The idea of multi-culturalism has had a
significant impact across many areas of law. This book explores how it has
shaped the recent development of international human rights law. Custodians of
human rights, especially international monitoring bodies, try to advance the
effectiveness of human rights standards by interpreting these standards
according to a method strongly inspired by the idea of cultural 'relativism'. By
using elements of cultural identity and cultural diversity as parameters for the
interpretation, adjudication, and enforcement of such standards, human rights
are evolving from the traditional 'universal' idea, to a 'multi-cultural' one,
whereby rights are interpreted in a dynamic manner, which respond to the
particular needs of the communities and individuals directly concerned. This
book shows how this is epitomized by the rise of collective rights - which is
intertwined with the evolution of the rights of minorities and indigenous
peoples - in contrast with the traditional vision of human rights as inherently
individual. It demonstrates how the process of 'culturalization' of human rights
law can be shown through different methods: the most common being the recourse
to the doctrine of the 'margin of appreciation' left to states in defining the
content of human rights standards, extensively used by human rights bodies, such
as the European Court of Human Rights. Secondly, different meanings can be
attributed to the same human rights standards by adapting them to the cultural
needs of the persons and - especially - communities specifically concerned. This
method is particularly used by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and the
African Commission of Human and Peoples' Rights. The book concludes that the evolution of human rights
law towards multi-cultural 'relativism' is not only maximizes the effectiveness
of human rights standards, but is also necessary to improve the quality of
communal life, and to promote the stability of inter-cultural relationships.
However, to an extent, notions of 'universalism' remain necessary to defend the
very idea of human dignity.mercoledì 4 giugno 2014
Sezione Diritto e società
The Culturalization of Human
Rights Law
The idea of multi-culturalism has had a
significant impact across many areas of law. This book explores how it has
shaped the recent development of international human rights law. Custodians of
human rights, especially international monitoring bodies, try to advance the
effectiveness of human rights standards by interpreting these standards
according to a method strongly inspired by the idea of cultural 'relativism'. By
using elements of cultural identity and cultural diversity as parameters for the
interpretation, adjudication, and enforcement of such standards, human rights
are evolving from the traditional 'universal' idea, to a 'multi-cultural' one,
whereby rights are interpreted in a dynamic manner, which respond to the
particular needs of the communities and individuals directly concerned. This
book shows how this is epitomized by the rise of collective rights - which is
intertwined with the evolution of the rights of minorities and indigenous
peoples - in contrast with the traditional vision of human rights as inherently
individual. It demonstrates how the process of 'culturalization' of human rights
law can be shown through different methods: the most common being the recourse
to the doctrine of the 'margin of appreciation' left to states in defining the
content of human rights standards, extensively used by human rights bodies, such
as the European Court of Human Rights. Secondly, different meanings can be
attributed to the same human rights standards by adapting them to the cultural
needs of the persons and - especially - communities specifically concerned. This
method is particularly used by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and the
African Commission of Human and Peoples' Rights. The book concludes that the evolution of human rights
law towards multi-cultural 'relativism' is not only maximizes the effectiveness
of human rights standards, but is also necessary to improve the quality of
communal life, and to promote the stability of inter-cultural relationships.
However, to an extent, notions of 'universalism' remain necessary to defend the
very idea of human dignity.
The idea of multi-culturalism has had a
significant impact across many areas of law. This book explores how it has
shaped the recent development of international human rights law. Custodians of
human rights, especially international monitoring bodies, try to advance the
effectiveness of human rights standards by interpreting these standards
according to a method strongly inspired by the idea of cultural 'relativism'. By
using elements of cultural identity and cultural diversity as parameters for the
interpretation, adjudication, and enforcement of such standards, human rights
are evolving from the traditional 'universal' idea, to a 'multi-cultural' one,
whereby rights are interpreted in a dynamic manner, which respond to the
particular needs of the communities and individuals directly concerned. This
book shows how this is epitomized by the rise of collective rights - which is
intertwined with the evolution of the rights of minorities and indigenous
peoples - in contrast with the traditional vision of human rights as inherently
individual. It demonstrates how the process of 'culturalization' of human rights
law can be shown through different methods: the most common being the recourse
to the doctrine of the 'margin of appreciation' left to states in defining the
content of human rights standards, extensively used by human rights bodies, such
as the European Court of Human Rights. Secondly, different meanings can be
attributed to the same human rights standards by adapting them to the cultural
needs of the persons and - especially - communities specifically concerned. This
method is particularly used by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and the
African Commission of Human and Peoples' Rights. The book concludes that the evolution of human rights
law towards multi-cultural 'relativism' is not only maximizes the effectiveness
of human rights standards, but is also necessary to improve the quality of
communal life, and to promote the stability of inter-cultural relationships.
However, to an extent, notions of 'universalism' remain necessary to defend the
very idea of human dignity.
