu/humanrights/2022/12/28/the-pinochet-precedent-convicting-human-rights-violators

Rethinking the UDHR:
From Aspiration to Implementation

Seventy-five years ago, the world arose from the horrors of World War II, vowing “never again.” The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), at that juncture emerged as a beacon of hope as it pledged to uphold fundamental rights and freedoms for all. It was a bold declaration, a decisive affirmation that every individual, irrespective of caste, color, creed or gender, possesses inherent and inalienable rights. However, in the current ever-changing era of unprecedented progress, do Human Rights still hold the same value it was expected to bestow? Despite its profound impact, the document suffers from a fatal flaw: its non-binding nature. This non-binding status has allowed states, even those who once championed human rights, to evade accountability. Potent nations like the US, Russia, and China have repeatedly violated their legal obligations with impunity.[1] (Geyu, 2018) The US resorts to torture, drone strikes, and extrajudicial killings. Russia, under Putin’s iron fist, brutally suppresses dissent. And China, with its massive surveillance and forced labor, tramples on basic freedoms. The list of offenders stretches across continents: Brazil, India and South Africa, all guilty of extrajudicial killings and torture.[2] (Posner, 2014) Even age-old horrors like slavery persist, affecting an estimated 30 million people globally. Women remain a subjugated class, and children toil away in factories instead of attending school. These are not merely statistics, but stories of human suffering. It is the story of the Brazilian teenager tragically shot dead by police[3] (Phillips, 2020). It is the story of the Indian child laborer, bereft of education and forced to endure grueling work for meager wages.[4] (Nagar, N., & Roy, B., 2022) It is the story of the countless victims of conflict, oppression, and exploitation, whose cries for justice remain unanswered.

Some argue that the UDHR, despite its limitations, has a symbolic value, a yardstick against which to measure progress. It has, undeniably, contributed to a global discourse on human rights and empowered individuals to challenge their governments. But this symbolic value rings hollow when confronted with the stark reality of widespread abuse. The question we face today is not whether the UDHR has made a difference, but whether it can truly deliver on its promises in its current form. A non-binding declaration cannot adequately protect the rights it proclaims. It is time for a radical transformation, a shift from aspirational ideals to concrete action.

The rapid pace of technological change has created new and complex challenges for human rights advocates. The rise of artificial intelligence, the increasing use of surveillance technologies, and the expansion of online platforms have all raised concerns about the potential for human rights violations. For instance, in 2013, Edward Snowden leaked documents revealing the vast scope of the US government’s surveillance programs. These programs included the collection of phone records, internet metadata, and personal communications.[5] (Moon, Ed.D.,, Millard E. Colonel , 2017) This epiphany sparked a global debate about the right to privacy and the balance between security and civil liberties. In addition, there are broader trends in technology that are also raising concerns about human rights. These trends include the increasing concentration of power in the hands of a few technology companies, the growing use of algorithms to make decisions about people’s lives, and the development of new technologies that could be used to control or manipulate people. These challenges require new approaches in order to protect human rights in the digital age. The people who champion Human Rights must work to ensure that new approaches to safeguarding human rights in the digital age are forged. This calls for a multi-pronged strategy, encompassing:

1. Decentralization: Fostering a more distributed and democratic digital landscape by promoting open-source platforms, fostering competition, and strengthening data privacy laws. This diminishes the dominance of tech giants and empowers individuals with greater control over their online presence and data.
2. Algorithmic Transparency: Demystifying the opaque algorithms that increasingly shape our lives. This requires greater transparency and accountability from tech companies, allowing for public scrutiny and ensuring algorithms are free from bias and discrimination.

3. Ethical Development: Integrating human rights principles into the design and development of new technologies. This entails robust ethical frameworks, rigorous impact assessments, and proactive measures to mitigate potential harms before they occur.

4. Empowering Individuals: Equipping individuals with the knowledge and tools to navigate the digital world safely and responsibly. This includes digital literacy programs, promoting critical thinking skills, and raising awareness about online threats and manipulation tactics.

5. Global Collaboration: Strengthening international cooperation and legal frameworks to address the complex challenges of online rights violations. This necessitates forging consensus among nations on digital rights standards, fostering cross-border collaboration, and holding tech companies accountable for their global impact.

Ostensibly, only through collective action, vigilant advocacy, and a commitment to ethical development can human rights remain the cornerstone of our shared digital future. Human Rights Advocates must also work to raise awareness of the potential for human rights violations and to hold governments and corporations accountable for their actions. This approach must take into account the interconnectedness of different technologies and the potential for cumulative impacts on human rights.

Another challenge faced by the UDHR in the 21st century is the liability for human rights violations by transnational corporations. The link between human rights and international trade lies in the increasingly perceptible link between comparative trade advantages and the discrepancies found in labor regimes across countries. Many of these discrepancies stem from violations of the rights granted by international treaties and conventions. For example, companies that use child labor or that have poor working conditions may be able to sell their products at lower prices than companies that respect human rights. This can lead to a “race to the bottom” in which countries compete to lower their human rights standards to lower production costs. In 2022, the International Labor Organization (ILO) published a report highlighting the prevalence of forced labor in global supply chains. 49.6 million People were living in modern slavery in 2021 of which 27.6 million were in forced labor. 12% of all those in forced labor are children[6]. ((ILO), 2022) More than half of these children are in commercial sexual exploitation. The International Program on the Elimination of Child Labor (ILO-IPEC) estimates that 160 million children are still indulged in child labor out of which 79 million children are working under hazardous conditions, often in the agriculture, mining, and manufacturing sectors. (UN), 2021.)[7] Many of these children are working for TNCs, or for companies that supply TNCs with raw materials or manufactured goods. These examples underscore the importance of creating a new international legal framework that effectively holds TNCs accountable for human rights abuses. This framework should also be based on the principles of transparency, accountability, and non-discrimination. It should also provide for effective remedies for victims of human rights abuses. The United Nations has taken some steps to address the issue of corporate responsibility, with the adoption of the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) in 2011. The UNGPs set out a framework for how companies can respect human rights throughout their operations, from the sourcing of raw materials to the sale of finished products. However, the UNGPs are, again, not legally binding, and there is no international tribunal to enforce them. As a result, TNCs often disregard the UNGPs, and there is little recourse for victims of human rights abuses. (UNHRC, 2011)[8]

One strategy that may be employed to promote the accountability of economic activities in face of human rights is awareness-building amongst grassroots, other NGOs, government officials and broader public. Another strategy is capacity-building and public mobilization. Influencing decisions, policy- and rule-making by national governments, as well as influencing decisions, policy- and rule-making in international fora and institutions, are also important strategies. (CALIARI, 2009)[9]

Furthermore, we must also acknowledge that the world faces a growing number of socio-economic and political challenges to human rights. The rise of authoritarian regimes, the resurgence of nationalism and xenophobia, and the widening gap between rich and poor have all contributed to an erosion of human rights protections. For instance, in Turkey President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has consolidated power in his own hands, curtailing freedom of the press, imprisoning journalists, and suppressing dissent. (Kizilkaya, 2023)[10] Meanwhile, since the Hindu nationalism has gained prominence in India, it has led to systemic and structural violence against Muslims via the majoritarianistic angst of ‘Anti-Muslim Rhetoric’ supported vehemently by Politicians and Media outlets, fostering prejudices and stereotypes that contribute to increased violence and discrimination against Muslims of India. (Krishnan, 2023)[11] The 2023 International Labour Organization (ILO) World Employment and Social Outlook (WESO) report found that the global middle class is shrinking, while the number of people living in extreme poverty is increasing. (ILO, 2023)[12]

The plight of the Rohingya, a Muslim ethnic minority group in Myanmar, again stands as a stark reminder of the depths of human cruelty and the inadequacy of international mechanisms to protect the most vulnerable. For decades, the Rohingya have endured systematic discrimination, marginalization, and violence at the hands of the Myanmar government and its security forces. Their plight reached a crescendo in August 2017 when a brutal military crackdown triggered a mass exodus of over 700,000 Rohingya into neighboring Bangladesh, seeking refuge from the atrocities unfolding in their homeland. (Schlein, 2023)[13] The Rohingya have been subjected to a litany of human rights violations, including denial of citizenship, arbitrary detention, extrajudicial killings, rape, torture, and forced displacement. The United Nations has declared the Rohingya as the most persecuted minority in the world and it has made repeated attempts to intervene and mediate the Rohingya crisis, but its efforts have been hampered by the Myanmar government’s intransigence and lack of international cooperation. The UN Security Council has failed to take decisive action, with China and Russia vetoing resolutions that would have imposed sanctions on Myanmar’s military leadership (Charbonneau, 2022)[14]. The Myanmar government has consistently denied these abuses, dismissing them as “counter-terrorism” operations. However, the overwhelming evidence points to a systematic campaign of ethnic cleansing, as documented by the United Nations Independent Investigative Mechanism for Myanmar (IIMM, 2023)[15][16]. The UN has made repeated attempts to intervene and mediate the Rohingya crisis, but its efforts have been hampered by the Myanmar government’s intransigence and lack of international cooperation. The UN Security Council has failed to take decisive action, with China and Russia vetoing resolutions that would have imposed sanctions on Myanmar’s military leadership. The UN’s role has also been criticized for its slow and bureaucratic response to the crisis. The Rohingya crisis is an unvarnished reminder of how the UDHR lacks enforcement mechanisms and relies on the goodwill of the members of states to comply with its provisions.

Even the Syrian Civil War, a conflict that has ravaged the country for over a decade, stands as a grim testament of how ineffective the document of UDHR stands. The origins of the Syrian Civil War can be traced back to 2011, when pro-democracy protests erupted in response to the repressive regime of President Bashar al-Assad. Instead of engaging in meaningful dialogue and addressing the grievances of its citizens, the Syrian government responded with brutal force, sparking a widespread uprising that quickly spiraled into a full-blown civil war (Britannica, 2023)[17]. The conflict has been characterized by a staggering level of human suffering and disregard for human rights. The Syrian government, backed by its allies, has unleashed a relentless campaign of airstrikes, artillery bombardments, and chemical weapons attacks, indiscriminately targeting civilian populations (Wikipedia, 2023)[18]. Opposition groups, some of which have adopted extremist ideologies, have also engaged in violence and human rights abuses. The Syrian people have borne the brunt of this conflict. Hundreds of thousands have been killed, millions more have been displaced from their homes, and entire cities have been reduced to rubble. The international community has failed to effectively intervene and end the Syrian Civil War. The UN Security Council has been hampered by vetoes from permanent members, particularly Russia, which has shielded the Syrian government from decisive action. (BBC, Syria: Does Russia always use a veto at the UN Security Council?, 2018)[19] Attempts to broker a ceasefire or political solution have repeatedly fallen apart, leaving the Syrian people trapped in a cycle of violence and despair.

The Chinese government is accused of committing genocide against the Uyghur people, a Turkic ethnic minority group in Xinjiang Province. The Chinese government has constructed a vast network of “vocational education and training” centers, euphemisms for internment camps, where hundreds of thousands of Uyghurs have been forcibly detained without trial. These camps have become notorious for their harsh conditions, including rampant torture, forced labor, and religious persecution. Outside the camps, Uyghurs are subjected to constant surveillance and control. Their movements are restricted, their communications are monitored, and their religious practices are suppressed. The Chinese government has also implemented a coercive birth control policy that targets the Uyghur population, seeking to reduce their birth rates and further dilute their presence in Xinjiang. The international community has been slow to respond to the Uyghur crisis, hesitant to confront China, a major economic and political power. The UN has been criticized for its muted response, failing to establish an independent investigation into the allegations of genocide. (BBC, Uyghurs: China may have committed crimes against humanity in Xinjiang – UN, 2022)[20]

The non-binding nature of the UDHR, as previously stated, may be seen as its Achilles Heel. Each flagrant and egregious violation of the Human Rights, each example laid bare, stands as a stark reminder of the chasm between lofty ideals promised in the document and their practical implementation. A shadow of impunity hangs over the flagrant disregard for human rights by states, evident in the harrowing tragedies like the Rohingya crisis, the Syrian Civil War, and the Uyghur genocide. To better address these crises and protect human rights globally, the UDHR needs to be strengthened and reformed. The UDHR should be revised to make its provisions legally binding on states, requiring them to comply with its principles. It must strengthen existing human rights mechanisms, promote the development of new international norms, and empower civil society organizations to hold governments accountable for their actions. Additionally, the UN should establish a permanent international criminal court with jurisdiction over crimes against humanity and genocide, empowered to investigate and prosecute those responsible for such atrocities. The international community must also demonstrate greater unity and resolve in upholding human rights principles. States should be willing to impose sanctions on governments that perpetrate systematic human rights violations, regardless of their economic or political clout. The UN Security Council should be reformed to prevent permanent members from using their veto power to shield repressive regimes from accountability.

The path towards the revision of the UDHR might not be fainthearted. It requires unwavering commitment from the international community, civil society, and individuals alike. We must demand better from our leaders, hold them accountable for their actions, and create a world where the rights enshrined in the UDHR are not mere words on paper, but a lived reality for every human being. We need a binding international legal framework that holds states accountable for human rights violations. We need robust mechanisms for enforcement, be it through targeted sanctions, international courts, or economic pressure. We need to address the accountability gap for transnational corporations, whose activities often exploit the vulnerable populations with impunity. We demand transparency and ethical conduct from these corporations, ensuring that their profits are not earned at the expense of human dignity. The international community must forge a united front, standing tall against authoritarian regimes and their blatant disregard for human rights. We must raise our voices in unison, denouncing atrocities and demanding justice for the victims.

However, the fight for a just world cannot be solely waged on the international stage. It is a battle fought in classrooms, living rooms, and hearts across the globe. We, as individuals, possess the power to be agents of change. We can educate ourselves and others about human rights, challenge discriminatory norms, and advocate for the marginalized. We can hold our own governments accountable, demanding that they uphold their commitments to international human rights standards. We can support human rights organizations and engage in peaceful protests and boycotts against companies complicit in human rights abuses.

The road towards a world where the UDHR is a lived reality may seem like a Gordian knot. It will be met with resistance from powerful forces who benefit from the status quo. Yet, we must not despair. We must remember the words of Nelson Mandela, who declared, “Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world.” Let us arm ourselves with knowledge, empathy, and courage, and together, we can build a future where the UDHR is not just a document of aspirations, but again a beacon of hope illuminating the path towards a world where every human being is treated with dignity and respect.

Footnotes:

[1]  Skylar Cheng Geyu. “How effective has the Universal Declaration of Human Rights been in 70 years?” Qrius, 12 May. 2018, https://qrius.com/how-effective-has-the-universal-declaration-of-human-rights-in-70-years/

[2] Eric Posner. “The Case against Human Rights.” The Guardian, 14 Dec. 2014, https://www.theguardian.com/news/2014/dec/04/-sp-case-against-human-rights

[3] Tom Phillips. “Black lives shattered: outrage as boy, 14, is Brazil police’s latest suspect.” The Guardian, 3 Jun. 2020, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/03/brazil-black-lives-police-teenager

[4] Nagar, N., & Roy, B. (2022). “A Critical Analysis Of Child Labour In India.” International Journal of Current Research in Multidisciplinary, 1(5), 17

[5] Moon, Ed.D.,, Millard E. Colonel (ret),. “How America Lost its Secrets: Edward Snowden, The Man and The Theft. By Edward Jay Epstein. Journal of Strategic Security 10, no. 1 (2017): : 143-147.

[6] International Labour Organization (ILO). (2022). Global estimates of modern slavery: Forced labour and forced marriage. Geneva: International Labour Organization

[7] International Labour Office and United Nations Children’s Fund, Child Labour: Global estimates 2020, trends and the road forward, ILO and UNICEF, New York, 2021.

[8] United Nations Human Rights Council. (2011). Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework. A/HRC/RES/17/4.

[9] CALIARI, Aldo. Trade, Investment, Finance and Human Rights: Assessment and Strategy Paper. SUR – International Journal on Human Rights. v. 6, n. 11, Dec. 2009, p.141-159.

[10] Emre Kizilkaya, “Turkey: Erdogan’s grip on media threatens fair elections” The World Today, 11 May. 2023 https://www.chathamhouse.org/publications/the-world-today/2023-04/turkey-erdogans-grip-media-threatens-fair-elections

[11] Murali Krishnan, “India’s religious violence: What’s being these raging clashes?” DW, 8 Oct. 2023 https://p.dw.com/p/4Uzkz

[12] International Labour Organization (ILO). (2023). World Employment and Social Outlook: Trends 2023 – Geneva: International Labour Organization.

[13] Lisa Schlein, “This Week Marks Five Years Since 700,000 Rohingya Refugees Fled Persecution in Myanmar. Voice of America.” VOA News, August 25, 2023, https://www.voanews.com/a/east-asia_this-week-marks-five-years-since-700-000-rohingya-refugees-fled-persecution-in-myanmar/6712218.html

[14] Louis Charbonneau. “UN Security Council Should Act on Myanmar Atrocities.” Human Rights Watch, 25 Jan. 2022, https://www.hrw.org/news/2022/01/25/un-security-council-should-act-myanmar-atrocities.

[15] Independent Investigative Mechanism for Myanmar (IIMM). “The Pursuit of Justice for Rohingya – Six Years On.” IIMM, 25 Aug. 2023, https://iimm.un.org/the-pursuit-of-justice-for-rohingya-six-years-on/

[16] Independent Investigative Mechanism for Myanmar (IIMM). “IIMM.” Accessed December 10, 2023. https://iimm.un.org/: https://iimm.un.org/

[17] Editors of Britannica. “Syrian Civil War.” Britannica, December 9, 2023. https://www.britannica.com/event/Syrian-Civil-War/Civil-war

[18] “Use of Chemical Weapons in the Syrian Civil War.” Wikipedia, 10 Dec. 2023. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use_of_chemical_weapons_in_the_Syrian_civil_war

[19] BBC News. “Syria: Does Russia always use a veto at the UN Security Council?” BBC, 16 Apr. 2018, https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-43781954.

[20] BBC News, “Uyghurs: China may have committed crimes against humanity in Xinjiang – UN” BBC, 1 Sept. 2022, https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-62744522

Bibliography

(ILO), I. L. (2022). Global estimates of modern slavery: Forced labour and forced marriage. Geneva.

BBC. (2018, April 16). Syria: Does Russia always use a veto at the UN Security Council? Retrieved from BBC: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-43781954.

BBC. (2022, September 1). Uyghurs: China may have committed crimes against humanity in Xinjiang – UN. Retrieved from BBC: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-62744522

Britannica, E. o. (2023, December 9). Syrian Civil War. Retrieved from Britannica: https://www.britannica.com/event/Syrian-Civil-War/Civil-war

CALIARI, A. (2009). Trade, Investment, Finance and Human Rights: Assessment and Strategy Paper. International Journal on Human Rights, 141-159.

Charbonneau, L. (2022, January 25). UN Security Council Should Act on Myanmar Atrocities. Retrieved from Human Rights Watch: https://www.hrw.org/news/2022/01/25/un-security-council-should-act-myanmar-atrocities

Geyu, Â. S. (2018, May 12). How effective has the Universal Declaration of Human Rights been in 70 years? Retrieved from Qrius: https://qrius.com/how-effective-has-the-universal-declaration-of-human-rights-in-70-years/

IIMM. (2023, August 25). The Pursuit of Justice for Rohingya – Six Years On. Retrieved from Independent Investigative Mechanism for Myanmar (IIMM): https://iimm.un.org/the-pursuit-of-justice-for-rohingya-six-years-on/

ILO. (2023). World Employment and Social Outlook: Trends 2023 . Geneva: International Labour Organization.

Kizilkaya, E. (2023, May 11). Turkey: Erdogan’s grip on media threatens fair elections” The World Today. Retrieved from The World Today: https://www.chathamhouse.org/publications/the-world-today/2023-04/turkey-erdogans-grip-media-threatens-fair-elections

Krishnan, M. (2023, October 8). India’s religious violence: What’s being these raging clashes? Retrieved from DW: https://p.dw.com/p/4Uzkz

Moon, Ed.D.,, Millard E. Colonel . (2017). How America Lost its Secrets: Edward Snowden, The Man and The Theft. Journal of Strategic Security 10, 143-147.

Nagar, N., & Roy, B. (2022). A Critical Analysis Of Child Labour In India. International Journal of Current Research in Multidisciplinary, 17.

Phillips, T. (2020, June 3). Black lives shattered: outrage as boy, 14, is Brazil police’s latest suspect. Retrieved from The Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/03/brazil-black-lives-police-teenager

Posner, E. (2014, December 14). The Case against Human Rights. Retrieved from The Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/news/2014/dec/04/-sp-case-against-human-rights

Schlein, L. (2023, August 25). This Week Marks Five Years Since 700,000 Rohingya Refugees Fled Persecution in Myanmar. Voice of America. Retrieved from VOA News: https://www.voanews.com/a/east-asia_this-week-marks-five-years-since-700-000-rohingya-refugees-fled-persec

UN), I. L. (2021.). Child Labour: Global estimates 2020, trends and the road forward. New York: ILO and UNICEF.

UNHRC. (2011). Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” . Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework. A/HRC/RES/17/4.

Wikipedia. (2023, December 10). Use of Chemical Weapons in the Syrian Civil War. Retrieved from Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use_of_chemical_weapons_in_the_Syrian_civil_war

Free and Equal in Dignity: Alternative Mechanisms to Ensure Greater Access to Universal Human Rights

While a set of basic human rights would ideally be a truth universally acknowledged, the truth is that access to supposedly universal human rights is often very precarious. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights has been admirable in its attempt to outline and reify a comprehensive suite of human entitlements to generate “a social and international order in which [certain] rights and freedoms… can be fully realized.”^[1] This Declaration has indeed been effective to some extent, as peace between major, powerful nations has largely been preserved and the globe is on a general trajectory towards social and economic development^[2] – albeit with environmental costs. However, with civil and geopolitical wars continuing to rage, humanitarian crises in Ukraine, Gaza and Yemen, and the looming refugee crisis that will arise from a warming planet, there must be some reforms to the current administration of universal human rights. If even just one country can contravene basic human rights, with the world’s media and therefore public watching, there surely must be some necessary changes to be made.

On its own, the freedoms and entitlements enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights are robust; there is surely no legitimate criticism, nor need to alter, such sentiments as, “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity,”^[3] “Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person,”^[4] “No one shall be held in slavery.”^[5] However, while the rights themselves need not be revised per se, the ways in which these are ratified – and how nations are held to account when such rights are infringed – need some attention. Current mechanisms used to enforce such rights, such as sanctions, have questionable efficacy and morality; while promising to prevent those in power from committing heinous actions on civilians, such measures can compound humanitarian crises. Besides, Russia has been able to manage global sanctions for a whole year while continuing to wage war on Ukraine – and the International Criminal Court’s issue of an arrest warrant for Vladimir Putin is clearly just a symbolic gesture under the status quo.^[6] Even treaties have dubious utility; while mutual agreements between countries that call for peace, with a set of restrictions in place to maintain that relationship, Russia has again flaunted such treaties.

Hence, some creative thinking is required to ensure the two core outcomes of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: expanding the proportion of the human population who has secure and reliable access to “all the rights and freedoms outlined in [the] Declaration, without distinction of any kind,”^[7] whilst providing paths of recourse for civilians and groups whose rights have been suppressed, eliminated, or otherwise transgressed. Firstly, I propose the UN oversees the formation of new International Criminal Tribunals to deal with special cases of human rights violations, thereby ensuring the victims of humanitarian crises and/or persecution have greater access to justice. Secondly, I propose that liberal, democratic nations should increase immigration and especially refugee intake, as well as make emigration from dangerous or impoverished areas more feasible, to expand the sheer number of people able to enjoy human rights: in a utilitarian sense, creating more good for more people.

Through the establishment of a wider array of International Criminal Tribunals, those whose human rights have been violated will have greater access to justice. The UN itself defines the International Criminal Court as “an independent judicial body with jurisdiction over persons charged with genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes.”^[8] They have the jurisdiction to investigate individuals or groups who have severely impacted the international community through acts of terror. It was first established on 17th July 1988 as a treaty, the ‘Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court’, to secure justice by punishing crimes of aggression via military invasions, crimes against humanity, and war crimes through the excessive use of violence against occupied territories.^[9]

For unique instances of crimes against humanity, special International Criminal Tribunals have been established. The International Criminal Tribunal (ICTY) for the former Yugoslavia, mandated from 1993 to 2017, managed to have a significant influence on international human rights, giving those without a voice the right to express themselves freely and appeal for help against the horrors of the 1990s Balkan conflict.^[10] In 2005, the ICTY stated, in their list of accomplishments “in justice and law,” they were crucial in “Spearheading the shift from impunity to accountability,” noting it was able to adjudicate humanitarian offences committed as part of the Balkan conflict, especially in cases when prosecutors in former Yugoslavian states did not.^[11] Additionally, the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) was established to rightly prosecute those who had committed genocide or severe human rights violations in Rwanda. 93 individuals were held responsible for these serious actions including government officials, politicians, and militia leaders.

Despite the vast number of crimes against humanity that have occurred since the Second World War and the formation of the UN, there have only been these two special tribunals established. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights itself states, “Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law,”^[12] and perhaps this can be expanded to – and thus reformed as such – enshrine ‘the right to an effective remedy for human rights violations by a competent international tribunal.’ The formation of more such special tribunals could prove an effective means of guaranteeing the effectiveness of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights for three reasons. Firstly, they support the interests of minority groups by providing them with a voice that otherwise may not be heard within the UN, where member states often act as mouthpieces for governments or dominant ideologies. Secondly, they ensure that those responsible for severe violations of human rights are held accountable and rightfully punished. Finally, the ICC will be able to provide resources to specific areas of concern, without compromising on its capacity to deal with all, simultaneous human rights abuses. This may include special criminal tribunals such as the International Military Tribunals, acting to prosecute those responsible for participating in war crimes. Beyond issuing an arrest warrant for Putin that may never eventuate, an International Criminal Tribunal for Ukraine may therefore offer a more feasible means of ensuring the effectiveness of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, thereby dedicating extra, special resources to the issue.

Another way in which we can ensure the preservation of international human rights is through the expansion of immigration intakes in nations that already have robust human rights records. The rejection of immigrants from conflict-stricken countries is a recurring issue across global history – and our present world. The expansion of the accessibility of immigration is necessary to help refugees escape from conflict or unliveable nations.

As a case study, Australia has had poor acceptance rates of refugees and asylum seekers, claiming a financial quota of 13,750 refugees in 2019, yet only granting 4558 over two years. As the Parliament of Australia itself notes, this is because very few asylum seekers are registered with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, and even then, “only about one per cent of those recognised by the UNHCR as refugees who meet the resettlement criteria.”^[13] Indeed, even with its vast resources to provide for the helpless, and ‘boundless plains to share,’^[14] Australia still separates families and imprisons asylum seekers who travelled to Australia by boat in detention centres, establishing costly bureaucracies rather than devoting time and resources to assessing the refugee status of people already in detention. Nations like Australia have abundant resources and a strong economic standing, and Australia spends more than $346,000 on mandatory refugee detention per person each year^[15] – more than four times the median annual income in Australia.^[16]

In this light, it seems ludicrous that Australia’s asylum seeker intake is less than half its expected quota. It would be far more efficient to reallocate those funds into the processing and acceptance of refugees, allowing for a higher number of people to access a social environment that accommodates human rights. Indeed, the UN should continue to strongly advocate for nations to increase refugee quotas and suspend draconian policies that ensure already enshrined quotas are unfulfilled. Indeed, nations with that power should be encouraged by the UN to establish more refugee processing centres near the borders of nations where human rights continue to be abused. Further access to such facilities will allow refugees to escape nations that infringe upon their human rights, thereby allowing them to avoid the difficulties of escaping and travelling long distances illegally and dangerously.

If we apply a utilitarian framework to this method of ensuring greater access to extant human rights, without needing to monumentally revise the Universal Declaration of Human Rights itself, we can see that investment in the relocation of people, rather than in encouraging autocratic regimes to give their citizens further access to human rights, is a sound policy. In contrast, this is a much more effective alternative to other methods that have been introduced, such as the encouragement of autocratic regimes that already deny human rights to improve their human rights through punishments such as sanctions. Although sanctions may be seen as a legitimate means of disincentivising contraventions of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, they can cause more harm than good to the people whose rights have already been violated, thereby burdening their lives further.^[17] Sanctions typically tend to reduce trade or restrict the activities of a specific nation to discourage their actions that act as a conflict of interest in society. However, while it may be seen as a necessary means to promote peace, it has paradoxically intensified further humanitarian abuses, as civilians can struggle to access the goods and resources necessary for survival, especially since globalisation has meant few nations are entirely self-sufficient.^[18] Countries must understand that this newly introduced policy is an efficient and ethical way for countries to contribute to the protection of human rights for people in vulnerable situations, rather than damage them further.

It is evident that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, although effectively outlining a set of rights and freedoms that few reasonable people would disagree with, is merely a collection of words on a page – on its own, it has not proven to be a significant deterrent against the violation of human rights in many countries. Therefore, it is not the declaration itself that demands revision, as it does hold value as a means of judging when human rights have been contravened; rather, it is the way in which the words on the page are reified that requires revision. Crucially, alternative mechanisms to sanctions must be pursued by world leaders to rightfully hold those accountable for their exploitation of human rights, whilst ensuring a greater number of global citizens can have their basic human rights respected. With more properly established International Tribunals for those who seek justice and increased refugee intake from democratic nations, we can produce both these outcomes more effectively. With such actions, the abuses that continue to exist in our contemporary society can be diminished.

Footnotes:

^[1] Article 28, United Nations. 1948. “Universal Declaration of Human Rights.” United Nations. United Nations. 1948. https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights.

^[2] Beauchamp, Zack. 2014. “One Chart That’ll Make You Believe We Can End Poverty.” Vox. December 14, 2014. https://www.vox.com/2014/12/14/7384515/extreme-poverty-decline.

^[3] Article 1. https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights.

^[4] Article 3. https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights.

^[5] Article 4. https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights.

^[6] International Criminal Courts. 2023. “Situation in Ukraine: ICC Judges Issue Arrest Warrants against Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin and Maria Alekseyevna Lvova-Belova.” International Criminal Court. March 17, 2023. https://www.icc-cpi.int/news/situation-ukraine-icc-judges-issue-arrest-warrants-against-vladimir-vladimirovich-putin-and.

^[7] Article 2. https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights.

^[8] “What Is the International Criminal Court (ICC) and What Is Its Relationship with the UN? Ask DAG!”, Ask.un.org. https://ask.un.org/faq/97157.

^[9] International Criminal Court. 1998. “Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.” International Criminal Court. https://www.icc-cpi.int/sites/default/files/RS-Eng.pdf.

^[10] International Criminal Tribunal for former Yugoslavia. “The Tribunal’s accomplishments in Justice and Law.” International Criminal Tribunal for former Yugoslavia. https://www.icty.org/x/file/Outreach/view_from_hague/jit_accomplishments_en.pdf.

^[11] Ibid.

^[12] Article 8. https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights.

^[13] Phillips, Janet. 2015. “Asylum Seekers and Refugees: What Are the Facts?” Parliament of Australia. March 2, 2015. https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/rp1415/AsylumFacts.

^[14] “Australian National Anthem.” 2023. Pmc.gov.au. 2023. https://www.pmc.gov.au/honours-and-symbols/australian-national-symbols/australian-national-anthem. ‌

^[15] “At What Cost? The Human and Economic Cost of Australia’s Offshore Detention Policies.” n.d. Equity Economics. https://www.equityeconomics.com.au/report-archive/at-what-cost#:~:text=Onshore%20mandatory%20detention%20is%20costing.

^[16] Read, Michael. 2023. “How Wealthy Are You Compared to Everyone Else (in Eight Charts)?” Australian Financial Review. January 19, 2023. https://www.afr.com/politics/how-wealthy-are-you-compared-to-everyone-else-in-eight-charts-20221214-p5c6a8.

^[17] Ellis, Elizabeth. “Ethics of Economic sanctions.” Internet Encyclopaedia of Philosophy”, https://iep.utm.edu/ethics-of-economic-sanctions/.

^[18] Ibid.

Bibliography

Ask DAG, “What Is the International Criminal Court (ICC) and What Is Its Relationship with the UN? Ask DAG!”, Ask.un.org. https://ask.un.org/faq/97157.

“Australian National Anthem.” 2023. Pmc.gov.au. 2023. https://www.pmc.gov.au/honours-and-symbols/australian-national-symbols/australian-national-anthem. ‌

Beauchamp, Zack. 2014. “One Chart That’ll Make You Believe We Can End Poverty.” Vox. December 14, 2014. https://www.vox.com/2014/12/14/7384515/extreme-poverty-decline.

Ellis, Elizabeth. “Ethics of Economic sanctions.” Internet Encyclopaedia of Philosophy”, https://iep.utm.edu/ethics-of-economic-sanctions/.

Equity Economics, “At What Cost? The Human and Economic Cost of Australia’s Offshore Detention Policies.” n.d. Equity Economics. https://www.equityeconomics.com.au/report-archive/at-what-cost#:~:text=Onshore%20mandatory%20detention%20is%20costing.

International Criminal Court. 1998. “Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.” International Criminal Court. https://www.icc-cpi.int/sites/default/files/RS-Eng.pdf.

International Criminal Courts. 2023. “Situation in Ukraine: ICC Judges Issue Arrest Warrants against Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin and Maria Alekseyevna Lvova-Belova.” International Criminal Court. March 17, 2023. https://www.icc-cpi.int/news/situation-ukraine-icc-judges-issue-arrest-warrants-against-vladimir-vladimirovich-putin-and.

International Criminal Tribunal for former Yugoslavia. “The Tribunal’s accomplishments in Justice and Law.” International Criminal Tribunal for former Yugoslavia. https://www.icty.org/x/file/Outreach/view_from_hague/jit_accomplishments_en.pdf.

Phillips, Janet. 2015. “Asylum Seekers and Refugees: What Are the Facts?” Parliament of Australia. March 2, 2015. https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/rp1415/AsylumFacts.

Read, Michael. 2023. “How Wealthy Are You Compared to Everyone Else (in Eight Charts)?” Australian Financial Review. January 19, 2023. https://www.afr.com/politics/how-wealthy-are-you-compared-to-everyone-else-in-eight-charts-20221214-p5c6a8

United Nations. 1948. “Universal Declaration of Human Rights.” United Nations. United Nations. 1948. https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights.

The Universal Declaration After Seventy-Five Years:
What It Means to Us Now and
What It Should Mean to Us Tomorrow

Allow me to bring you back to December 10^th, 2015. On that date it was Human Rights Day, just as it is today, and on that date Al Jazeera published a photographic report on how Human Rights Day is celebrated all across the globe. In the images we could see the unveiling of a large commemorative artwork of Nelson Mandela in Cape Town. In another image we might see grieving Tamil women whose family members went missing. Looking further, we might see Philippine protesters burning an effigy of their president at the time, Benigno Aquino III, or of a member of the Cuban activist group “Ladies in White” being detained [1]. These images display the determination of people everywhere to respect and fight for their human rights, rights that would not even be defined were it not for the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) [2]. Human Rights Day as such exists to commemorate this document [3], a document that may arguably be considered one of the most important documents in the history of human civilization [4], and today that document is celebrating its 75th anniversary [3]. That is more time than the average human gets to live, and in that time the UDHR has managed to establish a set of universal and secular human rights that transcend culture and politics [2] which have shaped international law for decades.

Since that Al Jazeera report, eight years have passed. Over that time, the world has faced a number of large human rights crises. To name just a few: over a million Rohingya were forced to flee their homeland due to ethnic cleansing [5], the Covid-19 pandemic forced complete shutdowns on life as such and exposed ever-present inequalities [6], and the Tigray war in Ethiopia claimed the lives of up to 600,000 people [7] with accusations of war crimes and of genocide being lain against both sides [8]. Today, war is once again in full swing [11, p 45] on the long peaceful European continent, where war has come to be seen as history [9]. The Taliban has regained control over Afghanistan and subsequently completely removed women’s access to education [10], and in my own home country of Slovakia, Roma people continue to live in ‘medieval’ conditions while lacking access to schools [11, pp 325-326]. How then should the UDHR prepare to deal with these human rights crises?

To answer such a question, observing how the UDHR dealt with crises in the past would most definitely help. The very founding of the UDHR is tied to a human rights crisis, that being one of the worst ones in mankind’s history, World War II [12]. This inhuman display of barbaric brutality lit the fire that resulted in the UDHR, the hope being that if all the rights recognized within it were respected, then the world would never again stoop to such a level [12]. As we can see today, that hope has been left unfulfilled. Russia is waging a horrifying campaign onto another independent and peaceful country [11, p 45], all the while being led by a war-criminal [13] despot [14] who silences anyone critical of his actions [15] [16]. This conflict has at the same time revealed that the international order is completely unfit to deal with such a situation [11, p 45]. In the meanwhile another war-crime filled war is happening in Sudan, one that has already left more than five million people displaced [17]. Adding to this, following a coup d’état Burkina Faso has continued to fight in a war against Jihadist militias that have managed to take control over a large part of the country [18]. In fact, Amina J. Mohammed, Secretary General of the UN, stated that we are facing the highest number of violent conflicts since World War II [19], the event that led to the UDHR being signed.

The UDHR has already faced a similar crisis with the Rwandan genocide and Srebrenica massacre in 1994 and 1995 respectively. During the Rwandan genocide, 500,000-800,000 Tutsi’s were brutally killed in the wake of a civil war and political assassination [20]. The sheer scale of the killings at display elicits memories of the Second World War, costing Rwanda around a seventh of its population [21, pp 1-5]. Then there was Srebrenica, a genocide remarkable for its barbarity and unique involvement of the UN. In Srebrenica eight thousand Bosniak Muslim men and boys [22] were systematically murdered by the Army of Republika Srpska, all of it happening inside a city that the UN declared a ‘safe haven’ under its protection [23] [44]. It was clear that after such a clear disregard for humanity, and after such a shameful display for the UN [44], that something needed to be done. What came was not a change in the UDHR, but rather the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) doctrine which was developed in 2001 and adopted in 2005. The R2P seeks to ensure that the international community never again fails to halt mass atrocity crimes of genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity [24]. The R2P very obviously harkens back to the UDHR. Although there were setbacks with the R2P, notably in Syria and Yemen, there have also been successes such as in Kenya in 2007 Cote d’Ivoire in 2011, with the ultimate impact of the R2P being positive [25].

Just as with the R2P, the UDHR has always relied on the international community [26]. One of the greatest perceived issues of the UDHR has been its lack of any vehicle of implementation, as the UDHR in and of itself does not propose any way to achieve its goals. The UDHR is an aspirational document [27], the impetus to implement it lies squarely on the shoulders of the international community. For this reason the UDHR has often been criticized for being ineffective [28], but it is clear that instead it is the international community that has been ineffective in implementing the UDHR. This is not to say that this is a simple task, international law exists under the so-called Westphalian system [29] where the sovereignty of every country has to be respected as ordained in the UN Charter [30]. For this reason the UDHR lacks any vehicle of implementation, as creating a legally binding and universally accepted method of implementing basic human rights all across the world would have been impossible. For the same reasons that the UDHR was drafted as an aspirational document on December 10th 1948, it would have to be drafted as an aspirational document today.

In fact, as Eleanor Roosevelt said, the UDHR is not a treaty, not an international agreement, nor is it an act of law. It is instead a declaration that recognizes the basic human rights given to all [31]. This should be a boon to the UDHR as a declaration should fundamentally precede all of those, with the idea being if a government recognizes the rights included within as given at birth, it would have no choice but to protect them. This was obviously aspirational in nature, as following World War II only a few countries would be able to protect those rights. Due to this, the UDHR should be seen as a measuring instrument for human rights, rather than a vehicle through which human rights are implemented. In that sense the UDHR paved the path for future conventions that led to future legally binding treaties [4]. These treaties do indeed work, however, they are more effective in societies that are considered to be civil, multiple studies and meta-analyses have shown that the effectiveness of these international treaties is deeply tied to the political situation of the countries that sign onto them. Still, the UDHR has accelerated the adoption of certain constitutional rights in various countries [32], which through a strong and fair judicial system lead to measurable improvements in human rights [33] [34]. In this regard, the advancement for women’s rights could be taken as an example. Global conferences pertaining to the issue of women’s rights began being held in 1975. These eventually led to the adoption of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) in 1979, which then put pressure on governments all across the world to pass laws which would adhere to the regulations outlined therein [4]. In addition, this convention had to battle through renewed accusations of ethnocentrism from Muslim majority countries as they took issue with the secularity of the conclusions [35], and in fact with the secularity of the UDHR as a whole [36, pp 111-116]. Despite this, most Muslim majority countries still chose to sign this convention, with some even eventually ratifying its contents [37].

In addition, the UDHR has continued to evolve in order to adapt to changing needs. The UDHR is a living document, and it can adapt to change [45]. Just over a year ago the right to life in a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment was declared as a human right for all by the UN [38]. This comes at a time during which we are all facing down the barrel of a global climate catastrophe that will affect everyone, everywhere. Such action sets a positive precedent for the world to follow as with CEDAW.

With this system the UDHR has steadily paved the way for real positive change. Over the past seventy five years there is a clear and defined upwards trajectory in human rights all across the world [39]. This upwards trajectory is verifiable through quantifiable metrics such as poverty levels, education levels, or access to healthcare, that have most definitely been trending upwards. And although correlation does not equal causation, and these metrics are certainly affected by global factors such as democratization and global development in general, it would be hard to imagine such a trend were the UDHR to not exist [32].

What has been made clear is that the UDHR does work, but at a glacial pace. As has been outlined with the case of the R2P and the CEDAW, it can take close to a decade before an idea turns into precedent, and even more time before it bears fruit. Even with the recently approved right to living in a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment being declared as a human right, it is apparent that this has taken far too long. Climate change has been studied as a trend for decades [40], and even before climate change became a hot-button issue, with crises such as the hole in the ozone layer, this is a right which long should have been recognized. This glacial pace is a massive issue given the fact that everyone, everywhere is affected by the UDHR. In fact, it would not be a stretch to say that this glacial pace of the resultant policies has cost millions of lives all across the world. In a globalized world that has long not been separated by something like the cold war, it is a shame that it is taking us so long to reach the goals to which the UDHR aspired to [27]. As has been stated, the UDHR through the treaties it inspires is much more effective in politically stable countries. As such the UN and the international community at large should prioritize ensuring political stability, not just for the sake of political stability, but for the sake of human rights at large. Whether it is through education, peacekeeping missions, or other aid programs, this would appear to be the best course of action. When we look at Europe post World War II, which could rebuild under heavy aid from both the Soviet Union and the United States and could do so in a tense but stable environment [41], it should not be surprising that these countries rank highly on human rights indexes [42].

In addition to this, a shift in perspective is necessary towards human rights and the UDHR as such. In order for the aspirations set out within the UDHR to become a feasible reality, everyone has to identify with the rights outlined within it [27]. Some are privileged enough to not even realize what human rights mean, while most are left dejected and beaten due to lacking them. If we wish to strive for a better tomorrow this cannot go on. The time to act is now, and it has been now for three decades. For the UDHR to be effective it is not necessary to rewrite it, or add a vehicle of implementation into it, but rather a shift in perspective is required. The UDHR cannot be seen as a bureaucratic document for diplomats to discuss while producing no visible results, instead it has to be seen as something worth fighting for, something that is important to every single human being on this planet, because it is [42]. It is up to every single one of us, from the individual to the governments, to act for the betterment of human rights. Only through complete absorption of the UDHR into our consciousness at every level can we finally achieve its goals and accelerate the creeping progress of human rights.

To conclude, the UDHR stands as a testament to humanity’s commitment to universal rights, even as it grapples with the complexities of implementation. As we celebrate its 75th anniversary, the call to action is clear: a collective effort is required to foster a world where the principles of the UDHR are not just acknowledged but fully realized. It is a challenge for each individual and every government to contribute to a global landscape where human rights are not just aspirations but lived realities for all.

Footnotes:

[1] “Human Rights Day Marked Around the World.” Aljazeera, 11 Dec 2015, https://www.aljazeera.com/gallery/2015/12/11/human-rights-day-marked-around-the-world. Accessed Nov 25 2023.

[2] “Universal Declaration of Human Rights.” United Nations, https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights. Accessed Nov 25 2023.

[3] “Human Rights Day.” United Nations, https://www.un.org/en/observances/human-rights-day. Accessed Nov 25 2023.

[4] Ozler, Ilgu. “The Universal Declaration of Human Rights at Seventy: Progress and Challenges.” Ethics and International Affairs, 2018 Winter,
https://www.ethicsandinternationalaffairs.org/journal/the-universal-declaration-of-human-rights-at-seventy-progress-and-challenges#footnote-12. Accessed Nov 26 2023.

[5] “Rohingya.” Human Rights Watch, https://www.hrw.org/tag/rohingya. Accessed Nov 25 2023.

[6] Gostin, Lawrence et al. “Human rights and the COVID-19 pandemic: a retrospective and prospective analysis.” The Lancet, Nov 17 2022. Accessed Nov 26 2023.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(22)01278-8/fulltext.

[7] Misteli, Samuel. “600,000 dead – and now what? On the road in Tigray, where a war is over but has not yet begun” Neue Zurische Zeitung, Mar 6 2023, https://www.nzz.ch/english/the-guns-are-silent-in-tigray-ethiopia-but-the-trauma-remains-ld.1728604. Accessed Nov 26 2023.

[8] “US says all sides committed war crimes in Ethiopia conflict.” Aljazeera, Mar 20 2023. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/3/20/us-says-that-all-sides-committed-war-crimes-in-ethiopia-conflict. Accessed Nov 26 2023.

[9] Schouenborg, Laust. “Why War has become Obsolete in Europe.” Stanford Program on International and Cross-Cultural Education, https://spice.fsi.stanford.edu/docs/why_war_has_become_obsolete_in_europe. Accessed Nov 26 2023.

[10] Ahmadi, Belquis and Hodei Sultan. “Taking a Terrible Toll: The Taliban’s Education Ban” United States Institute of Peace, Apr 13 2023, https://www.usip.org/publications/2023/04/taking-terrible-toll-talibans-education-ban. Accessed Nov 26 2023.

[11] “Amnesty International Report 2022/23: The state of the world’s human rights.” Amnesty International, Mar 27 2023, https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/pol10/5670/2023/en/. Accessed Nov 26 2023.

[12] “Universal Declaration of Human Rights.” Amnesty International, https://www.amnesty.org/en/what-we-do/universal-declaration-of-human-rights/. Accessed Nov 26 2023.

[13] “Situation in Ukraine: ICC judges issue arrest warrants against Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin and Maria Alekseyevna Lvova-Belova.” ICC, Mar 17 2023. https://www.icc-cpi.int/news/situation-ukraine-icc-judges-issue-arrest-warrants-against-vladimir-vladimirovich-putin-and/. Accessed Nov 26 2023.

[14] Gomza, Ivan. “Putin’s Inevitable Invasion”. Journal of Democracy, vol. 33, no. 3, July 2022, pp. 23–30.

[15] “Russian Federation: Journalist Roman Ivanov must be released immediately and unconditionally.” Amnesty International, Nov 14 2023.

https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/eur46/7412/2023/en/. Accessed Nov 26 2023.

[16] “President Putin: Free Aleksei Navalny.” Amnesty International, https://www.amnesty.org/en/petition/russia-aleksei-navalny-putin-moscow/. Accessed Nov 26 2023.

[17] “Regional Sudan Response Situation Update.” Reliefweb, 21 Nov 2023, https://reliefweb.int/report/sudan/regional-sudan-response-situation-update-21-november-2023. Accessed Nov 26 2023.

[18] “Burkina Faso: Armed groups committing war crimes in besieged localities.” Amnesty International, Nov 2 2023. https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2023/11/202715/. Accessed Nov 26 2023.

[19] “With Highest Number of Violent Conflicts Since Second World War, United Nations Must Rethink Efforts to AChieve, Sustain Peace, Speakers Tell Security Council.” United Nations, Jan 26 2023. https://press.un.org/en/2023/sc15184.doc.htm. Accessed Nov 26 2023.

[20] Meierhenrich, Jens. “How Many Victims Were There in the Rwandan Genocide? A Statistical Debate”. Journal of Genocide Research, vol 22, no 1, pp. 72–82.

[21] Taylor, Christopher. Sacrifice as Terror: Rwandan Genocide of 1994. Routledge, 2020.

[22] “Victims of the Srebrenica Massacre.” The Polynational War Memorial, https://war-memorial.net/Victims-of-the-Srebrenica-Massacre-4.171. Accessed Nov 27 2023.

[23] “European Parliament resolution of 15 January 2009 on Srebrenica.” European Parliament, Jan 15 2023, Accessed Nov 27 2023.
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-6-2009-0028_EN.html?redirect.

[24] “What is R2P.” Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect, https://www.globalr2p.org/what-is-r2p/. Accessed Nov 27 2023.

[25] Williams, Abiodun. “The Responsibility to Protect and Institutional Change.” Global Governance, vol. 23, no. 4, 2017, pp. 537–44. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/44861145. Accessed Nov 27 2023.

[26] Levin, Leah. “Human rights and the international community: twenty questions.” Unesco, https://en.unesco.org/courier/october-1978/human-rights-and-international-community-twenty-questions. Accessed Nov 27 2023.

[27] Robinson, Mary. “Shame of failure on human rights.” Chatham House, Feb 1 1998,
https://chathamhouse.org/1998/02/shame-failure-human-rights. Accessed Nov 27 2023.

[28] Dolinger, Jacob. “The Failure of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.”

The University of Miami Inter-American Law Review, vol. 47, no. 2, 2016, pp. 164–99. JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/26788283. Accessed Nov 28. 2023.

[29] Osiander, Andreas. “Sovereignty, International Relations, and the Westphalian Myth.” Accessed Nov 28 2023. International Organization, vol. 55, no. 2, 2001, pp. 251–87. JSTOR,

http://www.jstor.org/stable/3078632.

[30] “United Nations Charter, Chapter 1: Purposes and Principles” United Nations, https://www.un.org/en/about-us/un-charter/chapter-1/. Accessed Nov 28 2023.

[31] Sears, John. “Eleanor Roosevelt and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.” The Task Force, http://goodofall.org/site/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/sears.pdf. Accessed Nov 29, 2023.

[32] Elkins, Zachary, and Tom Ginsburg. “Imagining a World without the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.” World Politics 74.3 (2022): 327-66. Print.

[33] Wayne Sandholtz, “Treaties, Constitutions, Courts, and Human Rights,” Journal of Human Rights, vol 11, no. 1, 2012, pp.17–32.

[34] Neil A. Englehart and Melissa K. Miller, “The CEDAW Effect: International Law’s Impact on Women’s Rights,” Journal of Human Rights, vol 13, no. 1, 2014, pp. 22–47.

[35] Bydoon, Maysa. “Reservations on the ‘Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW)’ Based on Islam and Its Practical Application in Jordan: Legal Perspectives.” Arab Law Quarterly, vol. 25, no. 1, 2011, pp. 51–69. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/23025223. Accessed Nov 30 2023.

[36] Friedman, Elisabeth et al. Sovereignty, Democracy, and Global Civil Society, State University of New York, 2005.

[37] “Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimnation against Women.” United Nations Treaty Collection, https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=IV-8&chapter=4&clang=_en. Accessed Nov 27 2023.

[38] “UN General Assembly recognizes human right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment.“ ILO, Sep 29 2022, Accessed Nov 28 2023.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1c1Ntq27afl8YxCr7PzBnndDezxTNv79CSLt6hDIi63M/edit.

[39] Ann Marie Clark and Kathryn Sikkink, “Information Effects and Human Rights Data: Is the Good News about Increased Human Rights Information Bad News for Human Rights Measures?” Human Rights Quarterly, vol 35, no. 3, 2013, pp. 539–68.

[40] “History of Climate Science Research.” Center For Science Education, https://scied.ucar.edu/learning-zone/how-climate-works/history-climate-science-research. Accessed Dec 1 2023.

[41] Koshy, Susan. “From Cold War to Trade War: Neocolonialism and Human Rights.” Social Text, no. 58, 1999, pp. 1–32. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/466713. Accessed Dec 1 2023.

[42] “Most of the world’s countries receive failing grade in global ‘human rights report card.’” University of Rhode Island, Dec 7 2023, https://www.uri.edu/news/2023/12/most-of-the-worlds-countries-receive-failing-grade-in-global-human-rights-report-card/. Accessed Dec 9th 2023.

[43] Thérien, Jean-Philippe, and Philippe Joly. “‘All Human Rights for All’: The United Nations and Human Rights in the Post-Cold War Era.” Human Rights Quarterly, vol. 36, no. 2, 2014, pp. 373–96. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/24518059. Accessed Dec 1 2023.

[44] “The Fall of Srebrenica and the Failure of U.N. Peacekeeping.” Human Rights Watch, vol 7, no. 13, October 1995.

[45] “The Universal Declaration of Human Rights: A Living Document.” United Nations Office of the High Comissioner of Human Rights, Jan 27 1998, https://www.ohchr.org/en/statements/2009/10/universal-declaration-human-rights-living-document. Accessed Dec 2.

Bibliography

Friedman, Elisabeth et al. Sovereignty, Democracy, and Global Civil Society, State University of New York, 2005.

Taylor, Christopher. Sacrifice as Terror: Rwandan Genocide of 1994. Routledge, 2020.