Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Explanation and Analysis of the Document

The declaration is a product of a specific time and place, yet it has often also been described as a living document. The authors chose not to define several concepts, from “the family” to “torture,” so ambiguity is built into the UDHR. The authors believed that human rights are universal. In other words, nations cannot pick and choose certain rights and ignore others. Countries that voted to adopt the declaration were accepting the whole package. The division of the document into thirty separate articles may make it difficult to remember that they are all interconnected and interdependent.

The declaration was given a particular structure by Cassin, and the basic structure still stands. The foundation, or core values, consists of dignity, liberty, equality, and brotherhood. The preamble leads to the four pillars of the declaration: life, liberty, and personal security (Articles 3–11); rights in civil society (Articles 12–17); rights in the polity (political rights; Articles 18–21); and economic, social, and cultural rights (Articles 22–27). The final three articles (28–30) deal with duties, limits, and order. The UDHR does not specifically discuss the human rights of soldiers or civilians during wartime; it focuses on the rights that must be upheld in order to preserve peace.

Preamble

The preamble introduces the declaration and summarizes its core values. First, international peace and security are not just a matter of diplomacy. They are a function of human rights. Then, dignity is “inherent,” a vital part of being human. All people have the right to respect and share certain rights that cannot be taken away. Finally, these rights are shared equally: All people have the same rights, and no one has more of one right than anyone else.

In the preamble's reference to “barbarous acts,” the authors clearly had in mind World War II, but they do not mention the war, for they wanted the document to focus on the future. The second paragraph alludes to the “four freedoms” that were articulated by President Roosevelt in a 1941 speech. Although Roosevelt was speaking as an American, the delegates agreed that these are the “highest aspiration of the common people”: freedom from fear and want (or poverty) and freedom of speech and belief. This list includes social, economic, political, and cultural rights. In a sense, the UDHR is an expansion of the four freedoms.

Recalling the American Declaration of Independence, the preamble warns governments to protect human rights so as to avoid “rebellion against tyranny and oppression.” Such rebellion might be inevitable if human rights are not inscribed in the rule of law. There is a clear, if subtle, warning that national peace can be ensured only through the protection of human rights. The preamble then shifts to a reminder that protecting human rights is a vital aspect of the international peace process and essential for “social progress” or development. The preamble ends with a pledge by member states to ensure the implementation of the UDHR by means of education that will promote respect for human rights and to introduce various measures to “secure their universal and effective recognition and observance.” The final sentence includes colonies, people without political, social, or economic rights, though the word colony does not appear. Instead, reference is made to “territories” under the “jurisdiction” of the member states.

Articles 1 and 2

The first two articles spell out the core values of the UDHR. The preamble tells us that we are all members of the “human family,” and the first article declares that we should act “in brotherhood.” The implication is that a shared humanity is more important than being members of different countries, religions, or other belief systems. The preamble suggests that if we can understand that we are all part of one family, world peace may be possible.

Article 2 states that no one can be discriminated against on any basis. The list begins with physiological markers. Race and color are listed separately to ensure the greatest protection for minorities and others previously denied their rights on the basis of skin color. Sex is the other genetic marker. The article goes on to cover freedom of belief and opinion and ends with social and economic factors, including national and social status (class or caste). Finally, UN members are reminded that colonized people share these rights. The question arises as to whether a country that colonized other countries could adhere to the UDHR. It is a challenge to find an article in this document that does not raise this question.

Articles 3–11

The individual rights included in Article 3 are absolute. No conditions are attached to the right to life, liberty, and personal security. The right to life is not limited by national or international interests. There is no differentiation or hierarchy of rights: The right to life has the same value as the right to personal security. This implies that both capital punishment and wartime killing may be defined as violations of human rights. These rights might conflict, as in the case of self-defense or national security. The French Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen included a contradiction between individual rights to liberty and national security concerns. This contradiction remains pertinent today and is recognized in the final set of articles in the UDHR.

Article 4 prohibits slavery and states that no one can be held in “servitude.” Forced labor is outlawed. This connects with Article 9 (against arbitrary arrest) and to Article 23, which protects the right to choose one's work.

Article 5 continues the theme of personal security. It deals with the right to protection of the body from torture, or “cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.” Read with the third article, one might again argue that capital punishment is a violation of human rights. A similar argument has been made about interrogation. Note the inclusion of the word “punishment”: Even convicted criminals have the right to humane punishment. “Torture” is an excellent example of how the failure to define a term allows governments to redefine their policies or actions as “not torture” when others claim they are indeed torturous acts. At the same time, it underscores the moral power of the declaration, because governments do not claim the right to torture. This article demonstrates both the weakness and the strength of the declaration. Because it did not define its terms clearly, there is room for maneuvering, which may be used either to demand protection of human rights (normally by NGOs or individuals) or withhold human rights (normally by governments). Later conventions seek to address these kinds of shortcomings.

Articles 6–11 relate the individual to national legal systems. The UDHR states the moral obligation to create laws that protect human rights. These articles assume that such laws and constitutions are in place (see particularly Article 8). Article 6 ensures that every person has a right to fair treatment under the law, whereas Article 7 details the right to equality before the law. Not only is discrimination prohibited, but so too is the incitement to discriminate. Articles 8, 9, and 10 focus on the kind of treatment one should expect under a national legal system so as to ensure a fair, effective hearing. People have the right to be “presumed innocent” and to be treated accordingly, with dignity. Article 11 also states that no one can be held guilty of a crime that had not been codified at the time of the action, and if the crime did exist, “no heavier penalty [may] be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time.”

Articles 12–17

Rights related to the family and home in the context of the right to privacy are introduced in Article 12. Note the word arbitrary (see Articles 9 and 15). This means that the rights named here are not absolute. Rights to privacy, family, home, and correspondence are protected from “arbitrary interference.” If the interference can be justified legally, these rights can be limited.

Articles 13 through 15 discuss the rights to a nationality (including the right to chose a new one) as well as to freedom of movement within and between countries. The word citizen does not appear. Whereas the previous articles had assumed that a country would choose to uphold human rights within its constitution and laws, here we discover the rights of citizens whose governments persecute them. The word enjoy in Article 14 introduces ambiguity: “Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution.” If everyone has the right to “enjoy” asylum, the question arises as to which country has the obligation to grant it.

The family is the focus of Article 16. Marriage, in particular, was the cause of much discussion on the committee, and the delegates worked hard to ensure that different cultural views of this central institution were accommodated. Consent of both spouses is required, they have to be of “full age” (a specific age is not given, however), and the family is entitled to protection by both “society” and “the State.” However, this article contains a provision given by Saudi Arabia as a reason for its decision to abstain from the vote, for the Saudis believed it would not be acceptable for a Muslim to marry a person of another religion. Article 16 also raised other concerns among the members of the commission. Many delegates and lobbyists argued that the word divorce should not be included in the declaration; here Muslims and Roman Catholics were in perfect agreement. Note that the family is also protected in Articles 12 and 23, which refer to the right to earn a living wage to ensure the “an existence worthy of human dignity.” Article 25 protects the rights of children born out of marriage.

Finally, Article 17 states the absolute right to private property, a Western concept. However, the right to hold on to one's property is not absolute: “No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.”

Articles 18–21

These articles focus on two of Franklin Roosevelt's four freedoms: the rights to belief and speech—including the right to change one's belief and even one's religion. This was the second point Saudi Arabia could not accept. Whereas Article 18 focuses on religion, Article 19 is broader in scope, speaking of the right to “freedom of opinion and expression.” The next article moves beyond the right to the individual freedom of thought and expression to include the right (but not the obligation) to meet and associate with others, as long as it is done peacefully.

Article 21 shifts to formal political rights: the right to participate in government and to have equal access to public service. This article is important because it permits only one concept of government: “The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government.” The article goes on to state that regular, public elections incorporating “free voting procedures” should be held and that there should be “universal and equal suffrage”—there shall be no discrimination on the bases outlined in Article 2. The only ambiguity is in the word equivalent in reference to methods of voting.

Articles 22–27

Article 22 sets out the right to “social security,” although this is not specifically defined. Nevertheless, cooperation between nations and the international community is specifically invoked in this article, given limitations on countries' resources. Thus every nation individually and within the international community is obliged to ensure a humane standard of living for all people.

Work issues are the focus of Article 23. These rights have particular challenges, as the burden is placed on the state to protect rights; this assumes that nations have the resources to do so. Freedom to work is spelled out, including the right to choose one's employment. Fair labor conditions and the right to “protection against unemployment” are also noted as human rights. Section 2 states the right to equal pay for equal work for everyone, “without discrimination.” Fair pay is another right. The concept of a family wage is implied, with the assumption that each family has one male breadwinner. If the wage is insufficient, there has to be a backup, provided presumably by the state. Finally, the right (but not obligation) to unionize is included.

Article 24 includes what might be considered a surprising right: “the right to rest and leisure”; paid holidays are considered a human right. Leisure could be considered part of a dignified standard of living, the topic of Article 25. In this article, basic needs are spelled out, including food, housing, and medical care, that is, to social security because of “lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond [a person's] control.” It then specifies the importance of the needs of mothers and children and calls for the protection of children irrespective of the marital status of their parents.

The right to an education is the core of Article 26. The article says that elementary education should be compulsory and free, but it speaks of the right to other levels of education too. The purpose of education is to support the core values of the UDHR. Finally, parents have a right to choose how their children are educated. It should be clear that many of the rights in the UDHR provide a list of objectives toward which countries should strive. Not every country had, or has, the resources to provide free education, but in the spirit of this declaration, they should work toward this goal.

Article 27 refers to cultural rights specifically: All have the right to participate in the “cultural life of the community” and to “enjoy,” “share,” and benefit from scientific advances. This article also introduces the right to copyright, to “protection of the moral and material interests” that result from any kind of cultural production in the arts or sciences.

Articles 28–30

The final three articles speak of the duties of the international community. Everyone has the right to peace, but duties accompany rights. This was a point made very clearly by many influential thinkers (including the Indian nationalist leader Mohandas Gandhi and the English critic and novelist Aldous Huxley) who were surveyed as the committee began its work. Article 29 specifies this obligation. This article connects individuals to the community, not as bearers of rights but as bearers of duties to others. In order to claim our own human rights, we need to protect the rights of others. This section states that “the free and full development” of human beings is impossible without “the community.” The article goes on to acknowledge that rights may be limited, as for example by the need to protect the rights of others, but it also speaks of the “just requirements” of “public order.” Section 3 declares that rights and freedoms may be exercised only in line with the goals of the UN. The UDHR closes (Article 30) with a statement that recognizes that interpretations of the various rights and freedoms may vary, but no person, group, or government has the right to interpret the articles in such a way that human rights are violated.