(Vatican Radio) “A fundamental question ought always to be present in our minds: are
human rights universal because a majority of countries recognizes them, or are they
universal because of an ethical claim which is prior to their recognition by states
and which comes from the dignity of every person?”: This was the question posed by
Archbishop Dominique Mamberti, Secretary for the Holy See’s Relations with States,
to the 22nd Session of the Human Rights Council.
Below we publish the statement
by Archbishop Dominique Mamberti, Secretary for the Holy See’s Relations
with States, delivered at the High Level Segment of the 22nd Session of the Human
Rights Council, Geneva, 26 February 2013:
Mr President,
Introduction
The
need to prevent in the future the immense tragedies of the Second World War, when
the dignity of the human person was profoundly violated and entire populations destroyed,
created among the international community a convergence of understanding on the basic
values that led to the establishment, in 1946, of the United Nations Commission on
Human Rights, - which was replaced, in 2006, by this Human Rights Council, - and culminated,
two years later, in the Universal Declaration on Human Rights and related Conventions.
Mr
President,
Challenges for the protection of the dignity of the human person
Twenty
years ago, the 1993 Vienna World Conference on Human Rights proclaimed the indivisibility
and universality of all human rights. The effort, however, to give substance to the
stated equal importance and interdependence of civil and political rights and of economic,
social and cultural rights, still meets with serious obstacles in the path towards
its achievement. The resulting gap shows the high costs that large segments of the
world population have to pay as shown by their poor health and lack of access to necessary
medicines, the lack of adequate education, especially for young girls, the lack of
drinking water, of sufficient food, the ongoing political exclusion of millions of
people, the lack of security in armed conflicts, the lack of assistance for migrants
and refugees, and the lack of freedom of expression and religious liberty. Much remains
to be done to make the indivisibility of human rights a reality.
Moreover,
recent attempts to re-interpret the meaning of some critical terms in basic documents,
like the Universal Declaration on Human Rights and related Conventions, by the introduction
of ambiguous expressions and ideological positions appear to ignore the solid foundations
of human rights, to weaken the successes already achieved, and to undermine the universality
of human rights.
While for too many people fundamental human rights are still
a practically unreachable aspiration, the mechanisms that the concert of nations has
for the protection and promotion of these rights suffer from some serious contradictions,
duplication of structures and limited capacity to implement effectively their mandate,
because sufficient resources are not provided, clashes of convictions are increasing
among groups, and private interests are pursued instead of the common good.
Mr
President,
Role of the Human Rights Council
These challenges surely
urge the international community to recall the important role the Human Rights Council
is due to play in three main areas:
The Human Rights Council has the mandate
and the ability permanently to monitor respect for human rights and to ensure they
become a universal standard of achievement for all peoples and nations, and an important
milestone of the universal common good;
The Human Rights Council, through
its activities ought to promote international respect of human rights in fostering
both duties and rights at the same time, and further the concrete freedoms and responsibilities
of human beings all around the globe;
The Human Rights Council has grown by
supporting the concrete universality and indivisibility of human rights, and it should
protect, promote and adhere to these principles in order to resist the slide of human
rights into a rhetorical void, an ideology or an instrument of power for imposing
political agendas.
Mr President,
Through its mechanisms and procedures,
especially the Universal Periodic Review, the Human Rights Council is a key driving
force for human development, and a positive service to member States that can progressively
improve the implementation of all human rights for the benefit of their fellow citizens
and other persons found in their territory.
However, the way so-called “new
rights” are discussed and recognized by the Human Rights Council puts at risk the
universality and indivisibility of human rights and, consequently, the credibility
of the Council as a promoter and defender of the principles enshrined in the Universal
Declaration on Human Rights. A fundamental question ought always to be present in
our minds: are human rights universal because a majority of countries recognizes them,
or are they universal because of an ethical claim which is prior to their recognition
by states and which comes from the dignity of every person? The Holy See firmly believes
that human rights should be judged by their reference to the founding principles and
objectives enshrined in the basic documents where the nature and innate dignity of
the human person are key elements. In his 2009 Encyclical Letter Caritas in Veritate,
Pope Benedict XVI rightly observed: “A link has often been noted between claims to
a ‘right to excess’, and even to transgression and vice, within affluent societies,
and the lack of food, drinkable water, basic instruction and elementary health care
in areas of the underdeveloped world and on the outskirts of large metropolitan centres.
The link consists in this: individual rights, when detached from a framework of duties
which grants them their full meaning, can run wild, leading to an escalation of demands
which is effectively unlimited and indiscriminate.”
Thus the protection of
the dignity of every human person, on one hand, and the full implementation and respect
of the Resolutions of this Council, on the other hand, urge all States to work together,
in a spirit of dialogue and openness, to adopt Resolutions in a consensual way. In
fact, the number of resolutions is less important than their effectiveness, the imposition
of new rights and principles should be replaced by respect for and strengthening of
those already agreed upon. In this way, the common good will be sought, cooperation
among nations will be reinforced, and the principle of subsidiarity will be fully
respected.
In this context, the Holy See will continue to contribute to this
Council’s discussions, so as to offer an essentially ethical reflection upon its decision-making,
and so as to help safeguard the dignity of the human person.
Mr President,
Allow me to address some specific concerns that appear particularly urgent
today, and that would give greater credibility and status to the Council.
Freedom
of religion
One of the challenges the international community has had to face
in recent years is the right to freedom of religion. International law is quite substantial
in this regard. So why does it remain one of the most frequently and widely denied
and restricted rights in the world? Authoritative studies have recently shown that
violations of freedom of religion are not abating, but have in fact increased over
the last decade. More than 70% of the world’s population lives in places where religious
freedom is not fully guaranteed, with high restrictions on religious beliefs and practices,
and religious minorities pay the highest price. It seems then that, despite all the
legal instruments available, a minimal protection of freedom of religion has not yet
been achieved in many countries.
Reasons for this include poor state legislation,
lack of political will, cultural prejudice, hatred and intolerance. These factors
often accompany the violation of freedom of religion. However, key to upholding freedom
of religion is its recognition as grounded in the transcendent dimension of human
dignity. The freedom safeguarded in the freedom of religion cannot be reduced simply
to its political or even civil dimension. It is a freedom that signals a limit upon
the state, and a protection of the conscience of the individual from the power of
the state. That is why when a state safeguards it properly, freedom of religion becomes
one of the sources of the state’s legitimacy, and a primary indicator of democracy.
A
full recognition of religious freedom, therefore, requires a state, which recognizes
the transcendent dimension of human dignity. The issue at stake, then, is the recognition
of the positive dimension of religions in the public square as a force for peace and
freedom. This is accompanied by a correlative duty on the part of religions to participate
in public debate, an exercise that is part and parcel of democratic life.
Among
the many concerns linked to freedom of religion, the fate of religious minorities
stand in particular relief, including Christian communities suffering violence and
cruelty. As the last Report of the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion shows,
more can and should be done to protect the freedom of religion of religious minorities.
Mr President,
Confronted by conflicts in various regions of the globe
and by the constant risk of fresh outbreaks of violence, the international community
is struggling to find new ways to ensure peaceful coexistence, as the Charter of the
United Nations requires and as the current debate on the right to peace argues in
a convincing way.
Peace as a condition for human rights
No lasting peace
can be achieved without a true recognition of the dignity of every human person. Peace
is not only reached when armed conflict ends, however important a step this might
be; peace is earned by a society in the long term when the rule of law translates
into action the standards of human rights as recognized by the Universal Declaration
on Human Rights and by the international Conventions on human rights, a task that
the Holy See constantly advocates in the most diverse circumstances. Key to this
search for international peace in a globalized world is, once again, the preservation
and promotion of the universality and indivisibility of human rights. In today’s context
of an ever-growing inter-connection between societies, adhering to the standard of
human rights becomes both increasingly more important and a condition for social harmony
and peace. This requires defending the life of the human person, from conception until
natural death; protecting the rights of the child, especially the right to have a
family, founded on marriage between one man and one woman, and upon whom falls the
primary responsibility of education of children; defending the rights of disabled
people, of migrants and of refugees; protecting freedom of religion, freedom of expression,
freedom of association and so on; combating discrimination based on sex, religion,
race and colour; and combating violence against women.
In the context of the
discussion on human rights and how they should be given concrete and practical application,
special attention must be paid to the right to life, to its promotion and to the deepening
of our understanding of it. No peace can come without the true recognition of the
value of human life. Respect for the value of life is by no means a limitation or
contradiction of expressions of freedom. On the contrary, freedom of choice flourishes
where the deeper and prior value of human life is acknowledged and safeguarded. Indeed,
“openness to life is at the centre of true development ... By cultivating openness
to life, wealthy peoples ... can promote virtuous action within the perspective of
production that is morally sound and marked by solidarity, respecting the fundamental
right to life of every people and every individual.”
Mr President,
The
Catholic Church’s contribution to human rights
The Catholic Church’s acknowledgement
of the legitimacy of human rights is not only a moral or political duty. It has deep
roots in its convictions and beliefs. This is due to the way the Church views the
human person and his or her dignity. Fifty years ago Blessed Pope John XXIII wrote:
“Any well-regulated and productive association of men in society demands the acceptance
of one fundamental principle: that each individual human being is truly a person.
His is a nature that is endowed with intelligence and free will. As such he has rights
and duties, which together flow as a direct consequence from his nature. These rights
and duties are universal and inviolable, and therefore altogether inalienable. When,
furthermore, we consider a human being's personal dignity from the standpoint of divine
revelation, inevitably our estimate of it is incomparably increased. Men and women
have been ransomed by the blood of Jesus Christ. Grace has made them sons and friends
of God, and heirs to eternal glory.” Therefore, millions of individuals and thousands
of Catholic communities and NGOs around the world have taken up the task of promoting
respect for the dignity of the human person and his or her inherent human rights as
one of their responsibilities and de facto are engaged in practical actions to support
and promote awareness of the critical importance of human rights.
Conclusion
In conclusion, Mr President, the Holy See cooperates with all people of good
will who work to ensure that the Charter and the principles of the United Nations
are not only proclaimed, but also recognized in their genuine formulation, meaning
and application. Several decades ago, the late Pope Paul VI appealed for the world’s
commitment to close the gap between the ideal and the reality. He wrote: “The vastness
and the urgency of the action to be carried out call for the united contribution of
all. How can we see to it that international resolutions be applied among all peoples?
How can we ensure the fundamental rights of man, when they are mocked? How can we
intervene, in a word, to save the human person wherever it is threatened? How can
we make those in charge realize that it is a question of an essential heritage of
man that no one can harm with impunity, on any pretext, without making an attempt
on what is most sacred for a human being and thus ruining the very foundations of
social life? All these are grave problems and we cannot make any mystery of the fact:
it would be useless to proclaim rights if at the same time we did not do everything
in our power to ensure the duty of respecting them, on the part of everyone, everywhere
and for everyone.”