The importance of human rights

By Aleksius Jemadu

JAKARTA (JP): Concern for human rights abuses in developing countries has become a hotly debated topic in post Cold War international relations. Leaders of Western developed countries, in particular, seem to be quite critical of developing countries' human rights records. Unfortunately, instead of finding a common ground to promote human rights in the globalization process, leaders of developed and developing countries tend to point a finger at each other and neglect improving their political behavior.

Respect for human rights all over the world can only be achieved through mutual understanding and sincere cooperation by all parties. It is equally important to note that developing countries cannot be forced to improve their human rights records as a response to external demands. Western leaders need to understand human rights problems in developing countries in the whole context of their complexity.

We shouldn't be proud of the fact that the closer we get to modern civilization, the less our respect for the basic rights of our fellow citizens. Modernization is aimed at producing a more comfortable and prosperous life for all humankind. But as modernization has become an end in itself there is a tendency to use all available means to reach one's egoistic and partisan objectives. "Human needs" which are to be met through economic development should not be transformed into "human wants" for there are sufficient resources to meet the former but not for the latter.

Modern civilization ought to be based on the endorsement of people's civil rights and a sense of commonality. It is unthinkable that modern people are always trying to collect wealth. When we live on cash alone, we take nothing to the grave. Such people could even leave the seeds of quarrels among his offspring who would scramble for their common heritage.

As latecomers to economic modernization, people in developing countries should learn more from the experience of industrial societies. Although we have to emulate their tenacity in mastering modern science and technology, we need to be critical of their social and economic objectives so that we might not reach economic progress at the expense of our noble moral values. It should be noted that as one gets more prosperous economically, there is always a strong temptation to neglect more transcendental aspects of life. After all, where your treasure is, there your heart will also be. In this modern world, there is a crying need to make life more morally purposeful so that human life might reach a fullness of meaning.

It must be recognized that it is not easy to achieve economic progress and social justice at the same time. But governments in developing countries may not justify their authoritarian rule by arguing that they have their own conception about human rights. If they do, there is a danger that whoever holds political power has the authority to arbitrarily determine human rights conditions. In extreme cases, like in Mobutu's Zaire or Hitler's Germany, the government might be the citizens' enemy and a danger to individual health and safety. In today's borderless world we are always under increasing pressure to develop a broader perspective on problems of human rights and environmental protection.

In any case, respect for human beings is a universal value. Immanuel Kant, a moral philosopher, even regards this value as an end in itself. There is no law under the sun which would be against the principle of "do unto others what you would have others do unto you". We would accept Jack Donnelly's definition of human rights which refers to "the rights one has simply by virtue of being a human being". As such, any interpretation of human rights should involve an entitlement that an individual can use to make a moral claim on others who are bound to respect those rights. Therefore, any human rights violation should be considered a fundamental wrongdoing.

Although the idea of individual human rights is Western in origin, the institutionalization of this idea in international treaties such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), would bind all nations to accept such an idea. The UDHR declares that its aim is to set "a common standard of achievement for all peoples and nations" in respecting human rights. If we accept the universal concept of human rights then we have to reject cultural relativism which is often misused by governments in developing countries to justify their repressive regimes.

A range of human rights mentioned in the UDHR includes "the right to life, liberty and security of person", freedom from "inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment", and "arbitrary arrest, detention, or exile", freedom of "movement and residence", "the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion", "the right to property", and the right to have a say in the process of governance. In an effort to codify, expand, and make binding the rights set out in the UDHR, since 1966 the UN General Assembly has adopted the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (Richard W. Mansbach, 1997).

It is an undeniable fact that sensitivity toward individual rights in the international community in recent decades has increased. There seems to be an ongoing global awareness that human rights should be respected by all governments throughout the world. The role of international human rights figures like Nelson Mandela, Jimmy Carter, and Dalai Lama -- just to name a few -- and global campaigns conducted by human rights non- governmental organizations, especially Amnesty International, could make things more difficult for government leaders in developing countries.

There are several ways to deal with international criticism against the human rights record. First, we have to start from a consistency in carrying out gradual reforms in the political system itself. Governments in developing countries have the capacity to initiate more transparency and openness so that their citizens might have the opportunity to influence the governance process. There are ample instances at the international level which demonstrate the success of political democratization. Political changes in Russia, East and Central Europe, Latin America, and South Africa have led to a more "human" interaction between the ruler and the ruled.

Second, we need to empower the role of the National Commission on Human Rights and make it more independent. It is encouraging to learn that more and more groups in society channel their complaints against the abuse of human rights by government officials through this body. The credibility of our human rights body could determine whether we have a good or bad reputation at the international level.

Third, Indonesian diplomats abroad should be more aggressive in explaining the complexity of development in a developing society such as ours. They are required to be more professional and knowledgeable about social and political dynamics at home. Unfortunately, there is a widely accepted impression that our diplomats tend to use the "defensive approach" instead of taking the initiative to convince their fellow diplomats about the complexity of human rights issues in Indonesia.

Finally, the integration of our society into the international community cannot be denied. We have become a part of a community which is increasingly critical over whatever we do with our citizens. International criticism against our human rights record is not always negative. It is sometimes needed to improve the quality of our social and political life as a modern state.

The writer is Director of the Parahyangan Center for International Studies (PACIS), Parahyangan Catholic University, Bandung.

Window: If we accept the universal concept of human rights then we have to reject cultural relativism which is often misused by governments in developing countries to justify their repressive regimes.