Having Your Cake And Eating It

10 December is Human Rights Day

Quite possibly my favourite observance or holiday. Even more so than Christmas. Basically, it's a celebration of the anniversary of the adoption and proclamation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights on the 10th December 1948. Among the authors of the article John Peters Humphrey, a Canadian jurist, human rights activist; and Eleanor Roosevelt, the First Lady of the United States 1933-1945 and civil rights activist. The human rights set fourth in the Declaration are as follows:

Article 1 

All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

Article 2 

Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.

Article 3 

Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.

Article 4 

No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.

Article 5 

No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Article 6 

Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.

Article 7 

All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.

Article 8 

Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law.

Article 9 

No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.

Article 10 

Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.

Article 11

1. Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.
2. No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the penal offence was committed.

Article 12 

No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

Article 13 

1. Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state.
2. Everyone has the right to leave any country, including their own, and to return to their country.

Article 14 

1. Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution.
2. This right may not be invoked in the case of prosecutions genuinely arising from non-political crimes or from acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

Article 15 

1. Everyone has the right to a nationality.
2. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.

Article 16 

1. Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.
2. Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses.
3. The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.

Article 17 

1. Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others.
2. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.

Article 18 

Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

Article 19 

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

Article 20 

1. Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.
2. No one may be compelled to belong to an association.

Article 21 

1. Everyone has the right to take part in the government of their country, directly or through freely chosen representatives.
2. Everyone has the right of equal access to public service in their country.
3. The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures.

Article 22 

Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security and is entitled to realization, through national effort and international co-operation and in accordance with the organisation and resources of each State, of the economic, social and cultural rights indispensable for his dignity and the free development of his personality.

Article 23 

1. Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.
2. Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.
3. Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.
4. Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.

Article 24 

Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay.

Article 25 

1. Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.
2. Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.

Article 26 

1. Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.
2. Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.
3. Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.

Article 27 

1. Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits.
2. Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author.

Article 28 

Everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration can be fully realised.

Article 29 

1. Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible.
2. In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.
3. These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

Article 30 

Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.

The declaration is adopted by nearly all nations and translated into 375 dialects, and while not legally binding, it serves the basis for binding human rights covenants such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; as well as the usage of the UDHR to put pressure on governments violating its articles. This then nicely brings me to the main issue I wish to address:

I'm sure many of you are aware of the decision by the Third Commitee of the UN General Assembly which removed references to "sexual orientation" in a resolution protecting people from arbitrary executions, essentially meaning that LGBT people can be executed without so much as an adequate explanation  (non-binding, of course). Interesting in that in doing this, Articles 3, 6 and 9 of the UDHR are violated anyway, but let's consider the groups that were the most adamant in pushing this: The African Group and the Organisation of the Islamic Conference or OIC; both groups have not exactly followed the UDHR to the letter. The latter especially have not being much of team players to the UN.

For instance, they had the nerve to suggest that the UDHR didn't take into account the cultural and religious account into Islamic countries. In 1982, Iranian representative to the United Nations, Said Rajaie-Khorassani said that the UDHR was a "secular understanding of the Judeo-Christian tradition", which could not be implemented by Muslims without trespassing Islamic law. Ignoring the fact that Islam is a Judeo-Christian tradition itself by definition (or to help puritans like him understand, Islam is an Abrahamic religion), and last year, I wrote an article titled: "The Ten Commandments vs. The UDHR", this does highlight a relevant point. To ensure that it is universal, suggestions can be made by other parties on how to improve the declaration to make sure it's compatible with their governments. Unfortunately, several of the countries in the OIC already had a poor track record in respecting the human rights of its own citizens and after having another look at the charter myself, I'm curious as to which articles exactly are incompatible with Islam. Maybe he, or someone else with the same viewpoint, can explain this to me because I don't want to put words in his mouth and say "Islam is incompatible to UDHR, Said told me". That would be jumping the gun, and I might sound like Geert Wilders. So, did they explain exactly which articles they had a problem with, and give suggestions to implementing some that are more inclusive to their culture and beliefs? Oh, Lady Haruhi no. That would mean that they gave a toss about the UDHR. I suppose it's always easier to claim the UDHR has a cultural bias than to face the inadequacies of their own human rights track record. Because universal human rights is a culturally relativistic concept, right? So, they went and adopted their own charter called the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam in 1990.

Now there's nothing immediately wrong about this, since several other regional groups within the General Assembly. But then they put this their charter:

ARTICLE 1:

(a) All human beings form one family whose members are united by their subordination to Allah and descent from Adam. All men are equal in terms of basic human dignity and basic obligations and responsibilities, without any discrimination on the basis of race, colour, language, belief, sex, religion, political affiliation, social status or other considerations. The true religion is the guarantee for enhancing such dignity along the path to human integrity.

(b) All human beings are Allah's subjects, and the most loved by Him are those who are most beneficial to His subjects, and no one has superiority over another except on the basis of piety and good deeds.

So they immediately put their dogma in the first article? Hmm, OK? So long as it's inclusive of the belief systems of others, the-Oh right, it's not, is it?

ARTICLE 2:

(a) Life is a God-given gift and the right to life is guaranteed to every human being. It is the duty of individuals, societies and states to safeguard this right against any violation, and it is prohibited to take away life except for a shari'ah prescribed reason.

(b) It is forbidden to resort to any means which could result in the genocidal annihilation of mankind.

(c) The preservation of human life throughout the term of time willed by Allah is a duty prescribed by Shari'ah.

(d) Safety from bodily harm is a guaranteed right. It is the duty of the state to safeguard it, and it is prohibited to breach it without a Shari'ah-prescribed reason.

Just out of curiosity, I know that there are different systems of Shari'ah relative to different law schools in Islam, but does apostasy count as "a shari'ah-prescribed reason" to breach Article 2(a) and 2(d)? I mean switching religions is pretty controversial for the members of the OIC, right?

ARTICLE 9:

(a) The seeking of knowledge is an obligation and provision of education is the duty of the society and the State. The State shall ensure the availability of ways and means to acquire education and shall guarantee its diversity in the interest of the society so as to enable man to be acquainted with the religion of Islam and uncover the secrets of the Universe for the benefit of mankind.

(b) Every human being has a right to receive both religious and worldly education from the various institutions of teaching, education and guidance, including the family, the school, the university, the media, etc., and in such an integrated and balanced manner that would develop human personality, strengthen man's faith in Allah and promote man's respect to and defence of both rights and obligations.

ARTICLE 10:

Islam is the religion of true unspoiled nature. It is prohibited to exercise any form of pressure on man or to exploit his poverty or ignorance in order to force him to change his religion to another religion or to atheism.

ARTICLE 11:

(a) Human beings are born free, and no one has the right to enslave, humiliate, oppress or exploit them, and there can be no subjugation but to Allah the Almighty.

(b) Colonialism of all types being one of the most evil forms of enslavement is totally prohibited. Peoples suffering from colonialism have the full right to freedom and self-determination. It is the duty of all States peoples to support the struggle of colonized peoples for the liquidation of all forms of and occupation, and all States and peoples have the right to preserve their independent identity and control over their wealth and natural resources.

Gee, I'm rather reluctant to even touch that with a golf club. So Article 9 shows that it wishes to promote one faith at the expense of all others. Article 10 shows this quite blatantly, and is all kinds of B.S.. For instance, it's quite interesting that it says its forbidden to put pressure on someone, or to make them change their beliefs, as if somehow there no other reasons as to why someone can convert from Islam other than pressure, like for instance said person no longer finds Islam to be a fulfilling way of life or accurate explanation of the human condition. So much for "freedom of religion" (Also, if Islam is "the religion of true, unspoiled nature", wouldn't it logically infer that there wouldn't be anyone de-converting for any reason since it's perfect?). Article 11(b) I have no issues with but again in Article 11(a) it's quite that it is only inclusive of Islam, and uses it as the sole religion as to why human rights are granted in the first place.

ARTICLE 12:

Every man shall have the right, within the framework of the Shari'ah, to free movement and to select his place of residence whether within or outside his country and if persecuted, is entitled to seek asylum in another country. The country of refuge shall be obliged to provide protection to the asylum-seeker until his safety has been attained, unless asylum is motivated by committing an act regarded by the Shari'ah as a crime.

Again, I have to question whether in the case of apostasy, if a person seeking asylum would be rejected by a state which adopts this charter? It is a relevant question.

ARTICLE 16:

Everyone shall have the right to enjoy the fruits of his scientific, literary, artistic or technical labour of which he is the author; and he shall have the right to the protection of his moral and material interests stemming therefrom, provided it is not contrary to the principles of the Shari'ah.

This is fine, but what if someone wishes to make a literary work inspired by Baha'u'llah, the founder of Bah'ai? This is a relevant question since Baha'u'llah according to mainstream Islam is guilty of heresy, specifically a false prophet, and Bah'ais as apostate and heretics. What would happen to the person then?

ARTICLE 22:

(a) Everyone shall have the right to express his opinion freely in such manner as would not be contrary to the principles of the Shari'ah.

(b) Everyone shall have the right to advocate what is right, and propagate what is good, and warn against what is wrong and evil according to the norms of Islamic Shari'ah.

(c) Information is a vital necessity to society. It may not be exploited or misused in such a way as may violate sanctities and the dignity of Prophets, undermine moral and ethical Values or disintegrate, corrupt or harm society or weaken its faith.

(d) It is not permitted to excite nationalistic or doctrinal hatred or to do anything that may be an incitement to any form or racial discrimination.

According to Article 22(a) you have freedom of opinion...so long as it doesn't contradict the Shari'ah, which isn't really freedom of opinion then, is it? While the norms of Islamic Shari'ah does very (kind of) between the OIC, with 22(b) does this mean that LGBT rights, abortion rights, rights to freedom of religion and freedom of opinion are wrong and should be warned against since their outside "the norms of Islamic Shari'ah"? As for 22(c), I have little quarrel with. Although I should note that a lot of criticisms of the religion of Islam seldom violate the dignity of the Prophets of Islam since many of the actions the latter are said to have done are seen as acceptable  within the constraints of Islam (Muhammad and Aisha *cough*). In other words, the actions of the prophets obviously don't violate Islam anyway, since they introduced Islam, according to Islam. So criticisms of Islam, often focus on the actions of the prophets of Islam, specifically what is considered tolerable and acceptable within Islam, but questionable by modern standards e.g. slavery, child sacrifices, child brides etc., as to why Islam is wrong. Clear? 22(d) I have no quarrels with.

ARTICLE 23:

(a) Authority is a trust; and abuse or malicious exploitation thereof is explicitly prohibited, in order to guarantee fundamental human rights.

(b) Everyone shall have the right to participate, directly or indirectly in the administration of his country's public affairs. He shall also have the right to assume public office in accordance with the provisions of Shari'ah.

Let see, according to Article 23(b) you have the right to hold office so long as you're not an apostate, homosexual, or a really opinionated person. A-OK.

Now for the two articles I have the biggest problem with:

ARTICLE 24:

All the rights and freedoms stipulated in this Declaration are subject to the Islamic Shari'ah.

ARTICLE 25:

The Islamic Shari'ah is the only source of reference for the explanation or clarification of any of the articles of this Declaration.

 So, it's made abundantly clear in Articles 24 and 25 (especially Article 25) that this charter is not subordinate to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights at all, but the Islamic Shari'ah. Even in the African Union, their charter, the African Charter on Human and People's Rights, is subordinate to the UDHR. But with the CDHRI it has to be different and not only reaffirm the system they always had, but have it supersede all forms of treaties and protocols in the world. They've demonstrated their contempt for the idea of universal human rights. The OIC basically had a little tantrum over the UDHR because it required them to clean up their act. And because the idea that human rights could be bigger than their dogma was too much for them, they took their ball and went home, returning to produce this shambolic excuse for a charter and claim they promote human rights. And looking at Articles 24 and 25, I seriously don't see how anyone can claim that the CDHRI isn't an alternative to the UDHR and avoid being called dishonest or an absolute idiot by anyone knows fuck all about what UDHR outlines.

And worse, this group has a permanent place in the UN General Assembly, in which they have a platform to voice their objections to references to "sexual orientation" to a bill protecting people from arbitrary executions. When they themselves have shown by producing this laughable charter that they don't care about universal human rights and preserving their own rigid, comparably archaic values, and would much rather drag everyone else with them to fit their idea of universal ethics, but until then bellow "cultural relativism!" or "Bigot!" whenever they're called on their bullshit.

Dr. Adama Dieng, a prominent Senegalese jurist, in 1992 warned the International Commission of Jurists  in Geneva on the grave implications for human rights it may introduce declaring in a statement that:

1. It gravely threatens the inter-cultural consensus on which the international human rights instruments are based; 
 2. It introduces, in the name of the defence of human rights an intolerable discrimination against both non-Muslims and women; 
 3. It reveals a deliberately restrictive character in regard to certain fundamental rights and freedoms, to the point that certain essential provisions are below the legal standards in effect in a number of Muslim countries; 

4. It confirms, under cover of the "Islamic Shari'a (Law)", the legitimacy of practices, such as corporal punishment, which attack the integrity and dignity of the human being.

I should stress that if Dr. Dieng, a practicing Muslim, could see what this article actually represents to the goal of universal human rights, then the UN General Assembly should as well. And it seriously needs to shape up if it is and its goals are to be taken seriously and not allow any excuses for hypocrisy. Especially in the form of pieces of crap being shilled as a human rights charter. But in order to do this, there has to be those fighting the good fight for the rights of those that can't defend themselves in such autocratic governments. And there are those that do so showing no quarter to any form of bullshit infringing on the civil rights within any state. So please support the efforts of the champions of human rights in any way you can, in their battle against human rights abuse:

Amnesty International
Human Rights Watch
International Federation for Human Rights
International Commitee of the Red Cross
Human Rights First