60 years of the UDHR, 7 years
of the war on terror
By
Julie Middleton
, Acting Manager, CIVICUS Civil Society Watch Programme
In the 60 years since the introduction of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), the concept of human rights has been deliberated, debated and dissected. While its premise, that the “inherent dignity and of
the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,” has rarely, if ever, been challenged, few of its articles have been left unscathed.
Some governments have rejected it as ‘Western’, have emphasised certain parts over others and have attempted to sweep their commitments under the thick carpet of sovereignty. Others have instead used its ambitious and
inspirational language – that of rights, equality and justice – to draft their own national constitutions. Over the years it has become a cornerstone of international law, and the root from which all other international human rights documents have grown and blossomed.
Included among the its articles are protections for civil and political rights, such as the right not to be subjected to torture, to equality before the law, to a fair trial, to freedom of movement, to asylum and to
freedom of thought, conscience, religion, opinion and expression. In addition, it includes economic, social and cultural rights, such as the right to food, clothing, housing and medical care, to social security, to work, to equal pay for equal work, to form trade unions and to education.
The UDHR was drafted at a time of cold war tensions, philosophical tensions and inescapable political divides between large and small countries. In the last seven years, however, this ambitious document has seen its most
pervasive threat. Terrorism - While terrorism is indeed a threat to fundamental human rights, the response to it – counterterrorism – has crept into the crevices of human rights protections, presenting a much more sinuous and systemic danger.
Ironically, many of those countries who made up the 18 country original drafting committee of the UDHR - Australia, France, Ukraine, Belgium, India, USSR, Byelorussia, Iran, UK, Chile, Lebanon, USA, China, Panama, Uruguay,
Egypt, Philippines and Yugoslavia - are now at the forefront of its dismantling, in the name of the war on terror.
Under counterterrorism laws in the
UK
, the House of Lords is currently considering extending pre-trial detention to 42 days, clearly violating fair trial principles. In the
USA
, post 9/11 policies have targeted charities as conduits of terrorist financing, but despite no convictions, counterterrorism measures continue to inhibit non-profit activities. In
Australia
, anti-terrorism laws have been equally regressive, with a 2005 Act including a "shoot-to-kill" clause.
Two weeks ago in
Paris
, the United Nations Department of Public Information gathered over 1000 representatives of non-governmental organisations with consultative status at the UN, among them CIVICUS. The topic of discussion – The Universal Declaration
of Human Rights at 60: Reaffirming Human Rights for All. While the conference addressed a broad range of human rights concerns, by far the most lively session dealt with Human Security and Human Rights, focusing on the impact of the war on
terror.
The panellists pointed out definite changes in the treatment of terrorism suspects since 9/11, and observed that “common standards of judicial procedures do not apply”. Joanne Mariner of Human Rights Watch described a
bending of norms in both practice and domestic law, and a willingness to ignore or even collaborate on abuses committed in the name of the war on terror. Following 9/11, the UN passed a number of resolutions that called on states to take measures to stop the flow of funds, restrict
migration, and imprison and apprehend terrorists. Despite broad statements by Kofi Annan that it is important to consider human rights in the war on terror, the UN has made little substantial effort to guarantee this – in fact, the UN’s counterterrorism unit has only one human rights
expert.
“NGOs must speak out for stronger powers for civil society – stronger roles to monitor and enforce human rights,” said Theo van Boven, former Special Rapporteur on Torture at the UN, who also spoke on the panel. He
pointed out the tendency of states to accuse critical NGOs of being terrorists, and the need to contest this through strengthening the role and voice of NGOs at the UN. The current climate of restrictions on the freedom of speech and belief, extraordinary renditions, violation of the
presumption of innocence and the right not to be tortured underscore this point. The principles enshrined in the UDHR must not be selectively practised by governments against those who oppose their political actions or act as a democratic check and balance against untrammelled state power.
The UN’s special commemorative page asserts, “The UDHR belongs to all of us.” It protects all of us. On its 60th anniversary, we must
appeal to our leaders to strengthen the rights it enshrines, and make them a practical reality by resisting the temptation to to erode them under the thin guise of countering terrorism. The end can never justify the means. As Mahatma Gandhi said,
an eye for an eye will make the whole world blind.
Subscription to e-CIVICUS:
Do you have a friend who works for a more just world? Would you like to share this newsletter with them? Why don’t you suggest
they register for a free subscription?
They can send us an e-mail to subscriptions@civicus.org or fill out the subscription form click
here. Alternatively, please forward their e-mail address to subscriptions@civicus.org and we’ll contact them on
your behalf.
Comments, Suggestions and Contributions:
Please send us your contributions no later than Monday every week to
editor@civicus.org. All contributions must be focused on civil society issues or have
a civil society angle.
