A special report by Kate Allen, Director of Amnesty International UK
SIXTY years ago world leaders met in Paris to set out a new direction for humanity. The world had just emerged from a brutal war in which tens of millions died, the holocaust and other unspeakable acts of atrocity were committed and two atomic bombs were dropped on civilian populations. In 1948 the new Cold War was beginning, Gandhi was assassinated and apartheid laws were introduced in South Africa. Much of the world still laboured under the yoke of colonisation.
Set against this background the vision document which politicians unanimously agreed on December 10, 1948, was a triumph of hope and optimism. Sixty years later, this Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) remains one of the most important documents of the 20th century. It has become the inspiration behind a global movement, and sets the benchmark for the whole world to attain, and against which we all can be judged.
Proclaiming in ringing terms that "All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights," the 30 articles of the UDHR set out in unprecedented detail the standards of dignity, respect and justice to which everyone is entitled, simply because they are human.
Not only does it promote a people-centred view, based on the notion that all humans have intrinsic value and are deserving of respect, it provides practical measures of what is meant by a fair and just society, which can be used to pursue an objective analysis of problems and signpost viable solutions.
Drafting the UDHR, under the chairmanship of Eleanor Roosevelt, widow of the late US president, was no easy task.
Member states voted more than 1400 times on practically every word and clause of the text. Some Islamic states objected to the articles on equal marriage rights and on the right to change religious belief, the USSR would not accept the inclusion of freedom of expression, while several Western countries criticised the commitment to economic, social and cultural rights such as education or housing.
In the end they all made it through and finally a draft was adopted by the General Assembly.
The first cluster of articles, 3 to 21, sets forth civil and political rights. The right to life, liberty and personal security, recognised in Article 3, is then explored in greater detail, including freedom from slavery, torture and arbitrary arrest.
The second cluster of articles, 22 to 27, introduces economic, social and cultural rights. The cornerstone of these rights is Article 22, acknowledging that, as a member of society, everyone has the right to social security and is therefore entitled to the realisation of the economic, social and cultural rights "indispensable" for his or her dignity and free and full personal development.
Five articles elaborate the rights necessary for the enjoyment of the fundamental right to social security, including economic rights related to work, fair remuneration and leisure and social rights concerning an adequate standard of living for health, well-being and education, and the right to participate in the cultural life of the community.
Although seldom discussed, the remaining articles are crucial.
Article 28 emphasises the duty of the whole international community to create a society that allows for the full realisation of human rights. Article 30 underlines the responsibility that all people have to their community but, in contrast, does not impose any obligations to support or obey the state.
In the years that followed, visionary leadership lost out to narrow political interests. Human rights, like so much else, became split between the two superpowers' battling for supremacy. Communist states denied civil and political rights, while the West demoted economic and social rights.The end of the Cold War promised a new start, but hopes were dashed by an explosion of ethnic conflicts and disintegrating states that unleashed a spate of humanitarian emergencies, marked by widespread human rights abuses. Corruption, poor governance, and widespread impunity for human rights violations became the norm in many places.
As a new century dawned, the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, transformed the human rights debate into another divisive and destructive split between "Western" and "non-Western" paradigms. The war on terror resulted in restricted liberties and increased suspicion, fear and prejudice among governments and peoples alike.
Amnesty International's 2008 annual report provided a snapshot of how countries around the world are performing against the standards set by the UDHR.
Article 5 demands that "No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment," yet Amnesty research documented cases of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment in more than 81 countries in 2007.
And while everyone must be "equal before the law", according to Article 7, we know of at least 23 countries with laws discriminating against women, at least 15 with laws discriminating against migrants and at least 14 with laws discriminating against minorities.
In writing this article I am asserting my right, under Article 19, to "freedom of opinion and expression". Sadly Amnesty is aware of 77 countries in which this peaceful expression of my views would bring the threat of repression and even death.
And for as long as eight out of 10 people around the world still live in poverty we must never stop reminding world leaders that they have signed up to Article 25 of the UDHR, which stresses that "Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for their health and well-being."
The conflict in Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) is one of the deadliest in African history. Since it began in August 1998, it is estimated that the fighting and its aftermath have claimed more than five million lives.
Amnesty International is still receiving reports of killings, rape and sexual violence against women and girls, and the recruitment of child soldiers.
China leads the world in the use of the death penalty, executing more people each year than any other country in the world. In 2007, Amnesty International recorded 470 executions, but this is an absolute minimum, based on publicly available reports.
The US-based Dui Hua Foundation estimates that between 5000 and 6000 people were executed that year. Women in Iran face widespread discrimination under law. Evidence given by a woman in court is considered only worth half that given by a man. A girl under 13 can be forced to marry an older man. Women do not have equal rights in marriage, divorce, child custody or inheritance.
Under the auspices of the war on terror, the United States has repeatedly tried to weaken the UDHR's absolute ban on torture and ill-treatment.
Senior officials have refused to denounce the practice of "water-boarding" and the US president authorised intelligence agencies to continue secret detention and interrogation - practices which amount to international crimes.
YET the UDHR has achieved so much. For a start it has become a cornerstone of the international legal structure. Technically, all governments are bound to apply its principles. Lawyers often appeal to the principles of the UDHR when defending clients, and countries have included the language and principles of the UDHR in their national constitutions, laws and regulations. This autumn the SNP conference overwhelmingly passed a resolution asserting that the UDHR should form the basis for governance of an independent Scotland.
Many advances in human rights have been made since 1948 that have improved the lives of millions of people, such as the end of apartheid and the growth of democracy.
Amnesty works with human rights defenders around the world and I am constantly amazed at their work in difficult or even dangerous circumstances. Their cases are testament to the capacity of the human spirit to stand firm in the face of oppression.
Take for example the Campaign for Equality, which was launched in Iran in 2006 and aims to collect a million Iranian signatures to a petition against legal discrimination against women. The government has persistently harassed the group and made several arrests of those who have taken part in peaceful demonstrations or gathered signatures, yet their work continues.
The UDHR forms the basis of Amnesty International's work and I know that that work has some way to go before our vision is realised.
The abuse and violation of human rights is very different in the modern world to that of the post-war era, marked by the targeting of civilians by armed groups and government forces, by pervasive violence against women, by the suppression of dissent and attacks on journalists, by a lack of protection for refugees and migrants, by denial of economic and social rights and by the evasion of corporate accountability for human rights abuses. But that's no reason to give up - quite the opposite.
There is cause for hope too. The United States looks set to break with its human rights abuses in the name of the "war on terror" underPresident-elect Barack Obama There's hope too over the death penalty. The United Nations General Assembly recently issued a call for an end to executions worldwide.
A total of 105 countries voted in favour of the draft resolution, 48 voted against and 31 abstained. Amendments from pro-death penalty countries were overwhelmingly defeated.
Even in China there is likely to have been a significant drop in executions during 2007, after the Supreme Court took back the power to review all death sentences. So far, 137 countries have abolished the death penalty in law or practice.
Amnesty International has been busy reminding people of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. These are our rights to cherish but also our rights to lose.
We've taken that message to young people in particular, by encouraging thousands of schools all over the UK to celebrate the UDHR's anniversary, by publishing a book in which leading children's illustrators bring to life each of the UDHR's articles and by producing a short film shown in cinemas alongside High School Musical 3.
The 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is a huge cause for celebration, but the anniversary would best be marked by world leaders showing the vision of their predecessors and recommitting to the principles of the UDHR as the way of meeting the challenges of the 21st century.
One thing that has changed in 60 years is the growth of people power - organisations like Amnesty International simply did not exist back then - and, as well as holding world leaders to account, we, as global citizens all have a role to play: we should use our human rights to protect others.
