JABACHI NNAMDI OBAFEMI NWAOGU LLB LAW 1ST YEAR OBAFEMINNAMDI@GMAIL.

COM
+23059330526

Can Human rights be universal and have respect for cultural relativism?

The common ground for the universality of human rights and cultural relativism lays at the mercy of
opportunity. Via examination of the Standardization Approach, Geopolitical Considerations and State
Sovereignty, this essay will propose that besides the idea of Human Rights, the mainstream
understanding and application of human rights cannot truly be universal as ‘Failure to take into
account [equally] the cultural context in which human rights are being applied can result in a lack of
relevance and effectiveness, and may even be perceived as a form of cultural imperialism or an
infringement on cultural sovereignty’1.

Standardization Approach.

In order to assess thoroughly whether human rights can be universal and have respect for cultural
relativism, it is necessary to examine in detail the standardization of the one-size-fits-all approach.

LGBTQ+ rights in a culturally diverse, colonial resistant and religiously concentrated Africa, has
remained contentious as the standardization of a one-size-fits-all approach is consistently opposed
with taboo or even criminal views. For example, SMUG v. Lively2 involves a dispute between Sexual
Minorities Uganda (SMUG) and Scott Lively over allegations of persecution of the LGBTQ+
community in Uganda. The contention centers around the clash between international human rights
standards advocating for equality and non-discrimination, and Lively's argument that his actions
were based on cultural relativism and religious beliefs. Based on the example above and recent 2023
anti-gay bill passed in Uganda, not only was the universality of human rights challenged but its
contention with cultural relativism displays the absence of respect.
Similarly opposed, in an intersectional framework according to Crenshaw, a "one-size-fits-all"3
approach to human rights may overlook the unique experiences and needs of individuals who face
intersecting forms of discrimination. This can result in inadequate protection of human rights and
perpetuate systemic inequalities, as it fails to recognize the complex ways in which different forms of
oppression intersect and interact in the lives of marginalized individuals.

Geopolitical Considerations

In order to assess thoroughly whether human rights can be universal and have respect for cultural
relativism, it is necessary to examine in detail Geopolitical considerations.

From Jurisdiction and territorial disputes, international agreements and treaties, conflict resolution
and peacebuilding, to State sovereignty and autonomy, the controversy of human rights ‘universality’
is often met by geopolitical divides like ‘Asian Values’. For example, in Chee Soon Juan v. Prime
Minister Lee Hsien Loong4, the court of appeal in Singapore rejected the argument that freedom of

1
Martha Nussbaum, "Respecting Cultural Relativism: The Need for Contextual Understanding of Human Rights"
(2001) 14 Harvard Human Rights Journal 105.
2
SMUG v. Lively [2012] USDC 1:12-cv-00406 (D. Mass. March 14, 2012)
3
Kimberly Crenshaw, "Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of
Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist Politics" (1989) University of Chicago Legal Forum
139.
4
Chee Soon Juan v. Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong [2005] SGCA 42.
JABACHI NNAMDI OBAFEMI NWAOGU LLB LAW 1ST YEAR OBAFEMINNAMDI@GMAIL.COM
+23059330526

speech should be interpreted in the same way as western liberal democracies, emphasizing the need
to consider Singapore’s unique cultural, social, and political context. In similitude, Mohamad states
the universality of Human Rights may not be applicable in Asia because of different values, beliefs,
and social structures.5 He emphasized the need for respecting and preserving the unique cultural
identity of Asian Societies when addressing human rights issues.

State Sovereignty

In order to assess thoroughly whether human rights can be universal and have respect for cultural
relativism, it is necessary to examine in detail the necessity of State Sovereignty.

Asides political and ideological veils, the dynamic relationship between the Universality of Human
Rights and cultural context of State Sovereignty are imbued with legal friction. For example, the case
of R (Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union6 asserted the principle that decisions
affecting the UK’s Legal and political landscape should be made by domestic institutions, highlighting
the idea that the UK should have the power to shape its own human rights framework independent
of supranational bodies like the European Union, thereby promoting the argument for a British Bill of
Rights. In a similar tone of highlighting the lack of respect in this discourse, Makau argues that it is
often influenced by Western-centric perspectives that perpetuate Western Dominance and
undermine cultural diversity. 7 The flaw of such Universality in relation to culture is in the power
dynamics embedded within the human rights narrative, emphasizing the need to recognize and
respect the diversity of cultural values and practices when considering human rights issues.

Conclusion

In the examined Standardization Approach, Geopolitical Considerations and State Sovereignty

implications in this essays discourse, much further than the expression of inherency or an ideal, it is
suggested that a human right is only ever universal when a contextual awakening permits a
reactionary impulse. Therefore, it is both sparingly delayed and catalyzed in the moment of
opportunity, as the absence of it leaves individuals safe. The idea of ‘reconciling’ human rights
pedestal with cultural relativisms artwork, is in itself a defeated goal. It stipulates that sovereign
human liberty which is culturally expressed, has disregarded breathing inherently just as the
universal way of expressing such understanding and application for a human right, arises only with a
moment in time.

5
Mahathir Mohamad, "Asian Values and Human Rights: A Malaysian Perspective," in Journal of Asian Studies,
vol. 53, no. 4 (Nov. 1994), pp. 1013-1024, at 1013.
6
R (Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union [2017] UKSC 5.
7
Makau Mutua, "Savages, Victims, and Saviors: The Metaphor of Human Rights" [(1996)] 42(4) Harvard
International Law Journal 201, 210.
JABACHI NNAMDI OBAFEMI NWAOGU LLB LAW 1ST YEAR OBAFEMINNAMDI@GMAIL.COM
+23059330526

Bibliography

Journal Article:

Nussbaum, Martha. "Respecting Cultural Relativism: The Need for Contextual Understanding of
Human Rights." Harvard Human Rights Journal 14 (2001): 105-132.

Mutua, Makau. "Savages, Victims, and Saviors: The Metaphor of Human Rights." Harvard
International Law Journal [(1996)] 42(4): 201-225.

Mohamad, Mahathir. "Asian Values and Human Rights: A Malaysian Perspective." Journal of Asian
Studies 53, no. 4 (Nov. 1994): 1013-1024.

Seminal Article:
Crenshaw, Kimberly. "Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of
Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist Politics." University of Chicago Legal
Forum (1989): 139.

Case:

SMUG v. Lively [2012] USDC 1:12-cv-00406 (D. Mass. March 14, 2012)
R (Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union [2017] UKSC 5.
Chee Soon Juan v. Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong [2005] SGCA 42.