While true human rights universalism has often proved elusive in practice, the legitimacy of HRDs is tied to the public legitimacy of the work they are doing. The nature of their work monitoring governments and corporations and standing up against the abuse of power already puts them in a vulnerable position, but when governments attack the universalism of human rights and paint HRDs as agents of a foreign agenda, this leaves them significantly more exposed.
Upholding the principle of universalism and the right to defend human rights should be at the heart of creating an enabling environment for HRDs. But this has been undermined when governments that ostensibly champion human rights apply double standards. Political changes in numerous democratic countries have also shifted the focus away from advancing human rights. These trends have sent a clear and problematic message that human rights standards are secondary to political considerations.
Yet, universalism should not be at the expense of contextualisation. The case for human rights needs to be made continuously in each society in a way that resonates with people and their inherent values. In this way can HRDs be seen for what they truly are, as agents of fairness and equality within their societies.
Proposals for action:
- Proponents of human rights in every society need to keep talking about the “why” of human rights and never take it for granted. This includes setting out a positive vision for the future grounded in human rights, showing why human rights are about the common interest of the whole society, and being clear on the costs of rejecting human rights. It should also include celebrating the positive contributions of human rights in areas from environmental rights (such as the Escazú Agreement) to peace agreements (such as in Ireland), and making the case that human rights promote security and stability. It is also important to keep a distinction between the institutions and mechanisms of human rights on the one hand, and the fundamental ideas and values of human rights on the other.
- States seeking to uphold human rights need to guard against their own double standards, which contribute to a broad erosion of respect for the universality of human rights. In the context of growing securitisation, they should also be prepared to make the case for human rights as a foundation for security and a component of conflict resolution and post-conflict reconstruction. They should conduct their own security policy in a way that reflects this conviction.
- In the context of human rights diplomacy, more powerful states should recognise the pressures on smaller states caught between increasingly polarised great powers. This may necessitate finding less politicised ways of describing issues such as transnational repression so as to build broader coalitions of support for taking remedial action.