The Universal Declaration of Human Rights was adopted by
the United Nations General Assembly on December 10, 1948 as a result of the
experiences of World War II. International communities vowed to never again
allow human atrocities like those of the time and conflict to happen again.
World leaders worked with the United Nations in hopes of creating an
international document allowing and guaranteeing the rights of every
individual, everywhere. The commission of human rights was made up of 18
members from different political, cultural and religious backgrounds according
to the history information listed on the United Nations website. The entire
text of The Universal Declaration of Human Rights was created in two years
despite the fact the world was still divided by perspectives of the East and
the West. However, the first draft of the declaration passed the General
Assembly in 1948 in Paris with only eight nations not joining, but also not
dissenting against the declaration. A common ground was reached quickly and
adapted into law. This text is meant to represent the universal recognition of
basic and fundamental freedoms inherent to all human beings, equal and
inalienable to everyone, that every one of us is born free and equal in dignity
and rights, whatever our nationality, place of residence, gender, ethnicity,
color, religion, language or any other status.
Despite the fact The Universal Declaration of Human
Rights was overwhelmingly popular as it was accepted in 1948, there does not
seem to be any specific listing of what nations have accepted and created
obligations to the declaration. The document’s contents have been re-created
and adapted into laws, regulations, over eighty international human rights
treaties and declarations, forms of international law, regional agreements and
domestic law where human rights are expressed and guaranteed (United Nations
Website). These treaties, laws and provisions come together to construct the
comprehensive legal binding system for the promotion and protection of human
rights. Over time, international human rights treaties become more focused and
specialized based on new issues being addressed. At the same time, the
principles of human rights first created in The Universal Declaration of Human
Rights simultaneously entail nations both rights and obligations to make the
stand for the equality of man. It has been more difficult to find which United
Nation’s members have ratified any or all of these rights. Again, the United
Nations website states all United Nation member States have ratified at least
one of the nine core international human rights treaties, and 80% have ratified
four or more, giving a concrete expression to the universality of international
human rights.
The Declaration of Human Rights establishes an optimistic
and powerful expression of the freedom and equality between individual humans
however it is written without the authority of an office, a binding law, or
official, comprehensive measures and legislation compatible with the treaties
obligations and duties. This means enforcement and protection of human rights
begins to fall under individual legal systems instead of its guarantees under
international law. Many times in history, even domestic legal proceedings fail
to address human rights abuses and it becomes the responsibility of individuals
or groups to stand up for their complaints against international human rights.
An easy and prime example of such a situation can be seen through racial
discrimination in the United States directly following the establishment of The
Declaration of Human Rights and World War II. The time, culture, history and
society built the framework to easily declare these universal rights and the
use of official style rhetoric created the ability for the open acceptance of
the document. Even today it would be difficult to find a person of power and
responsibility unwilling to openly disagree with the international declaration
of equal rights for humans but their decisions and actions would also be directly
influenced by the same activity systems that created the original document in
1948.
Thinking about the activity systems which were working at
the time helps to understand how an important, international law can be created
with intentions and purposes shared amongst participants and yet still not be
able to produce the outcomes for human equality in the institutions and
societies of the real functioning world. There are different hierarchies of
power, different roles, bureaucracies, societal norms and conventions that can
either create or break the applications of endowing all humans with equal
rights. These systems and complexities can help account for differences,
contradictions and tensions within a text because there is no universal normal
or stereotype to be able to put and then enforce such an equalized and
promising law. The United States in coalition with the United Nations are
continuously working to gather information and create reports in order to be
informed or in control of abuses or failures by others not adhering to the
human rights laws; however, the official style rhetoric in the declaration
itself seems to hide many simple human rights which are still not in practice
for so many people today by using passive, bureaucratic, impersonal jargon to
disguise the laws and leaves the document without any basis for effective
enforcement.
To begin my argument, I believe the words chosen should
be incredibly specific to their intentions. The first seven statements in the
preamble of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights begin with the impersonal
use of the word “Whereas” followed by a statement of observance. This
impersonal “whereas” creates an implication that somebody has observed
situations of inequality and is now acting or creating a solution to remedy the
problems. These impersonal statements are proposing a key discovery for “equal,
inalienable rights for all members of the human family.” The “disregard,
contempt and barbarous acts” of the past have created a new “advent of the
world” where human beings all now proclaim freedom and equality as the “highest
aspiration of the common people.” Over thirty times within the preamble and the
thirty articles the word “everyone” is used proclaiming this document is for
all humans born into any society. However, when it comes down to researching
what nations or whose authority these declarations fall under, I can only find
small pieces of information stating many nations and governments have adopted
and accepted certain parts of the human rights declaration and it would be up
to an individual person to stand and fight if they feel they are not receiving
their entitlements.
Violations of human rights have been going on since it
was created and actions have not been taken for so many people. Article 18
states “Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion,”
but on February 27, 2002, in the Indian city of Godhra, Gujarat, a Muslim crowd
attacked a train filled with Hindu activist, firing into two train cars and
killing 27 people. This event triggered violent religious revenge and four days
later, 2000 Muslims were killed. Their houses, mosques and businesses were
destroyed and hundreds of women were raped and mutilated in front of their
families. Investigation into the attacks revealed that they had been planned
and done with mutual approval and collaboration with the local authorities
according to Softpedia, an online encyclopedia. Religious intolerance is
widespread throughout the world and the source of so much violence. Article 5
clearly states “No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhumane or
degrading treatment or punishment” and yet even the United States has been
captured by clear evidence disregarding this human right with the scandal in
the Abu Ghraib prison. African-American soldiers returning from World War II
were not given equal access to benefits of society as promised by the
declaration’s second article stating “everyone” is entitled with these rights
and freedoms despite race, color, sex, religion, creed or status. There are too
many examples of violated human rights to continue. Investigations and
prosecutions may follow when scandals enter into public domain but The
Declaration of Human Rights has been part of our world since 1948 and yet the
same errors of inequality repeat over and over.
Human rights are violated every single day in the United
States if people in a society have already been judged or stereotyped based on
race, sex, religion or even financial status. It is not as drastic as labor
camps, executions based on religious beliefs, rapes and mutilations for power
in a region, or just the general suffering of people who do not have enough
food, water or land for their own survival. Nevertheless, human rights are
violated any time a majority opinion is expected from all people. Article 16
entitles equality to men and women but even now in 2013 a woman’s salary is
statistically less than a man’s. It allows for any sort of marriage as long as
both parties enter willingly and yet the religious views of others have locked
out the rights of same-sex couples to enter willingly enter their own
marriages. The verbose bureaucratic language allows for the habits and
attitudes of a larger society to permeate the actual rights being endowed by
the declaration to be lost in all official style jargon. The Universal
Declaration of Human Rights was created with the best intentions to protect all
people in society from the horrors and mistakes learned from history and
experience but it seems to be a document without a true backbone being created
by using solid, straightforward, matter of fact statements backed up by strong
policy and law. A declaration for human equality should be powerful and
enforced instead of feeling passive, impersonal, and confusing for the general
population. The official style rhetoric allows for so much of the world to say
they are adopting or adhering to these rights while leaving the general
population without any guarantee for any of the freedoms they have supposedly
been granted.
Keeley McConaughey
