Globalization and human rights<\/p>\n
By T. Mulya Lubis<\/p>\n
JAKARTA (JP): Does culture matter? This question was raised by
\nAbdullahi An-Naim, a highly acclaimed scholar of human rights
\nfrom Sudan. The international community respected An-Naim's
\nclarity and consistency in advocating universal rights, despite
\nthe fact that he comes from a traditionally conservative Islamic
\ncommunity himself.<\/p>\n
Why is it so important to raise such a question again and
\nagain?<\/p>\n
Because within the human rights community there has been a
\nreluctance to again engage in cultural debate questioning the
\nadherence to the notion of universality of human rights that in
\nits nature must be cross-cultural and inter-cultural.<\/p>\n
Engaging in such a debate would be regarded as a serious
\nsetback that might revive bitter tensions and conflicts between
\nthose conflicting notions of human rights.<\/p>\n
Moreover, such a debate might open an avenue for repressive
\nideas together with a blanket cover up of violence and other
\nforms of human rights violations.<\/p>\n
Continuing human rights violations in South Africa, Sudan,
\nMyanmar and other parts of the world serve as a fresh reminder to
\nthose who oppose seeing human rights from a cultural perspective.<\/p>\n
When the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was being
\ndrafted immediately after World War II, a strong protest was
\nlodged by the American Anthropologist Association. It said that
\nuniversality of human rights was a nonsense. Rights must be
\nculturally bound, and no rights exist without cultural
\naffirmation.<\/p>\n
Similar protests have been aired by various cultural
\ncommunities around the world. In Asia as we know, the emergence
\nof Asian values has been regarded as a rebirth of cultural
\ndomination of the perception of human rights.<\/p>\n
Asian values have contributed to the so-called \"Asian miracle\"
\nthat facilitated several Asian countries to make economic leaps
\nfrom developing economies into (nearly) industrialized ones, such
\nas Taiwan, Hong Kong, South Korea, Thailand, Malaysia and
\nIndonesia.<\/p>\n
However, the collapse of the Asian miracle has destroyed the
\nmystique of Asian values whereby people started asking the
\nquestion: hasn't it been an empirical fact of life that history
\nof economic achievement was dictated by universal economic
\nindicators?<\/p>\n
The economic development in Europe and America has been a
\nproduct of working achievement of similar economic indicators and
\nmeasurement. Why economic development in Asia has not been the
\nsame as economic development in those two continents?<\/p>\n
To contradict a cultural approach on one hand and universality
\napproach on the other hand might be a futile exercise, however
\none must be able to clearly articulate a counter-cultural
\nargument to the hegemony of cultural fundamentalism or of Asian
\nvalues.<\/p>\n
Therefore, it is not an overstatement that culture matters to
\nglobalization, to economic and social rights, and to civil and
\npolitical rights because the very idea of rights is a cultural
\nconstruct.<\/p>\n
An-Naim is right when he says that human rights is not a
\nculturally neutral concept. Human rights contents are also
\nculturally conditioned. The institutions for implementing rights
\nare culturally embedded. Both the force and appeal of rights and
\nthe resistance to that appeal are culturally imprinted. The
\nproblematic of culture's relevance is precisely that paradox:
\nthat the notion of rights is a cultural construct while its
\ncounter-forces are also culturally embedded.<\/p>\n
Having said this, it does not mean that we should condone
\nhuman rights violations since such a kind of practice in a number
\nof cultural communities has cultural justification.<\/p>\n
Violations of civil and political rights are indefensible.<\/p>\n
Therefore, the question of Asian values, for instance, is not
\nwhether there are Asian values or what their relevance is to
\nhuman rights in abstract but whose understanding of Asian values
\nis taken seriously.<\/p>\n
This is the time, perhaps, for statesmen, scholars and
\nactivists to reconsider their longtime position. Dictated by
\nperpetual tension and conflict in human rights, they keep on
\ncontradicting cultural notion and universal notion of human
\nrights. After all, our world is becoming one where cultural
\ndifferences become less and less relevant.<\/p>\n
As An-Naim says, our past mistake is to think of culture as
\nmerely being bound to locality, either regional or national.
\nThere is an emerging culture such as the global business culture,
\ntechnology cultures and security cultures which are crossing
\nborders.<\/p>\n
The inevitable globalization of culture, whether we like it or
\nnot, must include the globalization of human rights culture.
\nPeople, of course are rooted in their cultural communities, but
\nthey are also sharing values and institutions and dynamics
\nglobally.<\/p>\n
The writer is a human rights activist and a corporate lawyer.<\/p>", "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/globalization-and-human-rights-1447893297", "image": "" }, "sponsor": "Okusi Associates", "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com" }