Search

Starting with an analysis of two edited volumes on human rights education published twenty years apart, the article argues that academic scrutiny of the field has focused more on its potential than on its effectiveness on the ground. Using as optics, ideology, agency, universality, epistemology, and contextualization as well as two case studies, one on Bangladesh and the other on South Africa, the authors point to (a) the ongoing weakness of front line teachers' preparation to teach the uniquely normative character of human rights education and (b) the limited impact of research on human rights education at the delivery points. [End Page 195] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although the scope of the right to culture has never been more recognized nor clarified, culture itself is currently portrayed in some human rights narratives as a tool of oppression and an obstacle to human rights, especially women's rights. Certainly, cultural rationalizations that justify human rights violations and the misappropriation of culture by dominant (male) elites put a dent in the recognition of collective cultural rights. However, the article argues that the binary understanding of universality versus culture and collective cultural rights ultimately harms women's rights, as such understanding does not reflect all women's experiences, priorities, and strategies. The article uses the example of indigenous women to highlight the importance of culture for some women. It suggests a paradigm shift from portraying minority and indigenous women as victims of their cultures to pushing for their empowerment through and beyond their cultures. In essence, the piece advocates for a multilayered, nuanced approach on women's rights that addresses universalism but also considers postcolonial feminist and anthropological critiques of human rights. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Assuming that human rights advocacy still largely hales from the West, Jack Donnelly asserts that it would gain additional legitimacy by recognizing the differences between Western cultures and others. Advocating "special caution and sensitivity," he calls for "relative universality." Other scholars advocate similar views. At the same time Donnelly agrees with the new anthropological insight about the "deeply contested" nature of cultures in the global South, as elsewhere, that in my view makes the recognition of the cultural differences across North-South axis almost impossible. How could Western advocates decide which of the fractions in a given contested culture should be nominated for culturally-sensitive considerations to arrive at "relative universality?" A significant section of his theory explains how universalism can be relativized in "interpretation" and "implementation." I contend that scholars, exploring the notion of "tempered" universality, should focus on the violating nation-states and posit their theories on the corpus of the available documentations and analyses. Hypothetical examples without references to specific human rights reports cannot be practically useful for monitoring and advocacy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The first part of the article examines the Chinese involvement in the preparation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, revisiting the opinions expressed by China's representatives. The second section reviews China's subsequent engagement with the human rights project in international and domestic contexts, with particular attention to official and academic perspectives on the universality debate. Thirdly, it puts forward some suggestions for moving beyond that debate. It concludes that current discussions of the dilemma of universal rights in a diverse world would benefit from revisiting the concept of legitimate pluralism held by the leading participants in the previous discussions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]