THE UNIVERSAL DECLARATION
OF HUMAN RIGHTS
A GUIDE FOR CANADIANS

MARKING THE 40th ANNIVERSARY OF THE UNIVERSAL
, DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS

THE UNIVERSAL DECLARATION
OF HUMAN RIGHTS
A GUIDE FOR CANADIANS

Written and designed by David Winchester

MARKING THE 40th ANNIVERSARY OF THE UNIVERSAL
DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS

Published by the British Columbia Human Rights Coalition, 107-96
East Broadway, Vancouver, B.C. V5T 1V6. Tel: (604) 872-5638.

The BCHRC was established in 1982 in order to promote public
education about human rights, implementation and enforcement of
human rights legislation and improved human rights legislation at the
municipal, provincial and federal levels of government. We are a
coalition, operating throughout the province of British Columbia. Our
member groups include women, the disabled, native peoples, gays,
lesbians, visible minorités, trade unions and many other community
groups.

The graphic devices which are interspersed among the text are based
on Navajo drypaintings. They do not represent something of and for
themselves but are used in therapeutic situations as part of a healing
ritual (a “prayer made visible’’) along with certain chants. According to
the Navajo view, the dangers of the world are caused by lack of harmony.
The rituals in which these symbols are used are aimed at restoring
health to the individual and solidarity to his group by a renewal of
commitment to the values of power, vitality, order, harmony and balance.

Printed December 1988 by Gramma Publications. Reproduction of
this text is permitted but credit to the BCHRC would be appreciated.

People all over the world want to have secure in the knowledge that our human
economic security, to live in dignity, and rights are adequately protected and that
to be free from fear, from police arrest, what goes on in foreign lands does not
and from torture. They want human have much importance for us? Has
rights. Where the basic requirements for human rights activism on behalf of people
a dignified human existence go unmet, in other countries really done that much
as they do in many parts of the world, good, even in the long term? This guide
there is one important document which to the Universal Declaration will try to
may provide help because it sets a com- give you the facts you need to answer
mon standard of achievement for human that question for yourself.
rights protection. This document is the
understanding
human
rights requires
Universal Declaration of Human Rights. usUnderstanding
t0 ask some difficu
lt questions
what

Forty years have passed since the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights
was unanimously adopted and proclaimed by the General Assembly of the
United Nations. The anniversary of this
historic document provides both a cause
for celebration and an opportunity to
assess the progress we have made toward the realization of the ideals which
the Declaration embodies. Everyone
knows that human rights abuses still
occur in many jurisdictions. Most Canadians, however, believe that their country’s record is among the best in the
world. Does this mean that we can turn
our attention to more pressing matters,

do you think is more important, the right
to vote or the right to have enough to eat?
If you had to choose between the two,
which would you take? Do you think it’s
more important that we respect a tavernowner's right to serve whomever he
pleases or the right of each and every
individual to demand service from the
tavern-owner without discrimination? Is
a right only “real-’when it is fought for
and won, or can it be a birthright, something which everyone is automatically
entitled to? It may become easier to
answer these questions once we have a
fuller understanding of what human
rights are.

What Are
Human
Rights?
Human rights refer in a general sense5
to entitlements we all share by the simplej
fact of our humanity — rights which are;
inherent in our nature and without which1
we cannot live as human beings. The;
rights and freedoms which allow us to,
develop fully and use our human quali­.
ties: our intelligence, our talents and ourr

conscience, are human rights. The foun­
dation for human rights is the idea thatt
each and every human being is entitled।
to a measure of dignity and respect on!
the basis of his or her membership in the;
human family.
Rights which are claimed in this wayj
are universal. They exist prior to andj
independent of governments. Humanj
rights therefore are inalienable, that is to,
say, they cannot be taken away by legis­
lation. They are based on the idea off
“natural law’’ which takes precedence;
over “positive” or man-made laws.
Human rights are claims asserted and[
recognized on the basis of what is
“right”, not claims upon love, or grace,
or brotherhood, or charity. One does not
have to earn or deserve them. Neverthe­
less, while these entitlements are every­
body’s birthright, they must still be pro­
tected.
Which rights should be considered as'
human rights? This has always been a

matter of controversy. Rights which we
take for granted today in Canada, such as
the rights to freedom of speech, or as­
sembly, or the right of equal access to
education, would not have been consid­
ered human rights 200 years ago. Fifty
years ago freedom from racial or sexual
discrimination was not widely thought
of as a human right. Today controversy
surrounds the area of economic, social
and cultural rights, rights which are in­
cluded in the Universal Declaration.

Many people, including lawyers and
high public officials, believe that only
civil or political rights, which can be
enforced in court, are “real” human
rights. The second type of rights, economic, social and cultural, are considered by these people not to be universal
rights but things which must be earned
or brought about by force. This view is
reflected in the Canadian Charter of
Rights and Freedoms which does not
proclaim explicit safeguards for social
and economic rights. It should be understood at the outset that what is to be
included in a definition of human rights
is constantly evolving.
The Universal Declaration of Human
Rights was the first international agreement to not only assert that protection of
human rights is the responsibility of
governments, but to also provide mechanisms for individuals who believe their
human rights are being abused to seek
redress of their grievances in an interna
tional forum. This agreement enshrined
the principle that individual human rights
cannot be ignored by governments. In
essence, the Universal Declaration at­
tempts to put limitations on the power of
governments. It is based on the idea that
certain individual rights are more impor­
tant than the rights of the collective.
Thus human rights have become the
responsibility of individuals everywhere.

The
International
Bill of
Human
Rights
The Universal Declaration of Human
Rights was the first comprehensive single
declaration of human rights which the
nations of the world agreed to sign. It
was not, however, the first statement of
human rights to appear at the United
Nations. The Charter of the United Na­
tions provides the basis for all the human
rights instruments created by the UN,
including the Declaration and many other
subsequent agreements. The first four
human rights agreements: the Universal
Declaration, The Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights, the Covenant on Social,
Economic and Cultural Rights, and the
Optional Protocol to the Covenants,
together make up what the writers of the
Charter proposed at the time of the UN’s
founding - an International Bill of Rights
for humanity as a whole. The develop­
ment of this International Bill of Rights
was anticipated by several articles in the
Charter which concern human rights.

Undoubtedly the primary motivation
for including human rights provisions in
the United Nations Charter, thereby
paving the way for the creation and
adoption of the Universal Declaration,
sprang from the universal revulsion of
the world to the Holocaust. The horror of
the Nazi crime of genocide created a
determination on the part of the world’s
statesmen to create mechanisms to pre­
vent its recurrence. The way was opened
by the Nuremburg trials where, for the
first time in history, the defence of
“following orders’’ was rejected by the
Allied tribunal as an excuse for ‘ ‘crimes
against humanity.” Note that the crime
of genocide is not perpetrated on nations
but on a people or group of individuals.
The trial and the Universal Declaration
represent a turning point in the history of
civilization. For the first time it was as­
serted that individuals have rights which
stand above the practice of war and the
law of nations. Leaders of nations which
violate these rights may be held account­
able for these violations.
Among the Purposes of the UN as set
forth in Article 1 in the Charter are:

“To achieve international co-opera­
tion in solving international problems of
an economic, social, cultural, or hu­
manitarian character, and in promoting
and encouraging respect for human
rights andforfundamental freedoms for
all without distinction as to race, sex,
language, or religion.”
Several other articles in the Charter
talk about human rights. For example
Article 55 of the Charter provides:

“With a view to the creation of condi­
tions of stability and well-being which
are necessary for peaceful and friendly
relations among nations based on re­
spect for the principle of equal rights

and self-determination of peoples, the
United Nations shall promote:
a. Higher standards of living, full em­
ployment, and conditions of eco­
nomic and social progress and de­
velopment;
b. Solutions of international economic,
social, health and related problems;
and international cultural and edu­
cational co-operation; and

c. Universal respect for, and observance
of, human rights and fundamental
freedoms for all without distinction
as to race, sex, language, or reli­
gion.”
In Article 56:

“All Members pledge themselves to
take joint and separate action in co­
operation with the Organization for the
achievement of the purposes set forth in
Article 55.”
At the San Francisco Conference of
1945, which saw the completion of the
drafting of the United Nations charter
and its opening for signatures and ratifi­
cation, a proposal to embody in the
Charter a Declaration on the Essential
Rights of Man was put forward but was
not examined because it required more
detailed consideration than was possible
at that time. Immediately after the final
session of the Conference, however, the
Preparatory Commission of the United
Nations recommended that the Economic
and Social Council should establish a
commission for the promotion of human
rights. The Council established the
Commission on Human Rights early in
1946. In the Commission’s first session
in early 1947 it began work on a prelimi­
nary draft of an international bill of
human rights.

During 1947 the Commission listened
to many different views expressed about
what form the bill of rights should take.
They finally settled on a declaration of
human rights, a convention on human
rights, and measures of implementation,
and to call the convention “The Cove­
nant on Human Rights.” As noted above,
the Covenant would eventually be split
into two parts and it would take almost
30 years before they finally entered into
force in 1976. The first and most impor­
tant effect of these meetings, however,
was the adoption and proclamation of
the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights on December 10,1948 as the first
of these projected instruments. Since
1948 it has been, and continues to be, the
most important and far-reaching of all
United Nations declarations, and a fun­
damental source of inspiration for na­

tional and international efforts to pro­
mote and protect human rights and fun­
damental freedoms. It has set the direc­
tion for all subsequent work in the field
of human rights and has provided the
basic philosophy for many legally bind­
ing international instruments designed
to protect the rights and freedoms which
it proclaims.

The
Universal
Declaration
The Universal Declaration provides a
standard or yardstick against which
human rights legislation can be meas­
ured. Its significance does not lie in its
capacity to force states to comply with
its provisions. It has primarily moral,
rather than legal force. Even the Cove­
nants, which are a part of international
law, rely on voluntary compliance by the
signatory states. The significance of the
Declaration lies rather in its power to set
the agenda for political debate, empha­
sizing the importance of certain types of
individual-centred reasons for govern­
ments to act or not act, and heightening
popular consciousness with respect to
the importance of basic human needs
and aspirations. The Universal Declara­
tion was intended to be “a common
standard of achievement for all nations.”
Ever since its adoption the Declaration
has been used as a standard of conduct
and as a basis of appeals urging govern­
ments to observe human rights. Global
and regional treaties have been prepared
which have transformed the cooperative
approach toward the realization of human

rights which the Universal Declaration
promotes into international law. The
constitutions, laws, and court decisions
of many states and international bodies
now show the influence of the Universal
Declaration. The declaration is a highly
significant document because it repre­
sents the consensus of the international
community. It defines more specifically
the rights and freedoms referred to in the
UN charter. It expresses the “common
understanding of the peoples of the world
concerning the inalienable rights of all
members of the human family and con­
stitutes an obligation for the members of
the international community.”

The vision of the Declaration encom­
passes many diverse areas of human life.
The Universal Declaration contains 30
different articles addressing issues which
are all considered to be part of human
rights. The two human rights Covenant
and the Optional Protocol brought into
force in 1976 add 98 more articles speci­
fying economic, social, cultural, civil
and political rights which are all consid­
ered to be ‘ ‘human’ ’ rights. Collectively
the Universal Declaration, the two Cove­
nants, and the Optional Protocol, which
provides international machinery for
dealing with communications from indi­
viduals claiming to be victims of viola­
tions of any rights set forth in the Cove­
nants, make up the International Bill of
Human Rights. A complex array of is­
sues are all included in the term “human
rights.”
Human rights are usually divided into
two categories: civil and political rights,
and economic, social and cultural rights
or more simply, “political” and “eco­
nomic” rights. The first group includes
the rights to

• life, liberty and security of person
• freedom from slavery and servitude

■ freedom from torture and cruel, inhu­
man or degrading treatment or punish­
ment
• recognition as a person before the law
• equal protection of the law
• an effective judicial remedy for viola­
tions of human rights
• freedom from arbitrary arrest, deten­
tion or exile
• a fair trial and public hearing by an
independent and impartial tribunal
• the presumption of innocence until
guilt has been proved
• debarment from conviction for an act
which was not a penal offence at the
time it was committed
• freedom from arbitrary interference
with privacy, family, home or corre­
spondence
• freedom of movement and residence,
including the right to leave any coun­
try and return to one’s country
• asylum
• a nationality
• contract a marriage and found a family
• own property
• freedom of thought, conscience and
religion
• freedom of opinion and expression
• freedom of peaceful assembly and as­
sociation
• participation in the government of one’s
country

The second group, Economic, Social
and Cultural rights, includes the rights to

• social security
• equal pay for equal work
• just and favorable remuneration ensur­
ing an existence worthy of human
dignity
• form and join trade unions
• rest and leisure

• a standard of living adequate for health
and well being (including food, cloth­
ing, housing and medical care)
• right to security in the event of unem­
ployment, sickness, disability, wid­
owhood, old age, or other circum­
stances beyond one’s control
• protection of motherhood and child­
hood
• education, with parents having a prior
right to choose their children’s type of
education
• participation in the cultural life of one’s
community
• protection of the moral and material
interests resulting from one’s author­
ship of scientific, literary or artistic
productions
While the Universal Declaration makes
no distinction between political and
economic rights the International Cove­
nants on Human Rights are specifically
divided along these lines. Unlike the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights,
these two international treaties legally
bind the contracting states to abide by
their provisions. The International Cove­
nants were adopted by the General As­
sembly and opened for signature in
December 1966 and both entered into
force in 1976.

The Universal Declaration is unique.
It is the only document in the world
which affirms the “old” political rights
which have been asserted for centuries
as well as proclaiming what are some­
times called “new” rights — economic,
social and cultural rights. The human
rights covenants, conventions, protocols
and agreements which have followed
the Universal Declaration are all nar­
rower in scope. They deal with specific
human rights issues such as the elimina­
tion of racial discrimination or discrimi-

nation against women, reduction of state­
lessness, abolishing forced labour or
ensuring equal pay for equal work. The
Universal Declaration is the broadest
statement of human rights which exists
and provides a challenge to the world by
creating ‘ ‘a common standard of achieve­
ment for all peoples and all nations.”

Rights in
History
It is impossible to pinpoint a beginnin
point for concern with human rights
Evidence for concern with human right
issues can be found in the records of th
earliest civilizations which speak t
matters of right and wrong, good an
evil, law, legality and illegality. Furthe
evidence of concern for human right
can be found in the religious writing
and scriptures of most of the world’
religions.

Some writers believe that the first legal
code - usually called the Code of Ham­
murabi after the Babylonian king who
enacted it - could be called humanity’s
first charter of rights. It set out laws to
protect the weak from the strong and
therefore contained one of the funda­
mental ideas of human rights legislation.
Other people look to the ancient Greeks
of the 4th and 5th century B.C. who
believed that if humankind is respon­
sible to a higher, God-given law, then
laws created by human beings which run
counter to divine law are evil and should
not be obeyed. The Greeks also taught
that following the dictates of human
reason and conscience was more impor­
tant than obeying unjust laws. Although
these and other civilizations were con­
cerned with the same questions ofjustice
and fair play which the Universal Decla­
ration addresses they did not use the
language of human rights. The idea of
human rights as we know it today did not
come into being until much later.

The roots of modem human rights
thought may be traced to the humanist
traditions of the Renaissance, to the
struggles for self-determination, inde­
pendence and equality that have been
occurring for over two centuries, and to
philosophical concepts promoted by such
men as John Locke of England, Jean
Jacques Rousseau of France, Thomas
Jefferson of the United States of Amer­
ica, Karl Marx of Germany, and V.I.
Lenin of Russia. The ideas which lay be­
hind such historic documents as the
Magna Carta signed by King John of
England in 1215, the adoption of the
Habeas Corpus Act by the British Parlia­
ment in 1679, the U.S. Declaration of
Independence of 1776, the Declaration
of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen
by the National Assembly of France in
1798 and the Communist Manifesto in

1848, were concerned in different ways
with what we today call human rights.

Early human rights concerns were
directed toward the rights of religious
and minority groups and the movement
against slavery and the slave trade.
Gradually more “humanitarian” con­
cerns were added, for example laws
concerning armed conflict. War is some­
times said to be the greatest violation of
human rights of all. Steps were taken in
the early years of this century to outlaw
the most brutal forms of warfare at the
Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907.
With these international conventions
certain means of waging war, for ex­
ample the use of “dum dum” or softnosed bullets which leave a large wound,
were outlawed. By the middle of this
century rights enshrined in the Universal
Declaration shifted the emphasis away
from the rights of groups to the rights of
individuals. This is the form in which
human rights are customarily addressed
today — the rights of individuals to the
free development of their human poten­
tial with a minimum amount of interfer­
ence from society or the state.
The language of human rights has
always had a great moral force. The
problem, of course, has been to put the
ideas into practice — to move from rheto­
ric to reality. Human rights ideas have
persuasive strength but often lack legis­

lative power. The idea that all human
beings have certain rights by virtue of
their humanity, rights which are not to be
set aside for any purpose whatsoever, is
a powerful one. Translating this idea into
particular legislative and judicial deci­
sions which directly affect the well-being
of those whose interests are in question
is extremely difficult and forms the basis
of the practical work of helping human
rights to continue to evolve.

Even before the Universal Declaration
was created the practical work of realiz­
ing human rights was recognized as
including education. The Proclamation
which precedes the Articles of the Uni­
versal Declaration states that
"Every individual and every organ of
society, keeping this Declaration con­
stantly in mind, shall strive by teaching
and education to promote respect for
these rights and freedoms and by pro­
gressive measures, national and inter­
national, to secure their universal and
effective recognition and observance,
both among the peoples of the Member
States themselves and among the peoples
of territories under their jurisdiction."

This essential aspect of human rights,
education, is not confined simply to
teaching. It has a broader sense as used
by the drafters of the Universal Declara­
tion to encompass the promotion of
human rights through political aware­
ness of conflict, interdependence and
the structure of society. Another way of
saying this is to talk about the promotion
of political literacy. If, for example,
Canadians are unaware of how wealth is
distributed in their country, they are
unlikely to have a strong basis on which
to judge the performance of their gov­
ernment in the sphere of economic rights.
Another example, which is becoming
increasingly important in this year of the
40th anniversary of the Universal Decla­
ration, is the human rights challenges
being posed by the indigenous peoples
of this country. Without a knowledge of
the history of the relations between these
groups and Canadian government their
demands for greater human rights pro­
tections are incomprehensible. There­
fore, human rights education covers a
broad spectrum of topics which might be
described by the term “political liter­
acy.”

Like most General Assembly resolu­
tions, the Universal Declaration is not
legally binding. Even so, it has become
a very significant document. Its effects
have been felt and they can be observed
in at least three important areas:
1) Even since its adoption, the Declaration has
been used as a standard of conduct and as a
basis for appeals urging governments to ob­
serve human rights.
2) Global and regional treaties have been prepared
which have transformed the Universal Decla­
ration into international conventional law.
3) The constitution, laws and court decisions of
many nations and international bodies now
show the marked influence of the Universal
Declaration.

Human
Rights and
International
Law
On December 10, 1948 the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights was signed
by all the members of the General As­
sembly of the United Nations. Does this
mean that it is part of international law
and therefore obliges every member state
to abide by its provisions? This question

is difficult to answer without an under­
standing of what international law is and
what its limitations are.

International law is a body of prin­
ciples, customs, and rules recognized as
binding obligations by sovereign states.
These laws are based for the most part on
treaties negotiated by sovereign states in
accordance with customs of international
relations which have developed over the
centuries. Because there is no “enforcer”
of international law, that is to say, no
sovereign or world government, adher­
ence to the spirit and letter of interna­
tional law is, in effect, voluntary. This
does not mean that international law is
not law at all, it is rather a developing or
imperfect form of law. If a country breaks
a law which it has agreed to adhere to
there are a number of ways in which the
world community can bring pressure on
the offending state to ensure compli­
ance. Diplomatic protests, mediation,
arbitration, economic sanctions and
public opinion may all have the effect of
forcing compliance to international law.
In many cases, however, it is as Abba
Eban, the former Israeli ambassador to
the United States put it, “the law which
the wicked do not obey and which the
righteous do not enforce.”
Because international law was created
by sovereign nations to govern their
relations with one another the question
arises of whether it is binding on nations
alone or on individuals as well. Opinion
is divided on this question. Some people
believe that international law, including
law relating to human rights, is solely the
concern of sovereign governments be­
cause international protections such as
the Universal Declaration and the Inter­
national Covenants are signed by na­
tions, not individuals. Others believe
that the individual has begun to emerge,

to some extent at least, as the subject of
that law. This is a very important point.
If the latter view is correct then interna­
tional human rights legislation places
restrictions on the jurisdiction of states
over their citizens. This represents an
important step forward for human rights
because it implies that these rights are
universal and beyond the jurisdiction of
the state.

UN Bodies
Which Deal
With Human
Rights
Each of the Covenant brought into
being mechanisms through which the
United Nations bodies could oversee
implementation of their provisions. The
Human Rights Committee, a UN body
of independent experts, oversees com­
pliance by the contracting states of the
Covenant on Civil and Political rights. A
committee on Economic, Social and
Cultural rights was established by the
Economic and Social Council to moni­
tor adherence and review progress in
implementing the Covenant on Eco­
nomic, Social and Cultural Rights.

A number of specialized agencies at
the United Nations have produced texts,
conventions, declarations and recom­
mendations which concern human rights.
Some agencies such as the International
Labour Organization (ILO) and the
United Nations Educational, Scientific
and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)
have adopted their own legal instruments
for the protection of human rights in
areas which specifically concern them.
Some of these instruments are now in­
cluded in treaties signed by the UN as a
whole, such as the Covenants on Civil
and Political, and Economic, Social and
Cultural rights.

There are literally dozens of other
groups within the United Nations which
are concerned with human rights in their
own areas of specialization. The Com­
mittee on the Elimination of Racial
Discrimination, for example, which was
established in 1970, consists of 18 ex­
perts elected by the states which have
signed the Convention on the Elimina­
tion of All Forms of Racial Discrimina­
tion. This committee considers reports
on the legislative judicial and adminis­
trative measures different countries have
adopted in this area, assists in settling
disputes, and receives and considers com­
munications from individuals or groups
who feel they have been discriminated
against on the basis of race. By the end of
1983 there were 122 states which had
signed this convention, although only 10
of these recognize the right of the com­
mittee to consider communications from
individuals or groups of individuals.
This raises the important question of
access to UN committees by individuals
and groups of individuals. Although the
majority of states have signed the human
rights Covenants, which specify in
greater detail than the Universal Decla­
ration the rights and freedoms of indi-

viduals, it is only through the Optional
Protocol that states truly bind themselves
to the provisions of the Covenants. Under
the terms of the Optional Protocol the
signatory states agree to allow their citi­
zens the right to appeal alleged human
rights violations directly to the appropri­
ate UN Committee. Only 31 states (in­
cluding Canada) have signed the Op­
tional Protocol.
Most submissions under the Optional
Protocol are received by the Human
Rights Committee which was established
in 1977 to oversee compliance with the
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
This committee considers communica­
tions in the light of all written informa­
tion made available to it by the individ­
ual and by the country concerned, and
forwards its views to both the individual
and the government of the country con­
cerned.
Other UN bodies which deal with
human rights in the course of their work
are: the Committee on the Elimination
of Discrimination Against Women, the
Sub-Commission on Prevention of Dis­
crimination and Protection of Minori­
ties, the International Law Commission,
the United Nations High Commissioner
for Refugees, the International Court of
Justice, the Food and Agriculture Or­
ganization (FAO), the World Health
Organization (WHO), and many others.

Other
Human
Rights
Organizations
The specialized United Nations
bodies described in the preceding para­
graphs are not the only groups concerned
with human rights. All the countries
which are party to UN human rights
agreements have official government
bodies which can be appealed to by
citizens. In Canada, for example, there is
a federal Human Rights Commission
and each of the provinces and territories
maintains an official body responsible
for administering their own human rights
legislation. In many countries, however,
it is the government which is abusing the
human rights of its citizens. The govern­
ment agencies charged with human rights
protection in these countries obviously
cannot be very effective.

Non-governmental organizations (or
NGOs for short) play an extremely
important role in safeguarding interna­
tional human rights. Because they are
not tied to any government or interna­
tional organization they are not con­
strained by political considerations in
their assessments of human rights viola­
tions. Probably the most famous of the
NGOs concerned with human rights is
Amnesty International. Its campaigns
on behalf of “prisoners of conscience,”
that is to say people imprisoned for their
political or religious beliefs, has resulted
in thousands of detainees and prisoners
being released since Amnesty began its
work in 1961.

Several other NGOs are active in the
human rights field. The value of these
organizations was recognized very early
on in the life of the United Nations.
Article 71 of the UN Charter authorizes
the Economic and Social Council
(ECOSOC) to make suitable arrange­
ments for consultation with NGOs which
are concerned with matters within its
competence. These NGOs may send
observers to public meetings of the
Council, its commissions, sub-commis­
sions and subsidiary bodies and NGOs
which have a basic interest in most of the
activities of the Council may submit
written statements for circulation within
the Council. In studying or dealing with
human rights problems, UN organs have
frequently called upon NGOs for infor­
mation about existing situations.

In countries where human
rights abuses by governments occur, UN
human rights agencies may be power­
less to do anything because UN organi­
zations must be invited into a country
before they can report on the state of
human rights there. The states where
human rights are not respected are rarely
In a statement to the International Non­
signatories to the Optional Protocol, or
governmental Organization Conference
to other Conventions permitting citizens
held in Paris in 1968 as part of the
the right of direct access to international observance of the International Year for
bodies, thereby cutting off appeals from Human Rights, Mr. Rene Cassin of
individuals within the country to the France, a former chairman of the Com­
UN. It is in these places that the activities mission on Human Rights, commented
of nongovernmental organizations play on the link between NGOs and the reali­
an especially important role.
zation of human rights:

“First, they have provided a link between, on the one hand, human beings —
ordinary men and women, all members
of the world community — and on the
other, official bodies, national and inter­
national. They were the first to make the
principles of the Universal Declaration
ofHuman Rights widely known in circles
informed inadequately or not at all
through official channels. It is they who
keep public opinion informed ofpossible
advances and positive achievements, of
obstacles encountered and not overcome.
Similarly, it is the non-governmental or­
ganizations which bring to the notice of
members of official bodies, national and
international, numerous facts, abuses,
gaps and violations of human rights
already known or, more commonly, hid­
den. In this general role as dissemina­
tors of information they are truly irre­
placeable. It is impossible to say how
many problems involving human rights
would never have got on the agendas of
official bodies but for the initiative or
indirect action of non-governmental
organizations."

Human
Rights in
Canada
Before our century, the virtually uni­
versal belief prevailed that the treatment
of its citizenry by a state was entirely a
domestic matter. It is perhaps the great­
est achievement of the United Nations
that, through the Universal Declaration
of Human Rights and the instruments
which have followed, the international
community has become increasingly
aware of the need to safeguard the mini­
mal rights of the individual. In conse­
quence, human rights have become a
subject of vital concern in the UN and in
international law. It must be emphasized,
however, that the problem of the status
of the individual centers on the question
of whether or not there is a legal right of
international representation regarding the
treatment of an individual.
Unfortunately, most individuals lack
the ability to assert their rights before an
international tribunal. Most of the people
of the world must rely on the state to take
up their cause by bringing a suit or filing
a protest or claim with another state.
This means that as yet it is the state that
possesses international legal rights, not
the individual. Only when the right to
direct access to international tribunals
has been acknowledged, that is to say the
rights which are now granted to citizens
whose countries have signed the Op­
tional Protocol (only 31 including Can­
ada), will the individual's status have
been changed at last. Until that day comes
we must look to how individual coun­
tries uphold the ideals of the Universal
Declaration in their own domestic legis­
lation.

One of the most fundamental prob­
lems of human rights is the need to
translate the ideal of human rights, as
represented in the Universal Declara­
tion, into actual laws in different places.
Different cultures and societies have
different values. Is it possible to create
universal legislation which overrides
local values? Vague and abstract human
rights standards are accepted at the global
level. There is a need to take full account
of cultural diversity of the states which
agree to these standards while at the
same time not abandoning the quest for
a universal consensus as to their mean­
ing. Secondly, as human rights values makes it far more difficult for legisla­
become specific laws the obligations for tures to make laws which might decrease
others, usually the state or the collective, the effectiveness of existing human rights
become more clearly specified and often legislation. Judiciaries are given the
more burdensome. The more specific power to declare unconstitutional state
the right becomes the more specific the legislation or other actions of the state
which conflict with the terms of the
duties become.
constitutional guarantees. This is the
This is because every right incurs an
course which Canada has followed.
obligation, or reduction of someone else’s
The British North America Act of 1867
freedom. For example, if you have a
right to freedom of speech then I have an contained no bill of rights. Protection for
obligation to let you say what you like civil liberties came from a clause in the
even if I disagree with what you say. If I preamble which referred to the Constitu­
have a right to freedom from torture then tion as being ‘ ‘ similar in principle to that
you have an obligation not to do any­ of the United Kingdom.” There was no
thing which would lead to me being tor­ bill of rights which superseded legisla­
tured. Rights often have to do with who tors and Canadian courts were generally
has power and who doesn’t. Wherever a powerless to interfere with discrimina­
right is claimed it puts limitations on tion or restriction of civil liberties. This
allowed discrimination on racial grounds
those with power to exercise it freely.
to go unchecked.
To have a practical effect, the prin­
Commencing in the 1940s, a series of
ciples put forth in the Declaration must
be translated into rules or laws in par­ legislative enactments dealt directly with
ticular countries. Then there is a basis for harmful discrimination. The first Racial
legal arguments concerning their viola­ Discrimination Act in Canada was passed
tion. There are two ways of doing this. by Ontario in 1944. In 1947 Saskatche­
Legislatures can make laws which pro­ wan enacted the first detailed and com­
tect human rights or they can create Bills prehensive statute, the Saskatchewan Bill
of Rights which become part of the of Rights Act. During the 1950s and later
constitution of the state. The latter course legislators gradually enacted anti-dis-

crimination legislation but these were
not based on human rights principles. In
1962 Ontario began the trend, since
adopted by all provinces and federal
government, of consolidating all human
rights legislation into a code, bill or
charter. By 1977 every province, as well
as the federal government, had set up a
commission or similar structure to ad­
minister anti-discrimination legislation
in its area of responsibility. Anti-dis­
crimination legislation has continued to
progress, gradually incorporating such
notions as affirmative action and reason­
able accommodation. Legislative pro­
tection in all parts of Canada covers
employment, housing, education, adver­
tisements and access to public and most
private services.

In 1960 Canada adopted a Bill of Rights
which provided national protection
against discrimination. With the repa­
triation of the Constitution in 1982 the
Canadian Charter of Rights and Free­
doms entrenched democratic and legal
rights, mobility rights, equality rights
and certain fundamental freedoms. Af­
firmative action is the leading edge in
the anti-discrimination field. Section
15(2) of the Constitution declares that
affirmative action is not discrimination.
One way to understand what the Uni­
versal Declaration represents is to think
of it as a matrix. The word matrix comes
from the Latin for womb and means
“something within which something else
originates or develops.” This is exactly
the function which the Declaration has
performed for 40 years. From this
“common standard of achievement”
have flowed numerous international
agreements and the Universal Declara­
tion has served as a model for national
legislation concerning human rights in
many different countries.

A former high official of the United
Nations once said that if the UN has an
ideology it would be best described by
the idea of human rights. From the ma­
trix of the Universal Declaration this
ideology is finding its way across the
Earth. At each step removed from the
Universal Declaration the ideals become
more concrete, that is to say, they be­
come more clearly defined and develop
greater legal force. The general prin­
ciples of protection of certain rights set
forth in the Declaration are specified
more fully in the Covenants and other
UN treaties and conventions. In turn
they are reflected by even more specific
national legislation for individual states.
Every link in this chain brings the ideals
of the Universal Declaration closer to
the progressive individualization of law.
a continuing process whereby much of
the world moves closer to the specifica­
tion. regulation and enforcement of an
international standard for the protection
of human rights.

UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS

Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members
of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,
Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have
outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall
enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as
the highest aspiration of the common people,
Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion
against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law,
Whereas it is essential to promote the development of friendly relations between nations,
Whereas the peoples of the United Nations have in the Charter reaffirmed their faith in fundamental
human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and
women and have determined to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger
freedom,
Whereas Member States have pledged themselves to achieve, in co-operation with the United
Nations, the promotion of universal respect for and observance of human rights and funda­
mental freedoms,
Whereas a common understanding of these rights and freedoms is of the greatest importance for
the full realization of this pledge,

Now, Therefore, the General Assembly proclaims

This Universal Declaration ofHuman Rights as a common standard of achievement for all peoples
and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society, keeping this
Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to promote respect for
these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures, national and international, to secure
their universal and effective recognition and observance, both among the peoples of Member
Stats themselves and among the peoples of territories under their jurisdiction.
Article 7. All human beings are bom free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with
reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Article 2. Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without
distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion,
national or social origin, property, birth or other status.

Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or interna­
tional status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent,
trust, non-self-goveming or under any other limitation of sovereignty.
Article 3. Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.

Article 4. No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited
in all their forms.
Article 5. No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or
punishment.
Article 6. Everyone has the right to recognition every where as a person before the law.
Article 7. All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal
protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation
of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.

Article 8. Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts
violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law.
Article 9. No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.
Article 10. Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and
impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge
against him.

Article 11. ( 1 ) Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until
proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary
for his defence.

(2) No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or omission which did
not constitute a penal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was
committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time
the penal offence was committed.
Article 12. No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or
correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the
protection of the law against such interference or attacks.
Article 13. (1) Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders
of each state.
(2) Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.

Article 14. (1) Everyone has the right to a nationality.

(2) This right may not be invoked in the case of prosecutions genuinely arising from non-political
crimes or from acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.
Article 15. (1) Everyone has the right to a nationality.
(2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his
nationality.

Article 16. (1) Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or
religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to
marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.
(2) Marriage shall be entered into only with, the free and full consent of the intending spouses.
(3) The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by
society and the State.

Article 17. (1) Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others.

(2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.
Article 18. Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right
includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community
with others and in public or private to manifest his religion or belief in teaching practice, wor­
ship and observance.
Article 19. Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes
freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and
ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

Article 20. (1) Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.
(2) No one may be compelled to belong to an association.

Article 21. (1) Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or
through freely chosen representatives.
(2) Everyone has the right of equal access to public service in his country.

(3) The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be
expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and
shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures.

Article 22. Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security and is entitled to
realization, through national effort and international co-operation and in accordance with the
organization and resources of each State, of the economic, social and cultural rights indispen­
sable for his dignity and the free development of his personality.
Article 23.(1) Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable
conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.

(2) Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.
(3) Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and
his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other
means of social protection.
(4) Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.
Article 24. Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working
hours and periodic holidays with pay.

Article 25.(1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being
of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary
social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability,
widow-hood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.
(2) Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether
bom in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.
Article 26. (1) Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the
elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and
professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally
accessible to all on the basis of merit.
(2) Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the
strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote
understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall
further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.
(3) Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.

Article 27. (1) Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to
enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits.

(2) Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any
scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author.
Article 28. Everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and freedoms
set for in this Declaration can be fully realized.
Article 29.(1) Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development
of his personality is possible.

(2) In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations
as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the
rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order
and the general welfare in a democratic society.
(3) These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles
of the United Nations.
Article 30. Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or
person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any
of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.