Skip to main content
Religious Freedom Toolkit

Part III | Expanded Analysis

Category D | Human Rights

Topic 21 | Human rights are universal, indivisible, interdependent, and interrelated

Human rights instruments, beginning with the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action, adopted at a World Conference on Human Rights in 1993, emphasize that human rights are universal, indivisible, interdependent, and interrelated.555 Freedom of religion or belief should be understood as part of this tapestry of fundamental human rights.556

Introduction  

Human rights may be recognized or accepted for various reasons. For example, the same human right may be accepted by some on the basis that life is sacred and by others on the basis that society should strive for fairness.557 But while some reasons for acceptance may differ, the international community has recognized a body of human rights based on a shared belief in human dignity as the foundation and goal of those rights.558 When people attempt to separate, minimize, or omit particular rights—including the right to freedom of religion or belief (FoRB)— they necessarily restrict and undermine other human rights and compromise human dignity.559

Universal  

Certain enumerated human rights are declared to be universal in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), which was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1948 to promote well-being and enshrine principles of freedom and equality internationally.560 Since the UDHR’s adoption, additional universal human rights have been recognized under international law.561

These recognized human rights are universal because they constitute “a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations” and are inherent to every individual “without distinction of any kind.” 562 Many human rights are also universal in the legal sense because they have been accepted by most states as binding under international law. For example, 174 countries have ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which is a legally binding treaty that guarantees the right to FoRB, among other fundamental human rights.563

  • Critiques  

Critics of the universality of human rights contend that Western values, norms, and political priorities dictate human rights and, therefore, they should not be imposed on non-Western cultures.564 In various Middle Eastern countries, for example, calls from Western countries to protect human rights are often met with cynicism and criticism regarding perceived political motives behind these calls.565 Some critics also contend that “Western” human rights are alien to certain cultures.566 Family obligations present one example of conflicting Asian and Western views: In Asia generally, the parent-child relationship invokes a reciprocal duty to look after one another.567 These and other familial duties give rise to collectivism and an emphasis on group rights in Asian countries, in contrast with Western ideals of individualism and, relatedly, individual rights.568

Cultural criticisms also arise when “emerging” rights are introduced. In 1991, the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) introduced the Human Freedom Index, which then measured freedom through 40 indicators.569 The list was varied and encompassed indicators based on foundational rights articulated in the UDHR, such as the right to peacefully associate and assemble and the right to be free from compulsory religion or state ideology in schools. However, indicators also included rights not explicitly protected by the UDHR, such as the right to engage in homosexual behavior and the right to determine the number of one’s children.570 Given traditional cultural and religious values in Asia, some have argued that a universal right to engage in same-sex relationships should not be used or imposed as an indicator of freedom.571 Some have also suggested that it may be unreasonable in certain countries for individuals to determine the number of one’s children, in the face of overpopulation and social demands.572

  • Responses  

Conflicting values like these beg the questions of how to balance internationally recognized human rights with other rights and what emerging rights should be considered fundamental and “universal.” The Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action attempts to address these concerns and reaffirm the duty to protect all recognized human rights, stating, “While the significance of national and regional particularities and various historical, cultural and religious backgrounds must be borne in mind, it is the duty of States, regardless of their political, economic and cultural systems, to promote and protect all human rights and fundamental freedoms.”573 This excerpt indicates that, while it is important to respect and consider regional and cultural differences in finding ways to promote and protect fundamental rights, the rights must be promoted and protected.

Indivisible, interdependent, and interrelated  

Parsing the Vienna Declaration’s descriptions of human rights as “indivisible,” “interdependent,” and “interrelated” lends insight into the nature and value of human rights as a whole.

Rights are indivisible when the commitment to different rights is built on similar presuppositions.574 For example, the right to freedom of association and the right to political participation are different rights, but each presupposes the foundational reality of human dignity and equal citizenship.575 If this pattern of justification is repeated for the whole of human rights, they constitute an indivisible system.576 Human rights are also indivisible because rights may only be enjoyed fully where all other rights are present; the lack of one freedom will often be antithetical to the enjoyment of another.577 For example, promotion or violation of the right to FoRB will respectively either strengthen or weaken the exercise of other political and civil rights, such as the right of association or expression.578 The indivisibility of human rights means that efforts to separate the right to FoRB into a category other than human rights is a conceptual and legal error. Freedom of religion cannot be divorced from other human rights.

Interdependence is related to indivisibility. Human rights must be interdependent to some degree because if they were not, absurdities would result: for example, a dictator seeking to squelch political chatter could prohibit freedom of association while professing to maintain freedom of speech.579 Human rights depend on one another because if one right is not realized, then others may collapse.580 To borrow the example above, lack of protections for the right to freedom of religion or belief in a given location would imply violations to rights of association, expression, and more.581

Human rights are interrelated as a whole because of their shared purpose—to protect the vulnerable from systems of domination and oppression and, thereby, promote human dignity.582 For example, freedom of religion arose during the Enlightenment (1685–1815) as a response to religious persecution and resulting wars. Basic human rights are also interrelated because they reinforce and strengthen each other in their realization. Rights such as nondiscrimination are related to religious freedom, as are rights such as freedom of speech, the press, association, assembly, and others. Interrelatedness further implies equal importance or legitimacy of different kinds of human rights, despite their differences.583 And finally, human rights are interrelated in the sense that upholding them calls forth duties from members of an interrelated, interconnected society, including governments, individuals, private agencies, corporations, and others who may promote or ensure protections.

A key challenge in a system of indivisible, interdependent, and interrelated rights is that it is hard to focus on everything at once. In challenges involving human rights, Identifying the root right at issue may be fruitful. For example, the most pressing issue may be a violation of religious freedom, even if it implicates other, related rights. It is often productive for certain departments or diplomats to focus specifically on freedom of religion so that it does not get subsumed or minimized within broader human rights agendas.

  • Critiques

Where there are more than 1000 human rights in the entire contemporary canon of internationally recognized human rights declarations, covenants, and conventions, some critics wonder whether these numerous and varied human rights can form a universal, indivisible, interdependent, and interrelated system.584 Some suggest focusing primarily or only on rights included in the UDHR.

  • Responses  

Regardless of which set of human rights is considered, various differing rights share the unifying purpose of protecting human dignity and promoting equality and freedom for everyone.585 Even in cases where rights seem to conflict, such as cases involving the celebration or performance of same-sex marriages (where the right to FoRB and LGBTQ nondiscrimination rights may appear to conflict), compromises that seek to vindicate the rights and dignity interests of all are possible.586

Professors Mary Ann Glendon and Seth Kaplan have identified basic principles that can help reinvigorate the human rights idea in our time: “Modesty concerning what rights can be universal; pluralism in bringing rights to life; interdependence of basic rights; and subsidiarity.”587

Conclusion  

Because human rights are universal, indivisible, interdependent, and interrelated, protecting and upholding one human right helps protect and uphold others. Promoting the right to freedom of religion or belief is essential for promoting all other fundamental rights protections—and vice versa. Discussions of human rights that omit or minimize the right to FoRB run the risk of undermining the human rights project entirely.

Previous - Topic 21 Outline
Next - Topic 21 Quotes

References

555. Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action, UN OHCHR I.5 (June 25, 1993) [hereinafter Vienna Declaration], https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/vienna-declaration-and-programme-action.

556. Toolkit Topic 21 (Human rights are universal, indivisible, interdependent, and interrelated) was drafted principally by Chloe Atkins, 2023 ICLRS Summer Fellow.

557. Ariel Zylberman, The Indivisibility of Human Rights, 36 LAW & PHILOSOPHY 389, 398 (2017).

558. G.A. Res. 217 A (III), Universal Declaration of Human Rights, at pmbl., art. 1 (Dec. 10, 1948) [hereinafter UDHR], https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights.

559. Vienna Declaration, supra.

560. UDHR, supra, pmbl.; Navanethem Pillay, Are Human Rights Universal?, UN CHRONICLE (Apr. 1, 2008), https://www.un.org/en/chronicle/article/are-human-rights-universal.

561. See, e.g., G.A. Res. 39/46, Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, Dec. 10, 1984, 1465 U.N.T.S. 85, https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/convention-against-torture-and-other-cruel-inhuman-or-degrading (defining specific protections and procedural rights relative to the general right, under Article 5 of the UDHR, not to “be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment”); International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Dec. 16, 1966, 999 U.N.T.S. 171, https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/international-covenant-civil-and-political-rights (specifying protections and procedural rights relative to many general rights recognized in the UDHR).

562. UDHR, supra, pmbl.; Jack Donnelly, Human Rights: Both Universal and Relative (A Reply to Michael Goodhart), 30 HUMAN RIGHTS QUARTERLY 194, 195 (2008).

563. Six other countries have signed the ICCPRS without ratifying it. See Status of Ratification Interactive Dashboard (International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights), UN OHCHR, https://indicators.ohchr.org (last visited Dec. 2024).

564. See, e.g., Janne Mende, Are Human Rights Western—and Why Does It Matter? A Perspective from International Political Theory, 17(1) JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL POLITICAL THEORY 38 (2021), https://doi.org/10.1177/1755088219832992; Ahmed Shaheed & Rose Parris Richter, Is “Human Rights” a Western Concept?, IPI GLOBAL OBSERVATORY (Oct. 17, 2018), https://theglobalobservatory.org/2018/10/are-human-rights-a-western-concept.

565. Rafiah Al Talei, The Dilemma of U.S. Democracy and Human Rights Promotion in the Middle East, CARNEGIE ENDOWMENT FOR INTERNATIONAL PEACE (2021), https://carnegieendowment.org/sada/84632.

566. Asoka De Z Gunawardana, An Asian Perspective of Human Rights, Dec. 1994, SINGAPORE JOURNAL OF LEGAL STUDIES 521, https://www-jstor-org.byu.idm.oclc.org/stable/24866722?seq=6.

567. Id. at 522

568. Id. at 523

569. UNDP, HUMAN DEVELOPMENT REPORT 1991, at 20 (1991), https://hdr.undp.org/content/human-development-report-1991.

570. Gunawardana, supra, at 526.

571. Id.

572. Id.

573. Vienna Declaration, supra.

574. Ariel Zylberman, The Indivisibility of Human Rights, 36 LAW & PHILOSOPHY 389, 395 (2017).

575. Id.

576. Id.

577. Rhonda Copelon, The Indivisible Framework of International Human Rights: A Source of Social Justice in the U.S., 3 NEW YORK CITY LAW REVIEW 59, 60 (1998).

578. What Are Human Rights?, UN OHCHR, https://www.ohchr.org/en/what-are-human-rights (last visited Dec. 2024).

579. Morton Winston, On the Indivisibility and Interdependence of Human Rights, PAIDEIA, https://www.bu.edu/wcp/Papers/Huma/HumaWins.htm.

580. Human Rights Principles, UN POPULATION FUND (2005), https://www.unfpa.org/resources/human-rights-principles.

581. Id.

582. Winston, supra.

583. Daniel Whelan, Untangling the Indivisibility, Interdependency, and Interrelatedness of Human Rights (University of Connecticut Human Rights Institute, Economic Rights Working Paper 7, Apr. 2008), https://media.economics.uconn.edu/working/7.pdf.

584. Id.; see also Mary Ann Glendon, Renewing Human Rights, FIRST THINGS (Feb. 2019), https://www.firstthings.com/article/2019/02/renewing-human-rights.

585. Whelan, supra.

586. See, e.g., Respect for Marriage Act, Pub. L. No. 117-228, 136 Stat. 2305 (as codified at 28 U.S.C. § 1738C (2024)) (ensuring U.S. federal legal protections for same-sex marriage while protecting the right of religious individuals and organizations to refrain from performing or supporting same-sex marriage, in opposition to their religious beliefs).

587. Glendon, supra.