Definition and Scope of the Study of Human Rights: Contending Issues

(Western and Non-Western Perspectives)

Definition of Human Rights

Human rights are generally understood as the inalienable, indivisible, and universal entitlements that every

human being possesses by virtue of being human. These rights are often seen as moral claims or legal

entitlements that protect individuals' dignity, autonomy, and freedom against abuse and injustice. The United

Nations defines them as rights inherent to all humans, regardless of nationality, sex, ethnicity, religion,

language, or any other status. Rooted in the principles of equality and non-discrimination, human rights are

enshrined in key international documents such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR, 1948),

the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), and the International Covenant on

Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR).

Scope of the Study of Human Rights

The academic and legal study of human rights spans multiple disciplines, including law, political science,

philosophy, international relations, and development studies. It covers a wide array of topics:

1. Legal Frameworks: International treaties, regional conventions (e.g., European Convention on Human

Rights), and national constitutions form the backbone of human rights law. Researchers study the

interpretation, implementation, and enforcement mechanisms of these instruments.

2. Philosophical Foundations: The moral legitimacy of rights--whether derived from natural law, positivism, or

social contract theories--is a key area of theoretical inquiry.

3. Historical Development: The evolution of human rights from ancient doctrines (e.g., Stoicism,

Confucianism) to modern liberal democracies provides critical context.

4. Institutions and Mechanisms: This includes global bodies like the United Nations Human Rights Council

and regional entities such as the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights.
5. Typologies of Rights: Human rights are categorized as civil and political rights (first generation), economic,

social, and cultural rights (second generation), and collective or solidarity rights (third generation), such as

the right to development and a healthy environment.

6. Applied Research: Scholars investigate real-world issues such as refugee crises, torture, censorship,

gender discrimination, and corporate accountability.

Contending Issues: Western vs. Non-Western Perspectives

A significant challenge in human rights discourse is the tension between Western and non-Western

understandings and applications of human rights. While the modern human rights regime is largely shaped by

Western liberal thought, it faces critiques and reinterpretations from non-Western traditions.

1. Origins and Universalism vs. Cultural Relativism

- Western View: The Western tradition, particularly post-Enlightenment Europe, emphasizes individual liberty,

rule of law, and rationality. Thinkers like John Locke, Rousseau, and Kant contributed to the idea of rights as

individual entitlements protected from state interference. The UDHR reflects these values, emphasizing

universality.

- Non-Western View: Critics argue that the universality claim of Western human rights norms often

marginalizes local cultural, religious, and communal values. For instance, in many Asian and African

societies, the emphasis is more on community, duties, harmony, and social responsibilities. Asian values, for

example, prioritize order, family cohesion, and economic development over civil-political freedoms.

- Tension: Cultural relativists challenge the imposition of a universal framework, suggesting that human rights

must be contextually interpreted. Yet, proponents of universality caution that relativism can be used to justify

oppressive practices (e.g., gender inequality, suppression of dissent).

2. Individualism vs. Collectivism

- Western View: Focuses on the individual as the bearer of rights. The state is often seen as a potential

violator, and thus, individual freedoms--speech, expression, association--are given primacy.

Rights are often embedded within duties. For example, African communitarianism (e.g., Ubuntu) emphasizes

mutual responsibility and shared humanity.

- Implication for Research: There is a need to balance individual rights with community-based ethics,

especially in contexts where collective well-being is prioritized over individual autonomy.

3. Developmental Priorities

- Western Democracies: Often emphasize civil and political rights (e.g., freedom of the press, fair trials, voting

rights) and tend to critique authoritarian practices in developing nations.

- Non-Western States: Especially post-colonial nations, argue for a 'development first' model. They view

economic, social, and cultural rights (e.g., health, education, employment) as foundational, asserting that

civil-political freedoms are meaningless without basic human security.

- Debate: Should rights be sequenced (development before democracy) or be seen as interdependent and

mutually reinforcing?

4. Colonial Legacies and Postcolonial Realities

- Many non-Western countries perceive the current human rights discourse as a continuation of Western

dominance, given its historical roots in colonialism. There is skepticism towards international human rights

interventions, which are sometimes viewed as neocolonial tactics aimed at regime change or geopolitical

advantage.

- This leads to the assertion of "sovereignty" and resistance to external scrutiny by international bodies.

5. Religion and Human Rights

- Western Secularism: Human rights are framed in secular, legalistic terms, separating religion from public

life.
- Non-Western Religions: Islamic, Hindu, Confucian, and Buddhist perspectives integrate religion with law

and ethics. For instance, Islamic human rights frameworks (e.g., Cairo Declaration) derive rights from Sharia,

which may conflict with secular standards on issues like gender equality or freedom of religion.

- The challenge lies in engaging with religious frameworks constructively while safeguarding fundamental

human dignity.

Conclusion

The study of human rights is marked by philosophical depth, practical urgency, and cultural diversity. For

researchers, understanding the contending Western and non-Western perspectives is crucial not only for

academic rigor but also for crafting inclusive and effective human rights strategies. The future of human rights

scholarship and practice lies in transcending binary oppositions--universal vs. local, individual vs. collective,

civil-political vs. socio-economic--and embracing a pluralistic, dialogic, and context-sensitive approach. This

demands sustained interdisciplinary engagement and sensitivity to historical, cultural, and geopolitical

complexities.