How The Universal Declaration of Human Rights Assists in The Maintenance of Laws and Treaties

After the Second World War, the international world community was greatly apprehensive at the great atrocities committed against some populations during the war could be replicated in the future. Consequently, the League of Nations was constituted and appropriated the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) in 1948. The UDHR persists in acting as the backbone of many national, regional, and international human right treaties and laws. The UDHR recognizes the universality and inalienability of fundamental right to all persons in the world. As a declaration, however, its implementation is mainly operationalized through state laws or/and international treaties. However, many of the treaties do not accommodate political, social, and cultural diversity in world communities thereby creating a loophole that results in widespread disregard and abuse of human rights.

Essentially, an updated human rights treaty should articulate bolder measures to ensure the enforcement of the ratified treaties by the implementing bodies such as executives, police forces, judiciaries or commissions. When analyzing the implementation of human right treaties in the world, Maiese observes that “there is little to enforce the commitments states have made to human rights” despite the creation of international bodies to oversee the task (1). Further, the author notes that human rights should not be compartmentalized as a component towards recovery but should rather incorporate an avenue to address past injustices committed on a population e.g. the genocide in Rwanda. Consequently, an updated human rights treaty should articulate the ramifications of non-conformation with the terms listed in the agreements. In the current setup, the observation of the fundamental social, political, and economic human rights are overshadowed by an inexistent enforcement mechanism. The continued occurrence of gross human right violations even in nations that have ratified the various treaties indicates that voluntary implementation of the agreements is inadequate.

Conversely, diplomacy is necessary during the negotiation for an updated version of an internationally ratified human rights treaty. Such an undertaking calls for negotiations, arbitration, mediation, and conferences to foster consensus, address any potential discord amongst member states, and also assimilate new members. The most appropriate process would initially involve an invitation to interested parties to participate. Each member state then, in negotiation with their internal stakeholders autonomously propose the issues it would like addressed in the treaty.

Whereas some nations and jurisdictions empower the elected entities to draft such proposals, others allow more inclusive participation of the electorate through fact collection missions. Further, some governments give extreme powers for negotiating international treaties to their national leader(s) or their appointee(s). Each member state should be allowed autonomy to choose its strategy for developing their proposals considering the variability in constitutions and institutional frameworks. Disagreements at this stage can be addressed through negotiation, arbitration, and mediation. Conferences are impractical at this point since it is not necessarily targeted at reaching a resolution.

After the nations prepare the human rights issues to be addressed, their representatives meet in a convention where a draft agreement is negotiated. An international conference is organized where diplomats from the different parties come together to negotiate a draft accord. The diplomats then submit the draft agreement to their national authorities where the leaders can either ratify or reject it. In some cases, some developed nations can opt to use economic diplomacy and appeasement to ensure that some unwilling parties approve agreements. This is referred to as soft diplomacy. However, in some situations, the powerful nations use gunboat diplomacy by coercing unwilling nations to ratify a treaty through display of might. After, ratification, the agreement becomes an international law which applies to the member states.

There are several other forms of international laws apart from treaties. Conventions, just like treaties are mutual agreements signed among many countries, but retain an open membership where other countries can become signatories long after their ratification. Contrarily, Alliances are agreements formed for mutual benefits among the signatories. For example in 1953, the US signed a Mutual Defense Treaty with South Korea for mutual cooperation against the proliferation of communism in the Korean Peninsula. Finally, nations can develop voluntary accords while still negotiating the terms of a treaty.

Considering the political, economic, social, and cultural diversity among the signatory states to any treaty, the implementation of the terms of agreement can potentially face several challenges. Firstly, mostly international laws are adjudicated under the United Nations and its organs as the final arbiter. However, the UN Charter also recognizes the sovereignty of the nation as primary to the implementation of international law. Consequently, some authorities can cite noncompliance of the international law with the domestic constitution to disregard some human rights. Secondly, some constitutions borrow substantially from religious and cultural doctrines. When some of these doctrines conflict with the international law, it becomes difficult to wholesomely adopt such a treaty.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) was established in 1948 to prevent future occurrence of widespread human rights violations in the world. It formed the basis for many international treaties over the years. However, the international treaties have not adequately prevented human right violations in the world, and there is a need for an updated agreement with more enforceable terms. Such a treaty can be diplomatically negotiated using arbitration, negotiation, mediation and conferences. However, where treaties are not achievable, human rights issues can also be addressed through conventions, alliances, and accords.