Cultural and Religious Relativism as Opposition to the Aims of International Human Rights Law: Revisiting the Universalism vs. Regionalism Debate

Abstract

International human rights law is a fragmented system. This universally conceived branch of international law is challenged by cultural and religious relativism emanating from regional human rights systems. Regional divergence is manifested through unique human rights conventions and through reservations to treaties. The paper argues that even though cultural and religious relativism may have legitimacy, they can constitute an opposition to the fundamental aims of international human rights law, and exacerbate fragmentation. The study analyses the universal conception of human rights, and then explores regional conceptions of human rights with particular reference to cultural and religious relativism. The paper analyses how reservations to human rights treaties enable states to make superficial commitments to human rights, while retaining their cultural and religious values which may be in conflict with the universal catalogue of human rights. Finally, the paper proposes ways in which human rights systems of the world may be balanced.