[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index
][Thread Index
]
The Moral Power of Affirmation by M
- Subject: The Moral Power of Affirmation by M
- From: nin@xxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 01:11:00
Subject: The Moral Power of Affirmation by Mary Robinson
Source: United Nations Association -UK
The Mortal Power of Affirmation: Reflections on 50 years of the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights
(Full text of a talk given by Mary Robinson, UN High Commissioner
for Human Rights at a meeting on 30 November 1998, in the
International Maritime Organization building London, organized
jointly by UNA-UK and the London UN Information Centre to
commemorate the 50th Anniversary of the Declaration.)
Anniversaries have a peculiar and powerful attraction for human
beings. Some mark personal milestones, of independence, achievement,
or significant alliances. As with individuals, so it is with
anniversaries of nations and institutions. A century provides
a satisfactory historical perspective, while a thousand years
fills us with awe at human grandeur and puniness. A fiftieth
anniversary, at the human and the institutional level, provides
a punctuation mark for drawing up a balance sheet of success
and failure in the past, and setting an agenda for the future.
In giving - and making - account of fifty years experience of the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, we affirm the centrality
of human rights to personal and social development, and address
the expectations and anxieties of the planet's inhabitants on
the edge of a new Millennium in the Christian era.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights was drawn up just
three years after the end of the second world war which had
claimed fifty million lives, including six million Jews murdered
in the Holocaust with millions of others whose lives were taken
because of their political beliefs, their sexual orientation,
or other supposed imperfections. Let us bear in mind that this
year also marks the 50th anniversary of the first genocide
convention.
In the intervening fifty years the world has witnessed many
destructive events. The magnitude of these events, the numbers
of deaths, the manner of them, take us to the limits of the human
imagination. To deal with them requires the witness of survivors
to bring those events to a human scale. One such was the Italian
Auschwitz survivor, Primo Levi. Shortly after his liberation
from Auschwitz Primo Levi encountered a child who looked about
three years of age. He was, Levi said: "A nobody, a child of
death, a child of Auschwitz." The nameless child died soon
afterwards. He died, Levi said, "free, but not redeemed. Nothing
remains of him; he bears witness through these words of mine."
Levi referred to "the mortal power of affirmation of the smallest
and most harmless among us," a three year old who died at
Auschwitz without even a name. If the Universal Declaration is
to be made a reality, then the international community needs to
respond to the mortal affirmation of the smallest and the weakest
voices. We must bring home to states their responsibility under
the Declaration; and reaffirm our joint commitment, in the words
of the declaration, to "the inherent dignity" and "the equal
and inalienable rights of all members of the human family",
recognizing that these rights are "the foundation of freedom,
justice and peace in the world." In doing so we recuperate the
memories of those whose rights have been denied in the past.
Speaking on the 40th Anniversary of the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights, Judge G W Weeramantry described the spread of human
rights consciousness as one of the cultural phenomena of all
history. He commented that: "Never in historical experience has
there been a universal acceptance of minimum norms in relation
to human rights comparable to the Universal Declaration." In the
ensuing decade, there have been major advances both in the
conceptual understanding of rights, and in the practical
requirements to deliver them. In examining them, it is essential
to emphasize that the Declaration set down minimum requirements
with the intention that they have universal effect.
Acceptance of these norms implies compliance with them. The
history of the last fifty years underscores the necessity for these
norms, but also the fact that in many respects they remain to be
implemented. Indeed, the work that has been done in setting
standards against which to judge the compliance of states must
be regarded as one of the major successes of the last decade.
The coming decade must see us moving towards ways of more
effectively applying those standards. Given the need to ensure
progress towards a universal application of human rights, this
will be a daunting task, and not one to be undertaken by a single
organisation. It will require the wholehearted commitment of
individuals, groups and nations.
The growth of a culture of human rights has continued apace in
the last decade, so that we can refer now to the existence of a
human rights community. Significant organs of civil society, such
as trade unions and the churches, increasingly couch their
recommendations in the language of human rights. Relief and
development agencies have long since recognized the importance
of incorporating human rights into their plans. The work of
these bodies, secular and religious, attests to the belief
in an ethic of human behaviour that can be translated into
effective practical action. Countless organisations, of varying
sizes and resources, operate in their own countries and
internationally, to advance the rights of vulnerable groups:
children, ethnic minorities, prisoners, the handicapped; and to
highlight the issues that continue to bedevil us: torture,
extrajudicial executions, modern forms of slavery, and social
and economic discrimination and exclusion.
Thoughtful business leaders are responding to the intensification
of economic interdependence by becoming powerful actors in the
human rights community. Last month in Dublin, Peter Sutherland,
speaking on the theme Towards a Global Ethic, said:
"Ensuring that low income countries don't miss out on
the benefits of globalization is a crucial test for
international economic governance and for developed
countries. Poverty remains the world's most urgent
moral challenge. Yet particularly following the end
of the Cold War, there has been a disturbing tendency
to look on the widening gap between rich and poor
with indifference.
This is short-sighted. Eliminating poverty is not only
the right thing to do; it is essential to fulfilling the
world's growth potential. Even if a moral imperative
to address human suffering did not exist, it would be
in the self interest of developed countries to confront
global poverty aggressively."
This identification of a business interest in human rights offers
enormous potential.
While recognizing the vibrancy and richness of the contributions
of these groups we must also acknowledge that the spread of a
rights-based culture remains skewed. For many States, both in
the developed and developing world, human rights responses are
inadequate or nonexistent. The challenge for the future must be
to embed the human rights culture in the operations of Governments,
and to make human rights activities central to all decision making.
For this to happen we must reinforce the universality and
interdependence of all human rights. There is no ownership in
any one region: they are not Western or Eastern, Northern or
Southern human rights. A few weeks ago I was glad to have the
opportunity to bring together and listen to experts in Islamic
Law discussing among themselves the theme "Enriching the
Universality of human rights: Islamic perspectives on the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights". Of particular relevance
to our modern world was the emphasis they placed on the
"duties owed to community" referred to in Article 29.
We should also recognize the specific advances that have been made
in the field of human rights in recent times, and the extent to
which necessary social and political change can be driven by
rights concerns. The momentous changes in the Republic of South
Africa indicate the importance of applying the philosophy
underlying the Universal Declaration, and its explicit statement
that respect for and implementation of rights constitutes
"the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world." In
particular, the recently completed work of the Truth and
Reconciliation Commission shows that revisiting the pain of the
past can help us to imagine a route to a more secure and inclusive
future. More recently still the Belfast Agreement, by placing human
rights concerns at the heart of the peace process, indicates the
capacity of such an approach to effect a means of addressing
conflict. In both cases, the setting up of powerful independent
Human Rights Commissions ensures redress. But their very
presence means that those who take decisions have to take
into account questions of equality and rights.
The ending of the Cold War has opened up new opportunities for
identifying and addressing human rights stripped of ideological
rhetoric. We have the opportunity to face problems and issues
more honestly, and the experience of the past gives us the
analytical tools required for a New World Order where civil,
political and economic rights are recognized. In this regard,
the decision of the Government of the People's Republic of China
also to sign the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights constitutes a significant advance and we will encourage
and support them to fulfil their obligations in ratifying both
Covenants. Meanwhile, and in the same spirit, I would encourage
the United Kingdom to adopt the Optional Protocol on Civil and
Political Rights and thereby reinforce the important work of the
Human Rights Committee.
We can also take courage from the increasing centrality accorded
to human rights in foreign policy considerations and relations
between states. Accelerating and nurturing this development is
crucial, particularly in relation to increasing globalisation
and its potential impact on economic, social and cultural rights.
Such potential has generally been seen as a threat. We must ensure
that it is seen as an opportunity to be grasped consistent with
the 1986 Declaration on the Right to Development. This declaration
recognized that development needed to be conceptualized as a
comprehensive economic, social, cultural and political process.
Such development aims at the constant improvement of the well-being
of the entire population and of all individuals on the basis of
their active, free and meaningful participation in development,
and in an equitable distribution of its benefits.
This places an obligation upon states to have confidence in civil
society. They need to empower it to participate in and influence
decision-making, especially in relation to the impact of public
decisions on rights and equality. We need to "bring rights home"
to those affected by decisions impacting on their social inclusion.
Initiating a "conversation" on rights between the powerful and the
powerless, on the basis of equality, and using the Declaration as
a basis, is a prerequisite for such an undertaking. Two
considerations are relevant here. The first is the pressing need
to tackle the question of debt. The UN has recognized that the
foreign debt burden remains one of the most critical factors
adversely affecting living standards for a number of developing
countries and their people. Thus far, measures for dealing with
the debt problem have not achieved an effective, durable and
development oriented solution, particularly towards the poorest
and most indebted countries.
In April of this year a resolution of the UN Commission of Human
Rights emphasized the need for action in relation to the social
impact of measures arising from foreign debt. The devastation in
Central America caused by Hurricane Mitch was a reminder of the
urgency of a dialogue between creditor and debtor countries within
the UN system, based upon the principle of shared interests and
responsibilities.
Secondly, the problem places an obligation upon both States
and Non- State Actors in relation to their international activities.
States must ensure that the activities of corporations in their
jurisdictions are consistent with international obligations, but
they could also reflect their capacity to encourage and reward
best practices. They could foster the growing recognition on the
part of some sectors of the business community of the need to
assess the impact of their activities on the counties where they
operate, and that a rights-based approach makes economic sense.
In the past fifty years, we have made considerable progress in
elaborating and codifying the minimal standards required for
effective implementation of human rights, but the legal
instruments are by their nature cumbersome, and consuming of
time and resources. Governments can show their transparency and
commitment by ensuring domestic applicability of international
commitments. In this regard, and particularly in this place,
I warmly welcome the fact that the Human Rights Act, incorporating
the European Convention on Human Rights, received the Royal
assent on November 9th. I hope I may be forgiven for
personalizing my feelings by referring to the work of Lord
Irvine, the Lord Chancellor, and Lord Lestor in facilitating this
far-reaching and farseeing endeavour.
Yet, as someone who has experience both as a legal practitioner
and a human rights activist, I must warn against the danger of
human rights becoming a lawyers' paradise. We need to ensure that
those who need protection have access to the courts; but it is
equally important that they do not lose ownership of those matters
which concern them in their daily lives. Hence the importance of
partnerships between government and governed, and of ensuring
that, in mediating on behalf of the less powerful, we do not lose
sight of the purpose of the exercise.
Participation of itself is an important human right, and decisions
must take account of the views of those whose rights might be
affected by them. There is nothing so energizing for those
threatened than taking ownership of and responsibility for
there own lives, and nothing more liberating for workers in the
field than enabling them to do so. Placing a value on oneself,
one's family, one's social group is an essential step in
challenging oppression. We must act as a resource in the
process, rather than accepting mechanical, take it or leave
it solutions.
Ultimately the work of the United Nations and the human rights
community as a whole will be judged by those who are in a
precarious position at the margins. Our work will be judged
by outcomes, and by measurable change in people's lives. Dignity
and respect constitute the ethic. Freedom from fear of death,
violence and wrongful imprisonment; and access to health,
shelter, food, education and employment: these represent
its delivery. In moving to ensure a more just world the UN must
continue to engage with a variety of actors who can contribute to
fairer outcomes: States themselves, transnational bodies, regional
and international organisations. The nature of this engagement
requires a greater focus on outcomes, and how they are to be
achieved. In calling for change from others, we can hardly exempt
ourselves from reform and renewal. We will learn from changes that
have promoted better human rights safeguards. We will learn from
those who have suffered from human rights abuses, and we will
incorporate those lessons into our own practice. The constituencies
of the excluded look to us for support and protection. We dare not
fail them, least of all by failure to attend to our own inadequacies.
The Universal Declaration affirmed that the rights enumerated in it
should be placed at the centre of all human activity. It recognized
that all had a part to play - "every individual and every organ of
society" - in promoting respect for these rights, as well as securing
their universal and effective observance. Thus the mass media have
a role to play, as have educators, and within education itself human
rights must be part of our shared cultural heritage and our vision
of what it means to be human.
The experience gained in the past half century maps out a difficult
route for us, but one that is better signposted. Our endeavours in
the future require a greater focus on what is required to achieve
better implementation. We know that we can effect change.
Increasingly we know what is required to get it. The ghosts of
our shared history demand Levi's mortal power of affirmation to
redeem the present and secure the future.
====================
END TEXT