Wednesday, August 22, 2007

Comparative and Analysis of Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam

Pannasastra University of Cambodia
Khieu Chansath
ID: 01736

Date: 22 August 07
Human Rights and World Politics
Prof. Stan Starygin

Title: Comparative and Analysis of Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam

Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) was adopted by general assembly of United Nations in 1948 under the president of United States Mr. Roosevelt. His intention was to send peaceful development to the world before World War II. He also wants to promote the freedom of the citizens such as the freedom of want, Hunger, freedom from fear and from not having the war. UDHR helps to promote human dignity and development of friendly nations between nations and Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam (CDHRI) is the declaration of member sates such as Sudan, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia. CDHRI declares its purpose to be the general guidance for member states of the Organization of the Islamic Conference in the field of Human Rights. This declaration (CDHRI) was adopted and issued at the nineteenth Islamic conference of foreign ministers in Cairo on 5 August 1990. The UDHRI is guarantee for universal human rights, but why CDHRI rejects Universal Declaration of Human Rights? And what are the mains meaning beyond CDHRI? Are there any impacts of CDHRI to human right? Is it CDHRI guarantee for human right? The comparativeness and illustrations with some analysis bellow may helps to answer these questions above.
Under UDHRI of Article 2 states that “Everyone is entitled to all rights and freedom set forth in this declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national origin, property, birth or other status
[1]’’ and in article 1 of CDHRI in (a) states that “All human beings form one family whose members are united by submission to God and descent from Adam. All men are equal in human dignity and basic obligations and responsibilities, without any discrimination on the ground of race, color, language, sex, religious belief, political affiliation, social status, or other considerations. True faith is the guarantee for enhancing such dignity along the path to human perfection[2] ”. Through, these two articles above, we see that in the article of UDHRI is the statement regard to <> of human rights in the world without any discrimination. Avery one is entitled to all the rights and freedom including freedom of religion, belief and so on…but in article 1 of CDHRI there is no emphasize of freedom, however, there are some similar meanings in the statement above such as there are no discrimination of race, color, language, religious belief…etc but the statement says all men are equal in human dignity and basic obligation and responsibility. The question is how we have the rights if there is no freedom? Human right is about the freedom no obligation. Is it an obligation to have a religion or belief? If there is an obligation to do so I think not have a freedom, if not having a freedom there is no right, of cause there is an obligation to obey the law but not for religion. Therefore, on CDHRI in article 1 of human right focus so much on obligation and responsible which it is not the freedom. The meaning beyond is that citizens who have born in origin religion already must have an obligation to follow god. On the other hand in article 1 of CDHRI there are no words social origin and property by changing social origin to social status. As my view I think that the changing this word above is not the accident. In article 2 of UDHR all men have freedom however freedom of social origin and article 1 of CDHR all men have equal right in basic human dignity and there is no discrimination in social status. So we see that the members of organization in Islam may think that if put the word freedom of social origin like article 2 of UDHR, citizens who born in Islam origin may have the right to change from one to another religion and it will be a major problem in Islamic members like Max of Communistfesto said “Religion is the opium of master”. Another thing we also see that in CDHRI not list about having freedom or an obligation or distinction of property. The members of Islamic religion may think that the property is the thing that we should be concern because it is the welfare of the state.
Another different between UDHR in article 16 and CDHRI in article 6 is that UDHR of article 16 said “Men and women of full age, without any limitation of 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 its dissolution
[3]” and also in article 16 (b) said that “the family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled by society and a stat” and in article 6 of CDHRI said that “ (a) women is equal to men in human dignity, and has rights to enjoy as well as duties to perform, she has her own civil entity and financial independence, and the right to retain her mane and lineage.(b) The husband is responsible for the support and welfare of the family[4] ”. In article 16 of UDHR, we see that men and women have equal right to marry, to found a family that are good manner for human beings to form a family. Family is the root of society. Family is the first fundamental educations for human resources, economic experience that can boost society go up. Therefore men and women should have equal chance to form a family. Family is the fundamental group in society that couple should work together enjoy thing together or sharing disappointed together. So in article 16 of UDHR encourage the family to be equal because family is the fundamental group unit of society. But when we take a look at a family in article 6 of CDHRI above women have more rights or freedom over men. Women have her own civil entity and financial independence. In this article, we see that there is no equal right between men and women. So society under this article is not promoting the fair rights. The members of Islamic country may think only in one way which can cause discrimination between people and people between men and women in society. Clearly, in (b) of article 6 of CDHRI husband is responsible for supporting the welfare of the family. With this CDHRI does not encourage couple to work together enjoy thing together by putting more jobs on men. So where is the equal right? Men responsible for earning money outside and women may work at home. So in order to earn money we need to have skills or knowledge, through this we analyze that men may invest education than women because they have more responsibilities than women. When men have big responsibility, they will have an opportunity to get the job more than women. Therefore, the job market will have the men more than women and there will be increased disequilibrium between men and women and between people and people in society. Although, the members of organization in Islamic country agree to adopt this kind of law in society for the better declaration in their own society than UDHR, sometimes, they need to accept the universal law rather than their domestic uninstitutional law.
The major different meaning between Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam and Universal Declaration of Human Rights, in article 5 of CDHRI said that “the family is the foundation of society, and marriage is the basis of its formation. Men and women have the right to marriage, and no restrictions stemming from race, color or nationality shall prevent them from enjoying this right
[5]”. This article we see that marriage is the basis of its formation. It means that marry is happen only within the same religion. When there is no marriage with other religions in Islamic members, it is against international human rights. In article 2 of UDHR said “every one is entitled to all the right and freedom set forth, without distinction of any kind such as religion[6]”. So we see that CDHRI encourages the marriage within religion and discriminate other religions and set no right, no freedom to form a family with other religions.
Another interesting declaration on human rights that we should be considered is on education. In article 26 of UDHR said that “Everyone has the right to education. Education should be free and at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education should be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basic of merit
[7]”. For the general it is true that education should be the free choice and everyone has the right to education at least in elementary and fundamental stages because with some basic education people can read and write and can communicate better in society. All elementary school is required for all people no matter sex, color, language and religion.
On article 7 of (b) of CDHRI said that “parent have the right to choose type of education they desire for their children, provided they take into consideration the interest and future of the children in accordance with ethical value and the principle of Shari’ ah
[8].” We see that even though education parent is responsible for choosing type of education for their children in accordance with ethical value and the principle of Shari’ ah. CDHRI may think that parent have more knowledgeable and experience over the children in ethical value and the principle of Shari’ ah by shaping the brand of children from primary to higher education. So the children have no idea to change type of education or such belief of god. Any way, CDHRI has an intention not to let children have a free choice of education freely. Even though, parents’ choice is the right thing for god or royalty for god. So is it a good job that parent is responsible for choosing type of education for their children? If all parent always caring that what children should have like type of education buying books, vehicles, clothes or other school accessory for their children as my point of view I think that in the future when they grow up and get an issue they will not know much how to solve the problem because all the things they have gotten the parent done for them and they will not know how hard the things come from and will not know how the life is meaningful. On the other hand, when society does not teach the children how to work hard, how to be struggle, how to be patient so a lot of children when they grow up will not want to work or volunteer in public community and the whole society will encounter the problems. Therefore, I think that article7 (b) of CDHRI is institutionalize. Clearly, in paragraph 2 of article 26 of UDHR said that “education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect of human rights and fundamental freedoms. It should promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations racial or religious groups, and shall further activities of the United Nation for the maintenance of peace[9]”. This article means that education is direct to human personality and we have to respect and fundamental freedom there is no someone chooses type of education for the others. Education is promoted for understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and should further the activities of the United nations for the maintenance peace. Therefore, we see that education is very important role in society. Education is the root of society to drive the people forward in the right way do the right thing and respect human dignity. Without education or shaping receiver of education in one way they might be not get good general knowledge for promoting peace of the world or human dignity of the world and also for human rights in the world or one way education they may think or do things for their own nations only and may sometimes can do things for destroying other nations that are not its own nations. I think that the general knowledge is very important to every one for promoting peace, changing bad attitude and for understanding the society in the world.
Even though, there are some analyses above that most of the things are different meanings from each others because of different words or different perspective but there are also have some similar meanings in each declaration of human rights such as in article 17 of UDHR said that “(1) Every one has the right to own property alone as well as in society with others and in (2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of this property
[10]” and in article 15 of CDHRI said that “ Every one shall the right to own property acquired in a legitimate way, and shall be entitled to the right of ownership, without prejudice to oneself, other or to society in general[11]”. Through these two articles we see that everyone has the right to reserve their own properties, no one can take other properties without permission other why in CDHRI will acquired legitimated way. However CDHRI in this article encourage people to use violence but this is should be the right way to protect their own wealth in the last resort. Property is hard to be earned so other people and I must do some thing to keep better security to keep their own properties by not allowing the commodity lost with reasonable.
The next good declaration for CDHRI that respect the international human rights in article 17 said that “(a) Every one shall have the right to live in a clean environment, away from vice and moral corruption, an environment that would foster its self development; and it is incumbent upon the state and society in the general to afford that right
[12]” we see that this law is respect and promote general human right for living in good environment no corruption that international community always concern. In this law I think that it promotes general value that we should take for granted for international law. In this article (b) and (C) are also very good respected declaration for international perspective. It promotes the right to have medical and social care, the right of individual to a decent living which enables him/her to meet all his/her requirement and those of their dependents, including food, clothing, housing, education, and all other basic need.
In all, we see that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is guaranty for more rights for the people in the world than Declaration on Human rights in Islamic countries, however the UDHR is just a statement which some countries not care about that but we see that UDHR is the first declaration in order to respect and promote human right and in the world. When people respect each other there will be no crime. So the peace will go on hand of the people in community as UDHR said “Where as it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against and oppression, that human right should be protected by the rule of law
[13]” So human right will protect if no one is forced by others. On the other hand, if there is an amend for new laws we should respect human right in general which promote equality between men and women.
[1] -Pro. Stan Starygin, Human Rights and World Politics.(POL305),P 158-159,2007.
[2] Id.P 239.
[3] Id. P 160.
[4] Id. P 240.
[5] Id. P 240.
[6] Id. P 158.
[7] Id. P 161.
[8] Id. P 240.
[9] Id. P 161.
[10] Id. P 160.
[11] Id. P 241.
[12] Id. P 241.
[13] Id. P 158.

1 comment:

Stan Starygin said...



You have taken on a comparative analysis of two declarations, which is no easy task. The diversity of issues that the articles of both declarations deal with makes comparing them in such a short paper a difficult undertaking (which is the reason why I suggested that topics based on one right be selected). You did a reasonably good job here, though. Although I fully appreciate your attempt at analyzing a variety of rights-related articles of the both declarations, I am not sure what your selection was based upon as there are many more rights-related topics than you chose to analyze.