The Universal Declaration of Human Rights - Assignment Example

Assignment
Yes, indeed, there exists a set of universal human rights spreading across boundaries of states, cultures, and legal systems. The continuous evolution of international jurisprudence as a consequence of the world wars and a catena of widespread human rights abuses in various parts of the world has forced jurists to devise a body of laws that prohibit these abuses regardless of municipal laws, which may or may not allow these abuses. The United Nations’ adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (hereinafter, “UDHR”) in 1948 was fundamentally the first expression of rights that inherently lie within all human beings and are inalienable at an international level. Various treaties, agreements, and international instruments have also richly contributed to expanding the scope of the thirty articles that the UDHR encapsulates. (“UN, United Nations”, n.d.)

Recent examples include the NATO intervening in Libya in 2011to stop its long-time dictator Muammar Gaddafi from committing such atrocities; the stepping in of the United Nations’ Peace Keeping Forces in Congo, Kosovo, Liberia, and Sudan. These are just a few examples when the concept of “humanitarian intervention” as enshrined in the UN Charter as an exception to general non-intervention gained public light and scrutiny. What this means is that, as a general rule, nation-states are prohibited from interfering in the domestic affairs of other states, except when such an intervention is on humanitarian grounds and is justified by its objective of putting a stop to instances of rampant human rights violations occurring in the state. The evolution of this widely agreed albeit contentious, law can be said to have been triggered by the Nazi pogroms against the Jews. The collective conscience of the world was shocked as the realization dawned on them that while an attempt was made at exterminating a whole race of people, other people of the world chose to look the other way. That should not be allowed to pass ever again.

After it has been established with reasonable agreement amongst jurists that an individual is a subject of international law, as opposed to the object of it, the hierarchical position of importance given to its subjects faced a dynamic change. At this juncture, upholding the rights of individual attention received a great fillip at the international level, even at the expense of the rights of a nation-state. This can be said to be a gift of the French and American Revolutions and general enlightenment in the body of laws as to the status of individuals. While, on the one hand, slavery, discrimination, and other forms of subjugating people were outlawed, states began to be tasked with a greater burden of international accountability with respect to any violations thereof (“UN Criticized for Using Private Security Firms”, n.d.).

Whether or not an intervention is legitimate and in the interest of upholding international justice remains a question with tenuous answers. There is a wide array of justifications provided by intervening states and even more so by states that have been accused of carrying on these violations. There are different questions: whether such an intervention has been sanctioned by the Security Council or the General Assembly of the UN, whether such an intervention was indeed necessitated by the scale of such violations, whether a proportionate amount of force was used, and whether there exist any ulterior motives or vested interests lying at the heart of such actions. While these questions should be independently decided by a court of law – in this case, the ICJ or any other Tribunal set up for this purpose – in most cases, they are not. For instance, the decision by the P5 of the UNSC to intervene in Syria, which has been continuously vetoed by Russia and China is open to interpretation by many, including the media (“Implementation of UNHCR's Policy and Guidelines”, n.d.). While some say Russia vetoes such action solely because it is the largest arms supplier to Syria, others contest such a claim by taking a stand that Russia principally opposes intervention into the affairs of other states. All debate aside, the rebels and thousands of civilians continue to suffer at the hands of the Syrian army daily.