Bridging the Gap Between Cultural Relativism and Universality of Human Rights: Indonesia Attitudes

Q3 Social Sciences
Cekli S. Pratiwi
{"title":"Bridging the Gap Between Cultural Relativism and Universality of Human Rights: Indonesia Attitudes","authors":"Cekli S. Pratiwi","doi":"10.15294/jils.v5i2.39271","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Debates on the universality of human rights and cultural relativism seem to be eternal and will continue to exist as societal dynamics bring different views, concepts, and understandings of human rights and culture. However, it cannot be denied that modern international human rights law which is currently being referred to and adopted by the international community, still creates gaps in the protection of human rights. Meanwhile, the development of cultural relativism in the 20th century is quite successful in bridging the gap between the two and contributing positively to the implementation of international human rights law at the domestic level. Nonetheless, the cultural relativism approach presents critiques and challenges. By using various secondary resources, this paper begins with the concept of, debates between, and challenges of cultural relativism and universality of human rights. The paper indicates that the contribution of cultural relativism can be seen from building tolerance and protection of communal rights, the rights of marginal groups, and the optimization of domestic law when dealing with some competing’s rights. This is a good opportunity to reduce discriminatory actions against marginalized groups for maintaining tolerance and harmony in a plural society. The effectiveness of the application of \"margin appreciation\" in Europe should be the best practice to actualize \"Asian values\" or \"African values\" in formulating the concepts of \"public morality\" or \"public order\" clearly and precisely. The cultural relativism approach may not be used by a government to justify any human rights violation. Both of these are important considerations for Indonesia because of its ambiguous attitude in placing these two theories appropriately and purposefully.","PeriodicalId":32877,"journal":{"name":"JILS Journal of Indonesian Legal Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JILS Journal of Indonesian Legal Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15294/jils.v5i2.39271","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Debates on the universality of human rights and cultural relativism seem to be eternal and will continue to exist as societal dynamics bring different views, concepts, and understandings of human rights and culture. However, it cannot be denied that modern international human rights law which is currently being referred to and adopted by the international community, still creates gaps in the protection of human rights. Meanwhile, the development of cultural relativism in the 20th century is quite successful in bridging the gap between the two and contributing positively to the implementation of international human rights law at the domestic level. Nonetheless, the cultural relativism approach presents critiques and challenges. By using various secondary resources, this paper begins with the concept of, debates between, and challenges of cultural relativism and universality of human rights. The paper indicates that the contribution of cultural relativism can be seen from building tolerance and protection of communal rights, the rights of marginal groups, and the optimization of domestic law when dealing with some competing’s rights. This is a good opportunity to reduce discriminatory actions against marginalized groups for maintaining tolerance and harmony in a plural society. The effectiveness of the application of "margin appreciation" in Europe should be the best practice to actualize "Asian values" or "African values" in formulating the concepts of "public morality" or "public order" clearly and precisely. The cultural relativism approach may not be used by a government to justify any human rights violation. Both of these are important considerations for Indonesia because of its ambiguous attitude in placing these two theories appropriately and purposefully.
弥合文化相对主义与人权普遍性之间的鸿沟:印尼的态度
关于人权普遍性和文化相对主义的辩论似乎是永恒的,并将继续存在,因为社会动态带来了对人权和文化的不同观点、概念和理解。然而,不能否认的是,国际社会目前正在提及和通过的现代国际人权法在保护人权方面仍然存在差距。与此同时,20世纪文化相对主义的发展相当成功地弥合了两者之间的差距,并为国际人权法在国内的实施做出了积极贡献。然而,文化相对主义方法提出了批评和挑战。本文利用各种二手资料,从文化相对主义与人权普遍性的概念、争论和挑战入手。文章指出,文化相对主义的贡献体现在对公共权利、边缘群体权利的包容和保护,以及在处理某些竞争权利时对国内法的优化。这是减少对边缘群体的歧视行动,维护多元社会的容忍与和谐的好机会。“边际增值”在欧洲应用的有效性,应该是实现“亚洲价值观”或“非洲价值观”清晰准确地表述“公共道德”或“公共秩序”概念的最佳实践。政府不能用文化相对主义的方法来为任何侵犯人权的行为辩护。这两个都是印度尼西亚的重要考虑因素,因为它在适当和有目的地放置这两个理论方面的态度模棱两可。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
13
审稿时长
20 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信