Human Rights’ Universalism

In human rights, universalism refers to the principle that certain basic rights and freedoms are and ought
to be claimed by all persons entitled to any other rights and freedoms regardless of cultural, political or
geographic factors. From this perspective, these rights emanate from every citizen as a result of the
person’s intrinsic qualities which culminate to the value of dignity hence are applicable to all people at
all times.

Huneeus and Madsen argue that international and regional human rights systems were shaped by pre-
existing legal and political ideas available during their development. Close to Huneeus(Madsen -
Betwe…). Such an assertion supports a notion of human rights being more-than-culture specific in that
people are interacting, creating and bringing forth different contributions and interchange in many
places. Hence, universalism can also be observed in the ideals represented as common denominators in
sustaining international human rights law such as everybody’s right-to-foes and basic freedoms to state
what is right.

In addition, Huneeus and Madsen posit that those regional systems of human rights protection with
their particular institutional architecture were built under the impact of similar forces and problems such
as the Cold War or the processes of democratization(Huneeus, Madsen - Betwe…). This means that there
were concepts regarding human rights that were universally appreciated; some regional specificities
were overlooked. Universalism in this case is reflected in the fact that these regional systems related,
borrowed, and contributed to the global regime on human rights. For instance, the ECHR and the
American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man emerged as the products inspired by the
principles embedded in the UDHR and sought the ways to actualize those principles in specific parts of
the world(Huneeus, Madsen - Betwe…). Although Huneeus and Madsen acknowledge these issues, they
also point out wider trends within scholarship which prioritize the delocalized human rights system, and
the United Nations (UN) system in particular. The authors thus observe that while the claim of the
universality of the UN based system is in abeyance uprising majority hose developments and innovation
on human rights have occurred within the regions(Huneeus, Madsen - Betwe…). This expands and
illustrates the universality of human rights because one would see through this that various regions of
the world have participated in forming the concept of human rights. The regionalist systems are not
simply passive absorbers of Western concepts but rather they are active participants in the process of
the transformation of human rights standards.

Cultural Relativism in Human Rights

Cultural relativism makes a useful contribution to this universalism by insisting that human rights must
be interpreted and enacted in the light of specific cultural and historical conditions. Cultural relativism,
therefore, stands for the inherent plurivocity of man positions and suggests a rather inventive reading of
human rights within such a context.

Though formally comparable to certain parts or aspects of the legal systems in Europe, America or Africa,
these authors point out and substantiate that human rights perfective practices in every system face
different political cultures which change how the system is operationalized up to practical realization
(Huneeus, Madsen - Betwe…). Global human rights frameworks, that accept and even celebrate such
diversity are also compatible with cultural relativism because they acknowledge these local specificities
in the context of human rights systemization. For example, there is a strong emphasis IFESH on the poliy
sub rights of the right to self determination with in the African charter on human and peoples’ rights on
the poliy comprehension of the colonialism experience and that community and collective identity is
vital in many African cultures (Huneeus, Madsen - Betwe… ).

On top of that Huneeus and Madsen cohesion of regional human rights systems into either the Global
North or Global South does not make sense as both global and local factors influence these
systems(www.geopolitics-center.org). Such a perspective counteracts the stereotype that universal
human rights are Western imperialist dictates, thus placing the locals at the centre of the struggle for
humanizing human rights. For example, its use of the experiences of European human rights protection
systems is apparent whereas its principles and constituent elements are wholly relevant to, and
reflective of, the history and politics of Latin America, including authoritarianism, cold war human rights
violations, and so on(Huneeus, Madsen - Betwe…).

The role of States in the African system also demonstrates every society cannot have similar objectives
towards human rights and therefore cultural relativism must inform design of human rights institutions.
The ideas incorporated in the African Charter, such as that of group rights and obligation to its people,
emerged from the historical and cultural backgrounds of the continent such as anti-colonialism and
advocacy of group rights(Huneeus, Madsen - Betwe…). These things are less visible in the European or
American systems, which indicates that such rights have been culturally appropriated by different parts
of the world.

Tension between human rights: Universalism versus cultural relativism.

It is worth noting that Huneeus and Madsen's overlap of these two concepts brings to light the
contending discursive framework of human rights that is often difficult to reconcile. Universalism places
emphasis on protecting certain human rights for everybody irrespective of culture or geographical
dispensation, while cultural relativism advocates for an understanding of the society and its practices.
The history of the development of the regional human rights systems indicates the necessity of both the
universal approach and respect for local contextual specificities.

It is necessary to add that, on the subject of human rights, the authors suggest that it is impossible to
position one actor as the monolithic deity responsible for their fulfilment, rather, such rights emerge
from complex negotiations of the concept or ideas (Huneeus, Madsen – Betwe…). This resonates with
the principle of universalism in that it accepts the need for human rights because of the existence of all
people as one people. The other perspective which emphasizes the fact, that, regional systems have
internal all political and cultural factors supports cultural relativism, since it stresses that human rights
cannot be upheld without addressing the realities of the society in which they are enforced(Huneeus,
Madsen – Betwe…).

For instance, the political context of authoritarianism in Latin America during the Cold War undermined
the legal task of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, which at first devoted its energies to
political diplomacy(Huneeus, Madsen – Betwe…). This is one of the core principles of the way in which
regional systems respond to the advocacy of universal human rights. In the same manner, the African
Charter places an emphasis on collective rights which reflects the influence of local realities such as
colonialism on the practice and perception of human rights(Huneeus, Madsen – Betwe…).

Final Thoughts

A final remark concepts put forward by Huneeus and Madsen where they state that there is not a single
actor, state, or a region that can be regarded as the only author of the universal or regional human rights
related arguments offer some perspective on the conflict of universalism against cultural relativism.
Human rights are normative and seek to be universal in nature, but their manifestations and realisation
are largely region and context specific. This dialogue between universalism and relativism must be
maintained if human rights are to remain relevant in a world that is becoming more integrated. We can
develop a better picture of how to advance human rights in different environments if we view them as
encompassing both domestic and international aspects.