A WORK IN PROGRESS

By Professor Sue Kenny*

On December 10th we marked the 60th anniversary of the signing of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

One of the first things to note about that moment in 1948 is what an achievement it was to get just about the whole world to agree on 30 articles about what constituted being a human and what rights that involved.

http://www.unhchr.ch/udhr/lang/eng.htm

There were 48 countries voting in favour of the Declaration, while none opposed it, eight did abstain from voting. They were the then Soviet Bloc nations and also Saudi Arabia and South Africa.

In December this year, the Centre for Citizenship, Development and Human Rights at Deakin University, together with the Australian Centre for Human Rights Education at RMIT University, organised a Human Rights Symposium at which we looked at what has happened since 1948 and how we can progress the human rights agenda.

The focus of the discussion was the social and political issues in applying human rights principles and we compared different methodologies for measuring progress in the observance of human rights. In the morning session we discussed the importance of using a human rights based approach to international aid, social development, social welfare and health. We discussed the significance of a rights based approach in supporting people with disabilities. The afternoon session focussed on the roadblocks to achieving human rights and how to get around these.

Dr Russell Solomon, from Amnesty International and RMIT University, argued that the foundation of the claims for the universality of human rights is fragile. Assumptions are made about the power of nation-states to enforce human rights, when control over everyday human rights often lies at the local level and the activities of nation-states are often controlled by unaccountable global bodies such as the World Trade Organization and global corporations, which are more committed to neo-liberal economic agendas than human rights agendas.

Professor Lee Anne Basser from La Trobe University argued that human rights instruments are important for consciousness raising and provide rallying points for calling states to account.

The participants came to a consensus that while much has been achieved, human rights are still very much a work in progress, for the aims of the Declaration remain a long way from being universally applied. We have certainly not progressed as far as we could have, as the current gross abuses of human rights in places like Zimbabwe and the Democratic Republic of Congo show.

The abuse of women in Afghanistan is another example of the failure of the Declaration to guarantee human rights.

Having drawn out those examples from overseas, the participants also agreed that we in Australia have no reason to be smug. For example, the incarceration of asylum seekers in detention centres for long periods of time has been a clear example of an abuse of human rights in Australia. There are also human rights abuses in the treatment of Indigenous Australians that continue right up until today.

Associate Professor Damien Kingsbury from Deakin University argued we need to understand the historical contexts of human rights as they affect each country. He pointed to the question of whether an ordinary citizen has any redress following an abuse of human rights.

In Australia the government can be held accountable for its failure to uphold human rights, with entitlements to compensation for demonstrable breaches. The experience of Cornelia Rau, who was wrongfully detained, is an example of this. The recognition of an abuse of human rights with a concomitant right to compensation is a primary test of human rights observance.

Many countries around the world do not meet the test of recompensing a breach of human rights.

At Guantanamo Bay the American Government has breached the human rights of those people incarcerated there in a way that would, within the United States, entitle access to its courts and justice.

In the final afternoon session of the Symposium an important discussion occurred about how in a democracy like Australia, we still have limitations on the right to freedom of opinion, expression and participation, for example in authoritarian workplaces.

Baogang He, Professor of International Relations at Deakin University, discussed human rights in China. He pointed out the ways in which participation in local decision making in China is based on notions of individual freedom of opinion, expression and participation.

He argued that China might best be described as a mixed regime of human rights, in which people have individualised (and controlled) rights at the local level, as long as these rights do not lead to collective rights which challenge the power of the Communist Party at the state level. The Symposium participants considered the question of whether the rhetoric of human rights in places like China and Russia might open the way to full human rights guarantees.

Could posturing on human rights to appease the outside world, in time, bring about appropriate change in those societies? Thoughts on this issue varied from the view that such posturing provides no more than clever image management, to the view that observance of human rights can develop exponentially. Small gestures or steps in implementing certain human rights can lead the way to policy changes and commitments to enshrine a fully developed human rights system.

The question of strategies for the implementation of a full human rights system was debated is some detail.
It’s all part of a fascinating debate emanating from what was, 60 years ago, a moment of great promise for humanity.

That we could have got then such a level of agreement is something to celebrate. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights still offers a beacon that all countries should aspire to reach. It should also continue to be a work in progress.

However, the fact that we still have a long, long way to go before everything in the 1948 agreement becomes truly universal continues to pose one of the greatest challenges to humankind.

*Professor Sue Kenny is Director of the Centre for Citizenship, Development and Human Rights at Deakin University

> BACK