Teaching Human Rights: The Culture Question
Jefferson R. PlantillaT

he perceived contradiction between human rights and local cultures is unfortunately misplaced, and constitutes a major obstacle tothe understanding of human rights in formal and non-formal educational settings. While there are areas of conflict between the internationally defined human rights and local cultures, there are also many areas ofconvergence between the two.
This problematic perception is traceable to the inadequate understanding of human rights as well as the lack of information on the process ofinternational human rights standards setting.
It could have also resulted from the statements of some Asian governments and their leaders in the 1990s that promoted human rights as nonAsian concept.
The projection of human rights as imposition of foreign culture reached
an alarming level in Asia in the 1990s, while some communities in the Pacificexpressed reservation on human rights due to differences with their cultural
practices.
However, the Asia-Pacific region has sufficient historical and cultural
resources to counter these views. These resources are important in ensuring
proper understanding and practice of human rights.
The Issue
Prior to the World Conference on Human Rights in 1993, national and international media had been giving much space to a “debate” on whether or
not “Asian values” existed. The “debate” pitted political leaders in a numberof countries in Asia against each other. On one side, a group of prominent
leaders particularly the then Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew,
the then Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohammad, and supportedby the then Indonesian President Soeharto, argued on the existence of aset of so-called “Asian values” that were distinguishable from the so-called“Western values”.1
253

254

H u m a n R i g h t s E d u c at i o n i n A s i a - Pa c i f i c

Another group of prominent leaders argued on the opposite side,
namely, South Korea’s then political leader Kim Dae Jung, the Philippines’
former President Corazon C. Aquino and then Philippine President Fidel
Ramos, and Burma’s political leader Aung Sang Suu Kyi. The debate covered
economics, politics, social behavior and human rights.
The “Asian values” proponents by and large support an authoritarian
form of government as a necessity to maintain peace, harmony and prosperity. As a consequence, rights and freedoms seen as individual entitlements
ought to give way to the welfare of the “majority.”
One scholar explains that the “Asian values” idea can be sourced fromthe Singaporean situation, a “city-state with a Eurasian culture and ethnically mixed Asian (but predominantly Chinese) population.” According to
the scholar,2Singapore has a genuine need to formulate some value consensus among diverse—and potentially divisive—ethnic andreligious groups that will serve as a common denominator for
public morality, for civil conduct of affairs, and for the work ethic that is needed to sustain high level of economic growth.
But this objective is premised on a “prime belief in ruling circles that
only strong, steady leadership can keep communal peace, and that authoritarian government, providing firm policy direction and social stability, is thenecessary condition for continued economic growth.”3
The idea promoted by Singaporean leaders at least during the late1980s and the 1990s was hardly unique in Southeast Asia. During the late1950s-1970s period, Sukarno implemented (and continued by Soeharto) the“guided democracy” principle in Indonesia while the Philippines’ Ferdinand
Marcos imposed “constitutional authoritarianism” on the country. The military-ruled governments in Thailand and Burma, in the 1970s, would probably be of the same type. They all stressed the need for strong government,
disciplined citizenry (meaning people obedient to government orders), roleof the military, and development. These ideas are variations of national security state concept with a supposed national development agenda.
The experience of economic growth under authoritarian rule in South
Korea and Taiwan provided support for this view in the eyes of theseSoutheast Asian authoritarian political leaders.

Teaching Human Rights: The Culture Question

255

Sustained economic growth supported by an authoritarian government
seems to be one of the key ideas underpinning the “Asian values” argument.4
In effect, ideas that would not support an authoritarian form of government
should be temporarily set aside, or ignored for being non-Asian concepts.
From this perspective, the idea of universality of human rights qualifies assuch non-Asian concept.
The debate generated so much heat that there was fear that the Regional
Meeting for Asia of the World Conference on Human Rights being held in
Bangkok in March 1993 would result in a formal declaration of “non-universality” of human rights. The representatives of non-governmental organizations, holding a parallel meeting, saw not simply an economic basis for the“Asian values” stance but outright attempt to restrict human rights. They
were prompted to state in the intergovernmental meeting that5[A]ny suggestion that the human rights embodied in the existing instruments such as the International Covenants on Human
Rights are not applicable [to] the Asian context must be resolutely rejected. We reject the position of divisibility of humanrights used in an attempt to negate the universality of theserights.
This argument is … used … to deny civil and political rights
by enforcing measures which are claimed to be necessary fornational or internal security or peace and order, for deterrence
against “terrorist” activities or to justify discrimination against
women, indigenous peoples and other marginalized socialgroups.
States have the responsibility to harmonize national approaches with universal standards of fundamental human rights.

to:

The Asian governments agreed in Article 8 of its Bangkok Declaration6
8. Recognize that while human rights are universal in nature, they must be considered in the context of a dynamic andevolving process of international norm-setting, bearing in mind
the significance of national and regional particularities and various historical, cultural and religious backgrounds.

It is important to note in this statement not the reiteration of universality principle but the strong qualification in the application of the principle.

256

H u m a n R i g h t s E d u c at i o n i n A s i a - Pa c i f i c

The provision, in requiring the consideration of the “context of a dynamic
and evolving process of international norm-setting, bearing in mind thesignificance of national and regional particularities and various historical,
cultural and religious backgrounds,” echoed a relativist approach to humanrights. This gave rise to several questions: How would “national and regional
peculiarities” and “historical, cultural and religious backgrounds” be considered in dealing with human rights? Could this approach in applying humanrights lead to weaker subscription to the international human rights standards by governments, as feared by the non-governmental organizations?
Three months later, the United Nations World Conference on Human
Rights (Vienna Conference) held in Vienna, Austria adopted on 25 June
1993 the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action (vdpa). It provides
among others the following: (Article 5)
5. All human rights are universal, indivisible and interdependent and interrelated. The international community must
treat human rights globally in a fair and equal manner, on thesame footing, and with the same emphasis. 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 andcultural systems, to promote and protect all human rights andfundamental freedoms.
While Article 5 of the vdpa drew inspiration from Article 8 of the
Bangkok Declaration, textual analysis reveals a difference between the two
provisions. Article 5 of the vdpa clearly and strongly emphasizes that States
must perform their ”duty” to promote and protect human rights “regardlessof their political, economic and cultural systems.” Article 8 of the Bangkok
Declaration emphasizes the peculiarities and diverse backgrounds of Statesthat must be considered in dealing with human rights.
Article 5 of the vdpa asserts the primacy of state obligation to protect,promote and realize human rights. Article 8 of the Bangkok Declaration
asserts the primacy of the context within which that state obligation must
operate.
This is not a minor difference in the context of the “Asian values” debate,
which basically lowers commitment to fulfillment of human rights obligations of States in the name of culture and other peculiarities, or for the sakeTeaching Human Rights: The Culture Question257

of economic development/growth. Article 8 of the Bangkok Declaration
does not conflict with the “Asian values” perspective.
The 1993 vdpa settled the issue of universality of human rights, including their “universal” implementation. And the member-states of the United
Nations were expected to faithfully implement the vdpa from 1993 onward.
The 1993 Joint Communiqué of the Foreign Ministers of six Associationof the Southeast Asian Nations (asean) member-states issued immediately
after the adoption of vdpa set the alarm early on about the full compliance with the vdpa commitments. The human rights section of the Joint
Communiqué states, among others, the following: 7
They stressed that human rights are interrelated and indivisible comprising civil, political, economic, social and culturalrights. These rights are of equal importance. They should be addressed in a balanced and integrated manner and protected andpromoted with due regard for specific cultural, social, economic
and political circumstances. They emphasized that the promotion and protection of human rights should not be politicized.
The word “universality” does not appear in describing human rights
and the “duty of States, regardless” clause of the vdpa is missing. There isa strong hint in this Joint Communiqué about the insistence of some Asian
governments on the original stance made on the issue embodied in the
Bangkok Declaration, rather than on the “international consensus” on human rights expressed in vdpa. This Joint Communiqué provides a basis forthinking that this stance would probably define the actions of Asian states inSoutheast Asia regarding protection and realization of human rights.
There is a certain irony in this situation considering that this Joint
Communiqué is meant to report on the commitment of the asean states8
involved in fulfilling the provisions of the vdpa.
The 2007 “Ministerial Meeting on Human Rights and Cultural Diversity”
of the Non-Aligned Movement (nam) provides another example of government ambivalence in adhering to the “duty of States, regardless” clauseof Article 5 of the vdpa. The meeting, attended by many Asian memberstates,9 adopted the 2007 Tehran Declaration and Programme of Action on
Human Rights and Cultural Diversity. The declaration cites Article 5 of the258

H u m a n R i g h t s E d u c at i o n i n A s i a - Pa c i f i c

vdpa in full in its preamble, not in its operative paragraphs. And includes
Article 4 in its operative paragraphs that provides:10
4. Recognized the significance of national and regional particularities and various historical, cultural and religious backgrounds and urged all actors on the international scene to contribute to the building of international order based on inclusion,
justice, equality and equity, human dignity, mutual understanding and promotion of, and respect for cultural diversity and universal human rights;
This statement strongly resembles Article 8 of the Bangkok Declarationand continues to an extent the pre-eminence of the cultural and other particularities and backgrounds in considering human rights.
While the Tehran Declaration and Programme of Action correctly emphasizes the right to culture (or cultural diversity), it could have been more
explicit in reiterating in its operative paragraphs the “duty of States, regardless of their political, economic and cultural systems, to promote and protect all human rights and fundamental freedoms” declared by the vdpa.
Thus the question is: When Asian states adopt their own regional or
subregional human rights-related agreements do they adhere closely to
vdpa, including the universality provision?
In 2002, the member-states of the South Asian Association for Regional
Cooperation (saarc) ratified two regional conventions regarding therights of women and children. In 2004, six Mekong states11 signed, under
the Coordinated Mekong Ministerial Initiative Against Human Trafficking(commit Process), a memorandum of agreement (mou) on combating human trafficking. Respect for the human rights of the trafficking victims isa key feature of this mou (see Taylor and Sullivan on pages 58 to 59 of thispublication).
In 2007, the Association of the Southeast Asian Nations (asean) adopted the asean Charter that laid the foundation for the creation of a rulesbased asean Community, and provided as one its principles the “respect
for fundamental freedoms, the promotion and protection of human rights,
and the promotion of social justice.” The charter led to the adoption in 2009of the asean Political-Security Community Blueprint with provisions onhuman rights and their mechanisms.12

Teaching Human Rights: The Culture Question

259

While the adoption of these human rights or human rights-related subregional agreements belies the supposed imposition of foreign ideas in theregion, their implementation with full support for the universality of humanrights is still to be seen.
The 2011 resolution of the UN General Assembly on “The universal,
indivisible, interrelated, interdependent and mutually reinforcing natureof all human rights and fundamental freedoms”13 provides an appropriate
reiteration of Article 5 of the vdpa. The resolution provides the following
relevant statements:
1. Reaffirms that all human rights are universal, indivisible,
interrelated, interdependent and mutually reinforcing, and that
all human rights, civil, political, economic, social and culturalrights must be treated in a fair and equal manner, on the samefooting and with the same emphasis;
		xxx		xxx		xxx6. Encourages States to take into account the universal, indivisible, interrelated, interdependent and mutually reinforcing
nature of all human rights when integrating the promotion andprotection of all human rights into relevant national policies andwhen promoting international cooperation in the field of humanrights, while recalling that the primary responsibility for promoting and protecting human rights rests with the State.
This resolution should at least be a guide in any restatement of Article 5of the vdpa at the regional and subregional levels.14
Context of the Debate15
The Asian efforts on linking cultures and human rights have particular
contexts. These historical contexts largely played a role in debunking theso-called conflict between “Asian values” and human rights. It is necessary
to recall in a summarized form the efforts at discussing human rights in acontextualized sense, that is in the context of Asia, and yet upholding theuniversality principle.
Much of the support for the harmonization of human rights principles
with the values and cultures in Asia come from people who underwent historic evolution in their respective political systems. They are the people in260

H u m a n R i g h t s E d u c at i o n i n A s i a - Pa c i f i c

South Korea and Taiwan in Northeast Asia; Indonesia, the Philippines andThailand in Southeast Asia; and India and Nepal in South Asia.
Repression to regeneration
People who experienced authoritarian rule in the decade of the 1970s(some date back to the 1960s) also experienced a pattern of repression, reform, reflection and regeneration.
The authoritarian governments in these countries brought about massive human rights violations in all forms—arbitrary detention, torture, disappearances, extra-judicial killings, media repression, prohibition of public
assemblies, restriction of movement for some people, among others. Most
governments justified the authoritarian rule as necessary for national security, indirectly saying that human rights had to be sacrificed for the benefitof the state. But the people knew that the national security justification wasa façade for the continued rule by the then government leaders. They saw
the human rights violations as mere attempts at stifling dissent, no matter how reasonable the dissent was. Thus the era of repression pervaded inmany parts of Asia, largely abetted by the Cold War.
Since the people could see the hypocrisy of the rulers, they did not succumb to the repression. They persisted, using various creative means, in defending the victims of repression, in protecting the general populace fromfurther control and repression, and in bringing the human rights issues out
to the international community. These people, consisting of lawyers, professors, social activists, religious workers, students, workers and members ofmarginalized groups were advocates of democracy, human rights or justicein general. In many cases they were also the human rights violations victims.
In some cases, appeals for support from the international community werepremised on the call for international solidarity with human rights violations victims.
As the structure of repression and authoritarian rule slowly unraveledin the decades of the 1980s and 1990s, more and more people gained thecourage to call for justice. As history shows, several authoritarian governments fell one after the other.
With the change in the political arena coming quite fast, the establishment of democratic governments became a challenge as much as a source ofhope (in many cases the cause of unreasonably high expectations of change).

Teaching Human Rights: The Culture Question261

And who else would be in the best position to help bring this about but thevery people who risked their lives for democracy and justice.
Thus the period of reform came about. Changes in the political structure brought free and open elections, human rights policies and institutions,systems of accountability, and even people’s participation in governance.
Those who figured well in the opposition to the authoritarian governments
were given the chance to put into practice what they sacrificed for. At different times, the adoption of human rights policies and institutions cameabout due to their presence in the government to the applause of the people
and the international community.
But making the system work is a totally different matter. While imbued
with the best of intentions, the new system had to work on a hit-and-missbasis. The unreasonably high expectations of the public brought by changeof government were not completely met. Human rights, while formally respected by the governments, continued to be violated nevertheless.
If the goals of achieving full democracy and respect for human rights
remained, a review of the experiences had to be done. This was the period ofreflection. Were things working in the way they were meant to be? Had there
been a total rejection of the authoritarian ways of governance, or did they
simply mutate into more subtle forms? Was the attitude of those who held
power—from the bureaucrats to the members of the police and military—changed toward democratic governance and full respect for human rights?
Did the people who came to power maintain their adherence to democratic
principles or to human rights, or did they themselves become autocrats andhuman rights violators? There were many questions that should be raised in
the transition from repressive situation to a system of governance guided byprinciples of justice.16
The call to recognize women’s rights as human rights formed part ofthis problem. Did we really mean full democracy, and all human rights forall? Did we really treat all sectors of society equally and fairly?
The stage for regeneration started with the efforts toward inclusivenessin terms of human rights advocacy. New issues were as important as theolder human rights issues of political repression. Systems review required
respect for the rights not only of the “men heroes” but also of the “women
victims”17 of human rights violations and of the indigenous peoples, persons
with disabilities, people living with hiv/aids, sexual minorities, religious
minorities, foreign residents, and so many other sectors of society that pre-262

H u m a n R i g h t s E d u c at i o n i n A s i a - Pa c i f i cviously did not matter in human rights debates and advocacy. If the system
was meant to be respectful of all human rights for all, then a new round ofsystems change had to occur.
Broadening conceptualization
The main message of human rights was change. This was raised in the
1970s in response to the repressive governments, and still being raised atpresent in view of the broadening scope of human rights. Human rights
were seen, then and now, as solutions to the many problems of government,
people and society as a whole. At the time when authoritarian governments
had strong grip of the society, some people had only human rights as thereason for appealing for international help. Lacking ratification of international human rights instruments, they could at least use the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights (udhr) as basis for pleas to the international
institutions and governments to help stop human rights violations, or to
exhort people to assert their rights.18
But human rights had to be applied in concrete contexts. In the 1980s,
there were initiatives at relating the then existing problems to human rights
both in terms of formal declarations and field practice. This was the periodof confluence. The 1983 Declaration of the Basic Duties of asean Peoples
and Governments19 drawn up by mainly law-oriented groups in Southeast
Asia reflects to a large extent the human rights problems at the time as wellas the reiteration of the international human rights standards in the context of Southeast Asia in the early 1980s.20 The Declaration called for a stop
to arbitrary detention, torture, and all forms of repression; people-centereddevelopment; people’s participation in governance and in their own community affairs; and government accountability for human rights violations.
The phase of conceptualization followed in the 1990s.21 Human rights
were “evolving” as new sections of society were given recognition as deserving of having their own rights properly recognized and respected. Thus theconcept of the rights of the indigenous peoples, persons with disabilities,
people living with hiv/aids, sexual minorities, religious minorities, foreign
residents, and so many other sectors of people further refined human rights
beyond the traditional civil-political-rights and economic-social-culturalrights categories. Human rights were seen as inclusive, not merely universal, more than before in order to emphasize that people had differences yet
they all are equal in rights. Conceptualizing human rights meant redefining,Teaching Human Rights: The Culture Question

263

reinterpreting human rights in light of new situations, new awareness, andnew assertions.
Conceptualization of human rights is indeed a necessity since the world
has ended the Cold War period that affected the view on human rights
concepts during the years that followed from 1946. This conceptualization,
however, does not refer to reconceptualization that advocates of the “Asian
Values” would like to do. Instead, this refers to the refinement of the specifichuman rights as applied to specific peoples, issues and contexts, yet still
subscribing to the international human rights standards.
The authoritarian period in Asia of the 1970s and 1980s likewise hindered the discussions on human rights from a more inclusive perspective
since political repression was the more dominant concern. When persons
with disabilities now say “Nothing About Us Without Us” there is a restatement, or even strengthening, of an “old” inclusive human rights principle toaddress the current context.
Whose Universality?
Proponents of “Asian Values” argue that human rights are Western European
and Northern American ideas and therefore unfit for Asian peoples whose
cultural, economic, social and political systems are different. But this viewignores the historical development of human rights as international standards, and thus confuses Western European and Northern American views
with the post second world war views on human rights. What we now consider “universal” human rights refer to those that went through international processes of vigorous discussions and formal decisions to adopt humanrights concepts. The international human rights standards did not arise automatically from Western European (and also Northern American) ideas
since their own old perceptions of human rights or similar rights were notmeant to be universal. One author explains this point clearly:22[T]he human rights of the first period (pre-1948 Universal
Declaration of Human Rights) as they developed in Europe wereby no means designed to be universal: there was to be no gradual expansion to include women and human beings of all races.
Thus, it was only logical that the first initiative in international
law towards international recognition of an equality of humanbeings that transcended the bounds of the white race did notcome from the West. This is a historic fact that finds no mention

264

H u m a n R i g h t s E d u c at i o n i n A s i a - Pa c i f i cwhatsoever in the usual Western publications on the “universality of human rights”. Instead of duly recognizing what was in thisrespect an historic role played by Japan directly after the FirstWorld War, global assertions are made that it is restraining itself
in participating in international platforms of human rights. But
it was in Japan where the first ever “League for the Abolitionof Racial Discrimination” was established immediately after theFirst World War. It was a Japanese diplomat who proposed at theParis Peace Conference of 1918 that the principle of equality be
included in the covenant of the League of Nations...” [which was
not approved by major Western representatives such as thenUnited States President Woodrow Wilson].
The universal human rights of the second period (after 1948
Universal Declaration of Human Rights) are as new for the Westas they are for China. Less than 50 years have passed since both
cultural spheres were confronted with such a universal conception for the first time. Indeed, the image of the human being
underlying even the present-day concept of human rights—especially in the liberal-democratic states of the West—is still not
truly universal. This is because the human rights position of theunborn human being—usually referred to in a trivializing manner as “unborn life” in a public debate in German-speaking areas—has yet to be clarified.
His mention of Japan’s role in promoting “universal” human rights issignificant as it shows that not all “modern” ideas come from Europe. The
universality of human rights, as currently defined, arose due to the participation of many more peoples from different parts of the world in setting
human rights standards—particularly with the adoption of human rights
conventions through the United Nations.
In addition, the principles of indivisibility and interdependence of rights
are new. The drafters of the 1948 udhr espoused the idea of fundamental
unity of all human rights as shown in the “organic unity” of the document.
This means thateach article of the Declaration must be interpreted in light of
all the rest, and especially in light of others on the same topic ortheme, and not necessarily in terms of its exact place in the final
sequence. There were for them no two kinds of citizens in therealm of moral rights.23

Teaching Human Rights: The Culture Question

265

Essentially, therefore, civil, cultural, economic, political and social
rights should be seen as one set.
The idea of “organic unity” of human rights upholds the principles ofindivisibility and interdependence of rights. It was expressed in the mottoof the 1993 World Conference on Human Rights: “All Human Rights forAll.” That this motto had to be promoted in the 1993 conference indicateda need to re-emphasize basic principles (indivisibility, interrelatedness, interdependence, and universality of rights), but probably also to pre-empt
attempts by some UN Member-states in early 1990s to put priority on one
set of rights over another set of rights.
Cultures in Asia and Human Rights
There is a bit of irony in the fact that one of the most revered Asian icons,
Mahatma Gandhi, expressed a view that supported the idea that humanrights must be qualified by local cultural precepts. In Hindu culture, dutycomes first before everything else. There is an oft-repeated excerpt of theletter of Mahatma Gandhi on 25 May 1947:24
I learnt from my illiterate but wise mother that all rights to
be deserved and preserved came from duty well done. Thus thevery right to live accrues to us only when we do the duty of citizenship of the world. From this one fundamental statement, perhaps it is easy enough to define the duties of Man and Woman
and correlate every right to some corresponding duty to be first
performed. Every other right can be shown to be a usurpation
hardly worth fighting for.
Then Secretary General of unesco, Julian S. Huxley, asked Mahatma
Gandhi in 1947 for his opinion on human rights as an input in the drafting of
the rights to be included in the very first human rights document of the UN.
The quoted letter was Mahatma Gandhi’s response. The letter suggested theneed to discuss duty before rights, an idea that would not support the concept of human rights being based on human dignity and nothing else. His
response instead provided the idea that human rights would not accrue to aperson by simply being human but only after the performance of duty. Thisis problematic when we consider the inherent nature of human rights as
expressed in the udhr, “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity

266

H u m a n R i g h t s E d u c at i o n i n A s i a - Pa c i f i c

and rights.” (Article 1) There is no qualification to enjoying human rights
immediately after birth.
Gandhi’s 1947 letter, while cited in many human rights articles, has notbeen evaluated based on the provisions of the udhr. One author notes that
the Gandhi letter likely reflects what many Indians would think about humanrights in line with the Hindu principles.25 In relation to human rights education, the former Chairperson of the National Human Rights Commission ofIndia argues for the inclusion of “component of obligations towards others.”
Citing Gandhi’s 1947 letter, he explains that26[T]his concept is reflected in Article 51A of the Constitutionof India which enumerates the fundamental duties of every citizen and is required to be read along with the fundamental rights
guaranteed in Part III thereof. This concept is gaining international recognition in as much as a draft Universal Declarationof Human Responsibilities (1997) on similar lines has been
prepared for adoption by the General Assembly of the United
Nations as complementary to the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights.
The University Grants Commission of India provides another view on
this issue by explaining how human rights education should play a role in
the Indian cultural context:27
Although every right entails a duty, there has been a feeling in certain quarters that rights education is promoted andthe question of duties has not been adequately addressed. In asociety which emphasized on duties for centuries, rights education comes as a correction of historical distortions. The violationof rights could be corrected only when the privileged persons
are reminded of their duties towards the marginalized sections,and the marginalized sections are gradually empowered throughrights education. Hre [Human rights education] at these levels
would extend to such areas as gender equity, caste and community relations, majority-minority conflicts, ‘forward-backward’
dilemma and North-South power relations. In short, all power
relations have to be humanized and democratized through restructuring of rights and duties.

Teaching Human Rights: The Culture Question

267

What is notable in this statement is the view about the necessity of using human rights to correct “historical distortions” and the emphasis on the
duty of the “privileged persons” toward the marginalized sections in society.
And the last statement about humanizing and democratizing “all” power
relations ensures that this view does not promote paternalism.
Including “obligation/duty” in the human rights concept is not a problem as it is already part of the udhr. But the idea of performing obligation/
duty first before meriting enjoyment of human rights is controversial. The
complementarity idea (rights being complemented by obligations) is morein line with the international thinking. (See the discussion below on a similar interpretation on how obligation relates to the human rights concept.)
During the past several decades, there have been efforts in finding
positive support for human rights in local cultures and major religions. In
Sri Lanka, in 1982, the Sri Lanka Foundation convened the “Seminar on
Religious and Cultural Traditions of Human Rights in Sri Lanka” that cameup with a set of reports on links between major religions and human rights.
The seminar concluded, among others, that28
fundamental human rights are inalienable and that a valid basis
for the meaningful consideration of human rights is the universal love of man and animal and the respect for everything thatexists, both animate and inanimate, including the environment.
While the different religions have their distinct religious perceptions and philosophical explanation of the universe, of humanrelationships, of development, of motivations and of ultimate
destiny, the religious and cultural traditions of the five major religions uphold in common certain basic moral and ethical values
for the promotion of which man must be enabled to exercise
his rights and perform his duties in a mutuality of relationships.
Among these values held in common are human dignity andworth, [e]quality, freedom, love and compassion, truth, justice,brotherhood and charity.
In 1988, the same organization that organized the 1982 seminar cameout with a book that explained the support of major religions to each provision of the udhr.29 The book states the importance of discussing humanrights:30
In a pluralistic society such as ours, a “common language”
for common values is essential if we Sri Lankans are to live andwork together, with understanding and genuine co-operation for268

H u m a n R i g h t s E d u c at i o n i n A s i a - Pa c i f i c

the common weal and welfare. The language of the Universal
Declaration [of Human Rights] can provide that “common language” in that the concept and norms embodied in each of the
Articles of the Declaration are found enshrined in the Buddhist,
Hindu, Christian, and Islamic perspectives of social behaviour.
		xxx			xxx			xxxIt is the view of all that this book can help the overwhelming majority of Sri Lankans to realize that, while the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights is comparatively of recent origin,
the norms and values in each of its Articles were started centuries ago by the Lord Buddha, the Great Hindu Saints, the Lord
Jesus Christ, and the Holy Prophet.
The book includes commentaries on each of the UDHR articles fromthe perspective of four major religions (Buddhism, Hinduism, Christianity
and Islam).
On the question of duty and rights under Hinduism, the book speaks
of mutual relationship, not of rights accruing from performance of duty.
Moreover, the duty being referred to is linked to what is now called human rights state obligation. On Article 29 of the udhr regarding duty to thecommunity, the Hindu commentary of the book explains that31[I]n the emphasis on one’s obligations to others lies an implicit recognition of the rights of the people to whom these obligations are owed. For example, the king’s obligation to protect
his subject is, by implication, a recognition of the subject’s rightto royal protection.
These Sri Lankan efforts on clarifying the relationship between religions andhuman rights were way ahead of the still to come controversy about “Asianvalues.” They reflect to a large extent the need to continue reviewing cultures and religions in light of ever-growing human rights concept, and theviews of some Asian political leaders that support undemocratic form ofgovernance.
In the same year, 1988, a Vietnamese scholar published a book that reviewed the old Vietnamese legal codes and sorted out those that relate to
the modern international law standards on human rights. The author dis-Teaching Human Rights: The Culture Question

269

cussed issues covering integrity of the person, equality and discrimination,
civil and political rights, economic, social and cultural rights and degree ofgovernment compliance with human rights obligations. The author was able
to show the existence of legal provisions in the old Vietnamese legal codesthat uphold human rights. He wrote32
Using the framework of today’s international human rights
standards as instruments for data compilation about, and legal
analysis of, a traditional East Asian polity, this study presents
systematically organized arguments on human rights, substantiated by historical facts, thus contributing to the validation of
the universality of today’s international law of human rights—a
research need for scholars as well as practitioners.
This analysis of the old Vietnamese legal codes is another example of efforts to understand the international human rights standards in the context
of national history and traditions. Having been done prior to the debate on
supposed conflict between Asian cultures/values and human rights, this effort deserves serious attention.
Similarly, a Cambodian human rights organization undertook in 1997
an initial study of the relations between human rights and Khmer culture.
The short report discussed a number of specific articles in the udhr andexplained how they were related to Khmer culture (art, tradition, custom,
history and religion).33
Linking Rights to Cultures
One author cites John Humphrey, the main UN official that supported thedrafting of the udhr,34 in describing Mr. Peng-chun Chang (representativeof Republic of China) as a “master of the art of compromise and under coverof quotation from Confucius, would often provide a formula which madeit possible for the [Human Rights] Commission to escape from impasse.”35
The “art of compromise” was an important tool in intermingling ideas
from various regions of the world during the drafting of the udhr. Mr.
Chang probably cited several Confucian quotes in order to help resolve issues. But did Mr. Chang really use them as mere “cover” for his proposals tosettle issues? The author neither mentions the Confucian quotations citedby Mr. Chang, nor provides examples on how they were used. There is a

270

H u m a n R i g h t s E d u c at i o n i n A s i a - Pa c i f i c

possibility that Mr. Chang cited such quotations as bases of proposals. If so,
the meaning of the rights in the udhr would be much richer with Confucian
ideas being part of the reasons behind them.
Nevertheless, the author makes it clear that those involved in drafting
the udhr had heard of pleas for consideration of the various cultures intheir task. He writes:36
At the start of the proceedings [Carlos P.] Romulo of thePhilippines said that the Commission had to draft a bill “which
could be accepted by all Members of the UN and … should takethe different cultural systems of the world into account.
The drafting of the udhr involved people from Asia (Republic of China,
India, Lebanon, Pakistan, the Philippines, Saudi Arabia, and Syria) who contributed to the debates on what rights should be included in the first humanrights document of the UN. They most likely expressed ideas that were possibly based on the cultures in Asia.
With this background, a question arises: how can human rights betaught as ideas that have either similarity with ideas in Asia or have been
indigenized in various local Asian and Pacific contexts?
The answer to this question consists of several approaches. Each approach recognizes the existence of link between human rights and cultures.37
Culture in this sense is defined broadly covering language, religious beliefs,
literature (poems, songs, novels), historical events, folklore, myths, etc.
Historical approach
Human rights ideas are derived from the basic concepts of justice, fairness and sense of humanity. Being basic concepts, they are found not only ina few cultures; they are found in many different cultures though in varying
degrees of development. In discussing human rights, one way is to find suchbasic concepts expressed by leaders and institutions in the past that moreor less relate to human rights. The historical approach to understanding human rights adds legitimacy to the idea of “universal” human rights.
The return to Iran in 2011 of the clay cylinder that contains the edictof King Cyrus of ancient Persia rekindled the pride of Iranians on their ancient cultural heritage. It has been reported that “since September [2010]
this Ancient Persian artefact, claimed as the earliest written Bill of Rights,

Teaching Human Rights: The Culture Question271

has been feted, wept over and argued by more than one million Iranians.”
An Iranian government official declared that the Cyrus Edict “reminded theworld of his country’s ancient values.”38
But more than an important relic of the past, the so-called Cyrus Edict(c. 576 BC - 530 BC) speaks of rights that are akin to present concept ofhuman rights. The edict provides for a number of rights including thefollowing:39• Freedom of religion• Right against enslavement• Freedom of movement.
The event that led to the issuance of the edict (conquering of the citystate of Babylon in 539 BC whose kings enslaved many people from otherplaces) was itself important since it spoke of liberation from tyranny, andrespect for diversity.
In India, Emperor Asoka is considered to be an enlightened Buddhist
leader who issued edicts and had them engraved on rocks in various places.
These so-called Asoka Rock Edicts prescribe principles that are considered
supportive of human rights. Emperor Asoka is described in the following
manner:40
Emperor Asoka who began his reign (c. 274 BC) by extending his empire in the most ruthless manner changed completely
after the carnage he saw he had caused in the Battle of Kalinga.
It is evident that he was attracted to, and influenced by, the humanistic teachings of Buddhism which he subsequently embraced and then became one of its greatest patrons. His Rock
Edict xii, besides the verses of the Pali Canon mentioned, is oneof the most striking injunctions issued on religious tolerance
and is worth quoting in some details. His subjects are enjoined“not to deprecate other religions” but on the contrary to see that“other religions are suitably honoured, for by doing so one exalts
one’s co-religionists, and one “helps people belonging to otherreligions.”
The Asoka Rock Edicts were based on Buddhist principles, similar tothe principles that were supposed to have guided other Buddhist and Hindu
leaders in other places in Asia. One account explains this matter in relation
to equality before the law:41

272

H u m a n R i g h t s E d u c at i o n i n A s i a - Pa c i f i c

In the Buddhist historical context equal protection under the law had been a concern of monarchs like Asoka of
the Maurya Empire (India), Indravarman II of Cambodia and,according to the Mahavamsa, of Sri Lankan Kings such as
Mahaculi Mahatissa, Bhatikabhaya and the Tamil King Elara—
to name just a few. This is perfectly in accord with the dictumin the Mahavamsa that monarchs should dispense “even justice
toward friend and foe on occasions of disputes in law.”
In fifteenth century Vietnam, while the laws of the Le dynasty absorbed
ideologies and laws from Chinese feudal states they developed nevertheless according to the then character of Vietnamese society. One author explains the independent development of legal concepts in fifteenth century
Vietnam:42
It was especially so in those regulations related to family andhuman rights. For example, the laws of Le dynasty defended thelegitimate rights of women in their marriage relations… Many
regulations were made to defend the rights and interests ofwomen. For example, girls were entitled to the same inheritanceas boys were; wives were entitled to get divorce; all measures that
expressed a traditional respect for women in Vietnam. This wasin utter opposition to the ideology of Chinese Confucianism,
which preached “respect for men and contempt for women.” Thelaws of Le dynasty did not see as ‘undutiful’ any act of children tohave their own properties or live away from their parents while
the latter were still alive. This also meant that there was a considerable difference between Vietnamese and Chinese families.
Even in penal law, the Le dynasty differed from the Chinese penal
laws by rejecting rod beating because it was “considered barbarous, as it
caused painful physical injuries to the victim, staining the latter’s honor anddignity.”43
Detailed analysis of the traditional Vietnamese laws reveals many moresimilarities with current international human rights standards.44
Appropriation (or endogenization) approach
The never-ending exchange of ideas and systems among peoples in various parts of the world for centuries characterizes human history. Ideas andsystems spread for a variety of reasons including trade, religious mission,Teaching Human Rights: The Culture Question273

and military occupation. The Silk Road, for example, facilitated exchangesof ideas and systems between West and East Asia. The same is true between
Europe and the Arab region and the South and Southeast Asia through landand sea routes. As a result, different ideas have been absorbed, or more
properly “appropriated,” by “receiving societies.” In the late 19th century,
Asian societies appropriated European ideas as their own. This is seen in thefreedom movement in the Philippines where Filipino revolutionaries fought
for freedom while echoing European ideas. Apolinario Mabini’s The True
Decalogue written in 1898 is an example. Some relevant sections state:45
VI. Strive for your country’s independence, for only you canhave any real interest in its advancement, and your own liberty
depends on its being free.
VII. Do not recognize in your country the authority of any
person whom the people have not elected, for authority comesfrom God and God speaks through the conscience of every man.
These ideas constitute what we now consider to be components of arepublican form of government, which include the right of suffrage for thepeople. The idea of securing the independence of the country expresses
the right to self-determination. These ideas were certainly influenced by
European liberal ideas, which were not necessarily pervasive in Europe itself by late nineteenth century, in view of the continuation of the rule ofmonarchies.
The same appropriation of ideas can be seen in Japan’s “Look West” policy under the new government (Meiji Reform era) after ending two hundredyears of isolation due to pressure of American gunboat diplomacy. Yukichi
Fukuzawa’s coining of the word “jinken” as Japanese word for human rights
in late nineteenth century is a perfect example of appropriation of an idea.
Synthesis/Syncretization approach
Peoples in Asia mixed indigenous and foreign ideas to support their objective of gaining freedom from oppression. A good example is the use of thesymbol of light. The concept of light is found in European as well as Asian
cultures. Light (lux) is a symbol of knowledge or liberation from ignorance,
and also liberation from suffering or oppression.

274

H u m a n R i g h t s E d u c at i o n i n A s i a - Pa c i f i c

In Hindu theology, light is equivalent to “consciousness,” and is considered to be free (or have freedom). If lack of consciousness means lack ofknowledge or ignorance, then an ignorant person suffers bondage.46
The 1922 declaration of the National Levelers’ Association (Zenkoku
Suiheisha), the Suiheisha Declaration, using the symbol of light to express
the desire of oppressed people, states:47
We, who know just how cold human society can be, who
know what it is to be pitied, do fervently seek and adore thewarmth and light of human life from deep within our hearts.
This seeking of the “light of human life” is a return to an earlier state of
freedom and equality:
Brothers! Our ancestors pursued and practiced freedom
and equality.
Since oppression deprived them of freedom and equality, the rational
way to go was to move back to that earlier state:Now, the time has come when we human beings, pulsing
with this blood, are soon to regain our divine dignity. The time
has come for the victims to throw off their stigma. The time hascome for the blessing of the martyrs’ crown of thorns.
Vietnamese intellectuals in the 1920s freedom movement also espoused
ideas that originated in Europe but expressed them in their own way. An
important freedom movement personality during that time, Pan Boi Chau,
said:48
Human rights will rise like a golden sun, flooding the world
with light.
The common use in Asia of light as a metaphor for freedom or liberation or simply gaining knowledge is an example of how an idea can be common to peoples regardless of their differences in culture and other peculiarities. Light is a common human experience and seen in the same way when

Teaching Human Rights: The Culture Question

275

related to human situation of suffering and liberation from suffering—be it
in Asia or Europe.
Indigenous concepts approach
The idea of human rights has similarity to indigenous concepts in different societies in Asia. Thus one author writes that words similar to humanrights have existed in many cultures/peoples in Asia:49
The Persians have used the Arabic word hagg [or haq], theHindi and Bengali have their adhikar and the Sanskrit svetve, theThais their sitthi, the Koreans their kooahri [or kwolni] and theFilipinos their karapatan—all mean rights.” (Raul Manglapus,
Philippines). The Universal Declaration [of Human Rights] does
not affirm the institutions Westerners often equate with humanrights, such as parliaments or supreme courts, but rather allows
for various cultural forms by simply setting forth those political,
social, and economic rights that contribute to the dignity of theindividual person.
The translations of the words “human rights” into different languages
reflect historical and religious development of Asian societies. Many countries in Asia did not seem to have any problem finding the equivalent terminology for human rights in their local languages. And since language grows
by borrowing from other languages or cultures, people from countries thatshare similar outside cultural influences use almost similar adopted words
to translate human rights into their own languages. Human rights havetherefore been translated into local languages based on the cultural makeup of the countries. Considering that several countries share cultural backgrounds, it is not a surprise to find their local language version of the words“human rights” to be similar in many ways:
a. Arabic stream – the Arabic translation for human rights, ħaqūq
al-’insān, are similar to haqqu in Dhivehi (Maldives), haqooq insaan in
Urdu (Pakistan), and hak asasi manusia in Bahasa Indonesia/Melayu/
Brunei (Indonesia, Malaysia, Brunei).
b. Sanskrit stream – countries that have adopted Hindu-Buddhist
tradition have translated human rights into sittimanut in Lao (Laos),sethik monus in Khmer (Cambodia), and sitti-manutsayachon in Thai

276

H u m a n R i g h t s E d u c at i o n i n A s i a - Pa c i f i c(Thailand). The root words are the Sanskrit words sitti that means rights
or justice, and manu that means human. The Hindi (India) word forhuman rights is manavadhikar probably composed of manu (humanbeing) and adhikar (rights). Similarly, the Malay language existing inIndonesia, Malaysia, and Brunei that had been influenced by the Hindu
culture, translates human rights into hak asasi manusia, with manusia
having the root word manu.
These translations of human rights in different languages illustrate theuse of old concepts of justice found in older civilizations of the Arabs inthe West and people in South Asia. Other translations, such as karapatang
pangtao in the Philippines with the root word dapat that means that whichis correct or right, are also likely based on the local concepts of justice. In
other words, the human rights idea relates directly to indigenous or evenborrowed words in local languages that mean justice, rights, and human.
Similarly, the histories of different societies in Asia provide examples
of indigenous notions of equality such as those relating to women. In thePhilippines, the pre-colonial women enjoyed rights and privileges, ruled
over communities, and acted as “priestesses and even as military leaders.”50
In Indonesia, in the thirteenth century, women ruled for twenty-four years
without interruption.51 In Cambodia, during the Angkor period (802-1431
AD), women could “lead or manage public affairs [as] astrologers, professors, judges, secretaries, soldiers and high [ranking] officials.”52 Some people
assert the continuation of this indigenous feminism in Southeast Asia despite the restrictions on women imposed by European colonialism and religions from outside the subregion.53
Myths and folklores also describe societal systems and aspirations.
Along with old stories written by women, these forms of literature portray women as leaders, independent-minded and strong. They also express
equality between women and men, and the capacity of women to save men
in time of distress.54
The indigenous concepts therefore have much to offer in terms of rooting human rights in local cultures. They confirm the basic ideas of fairness,justice, and equality in some traditional societies. Indigenous concepts were
probably expressed more in literature (writings, songs, poems) to oppose“mainstream” cultural-social-political norms. Some of these indigenous

Teaching Human Rights: The Culture Question

277

concepts remained despite restrictions by later cultural influences (particularly through the European colonial rule).55
One therefore has to argue for support for human rights by using the
local cultural systems. One should not expect a total break from traditions
and cultures in order to apply international human rights standards in local
contexts.
A 2006 study of Pacific customs and their relationship to human rights
provides similar result. The New Zealand Law Commission’s report entitled
Converging Currents: Custom and Human Rights in the Pacific explains thelink between custom and human rights:56
It is often assumed that they cannot. Some see humanrights, with their perceived individualist bias, as a threat to custom. Others see custom as undermining individual rights, particularly those of disadvantaged or vulnerable groups such as
women and young people.
The central thesis of Converging Currents is that, despite apparent areasof tension and conflict, custom and human rights can be harmonized inmany cases by looking at the underlying values of each.
Converging Currents thus explains how this link can occur:57
Certain values are also common to Pacific cultures, and itis these values that form the basis of custom. Respect for theindividual dignity of all persons is perhaps the primary value underlying Pacific custom. From this flow other values such as thedemonstration of love and care for others, consensus-based decision-making, and the maintenance of balance in relationships.
Such values are generally consistent with the values underlying human rights, which are also based on respect for individual human dignity. However, customary practices—whatpeople actually do—do not always reflect customary values, orunderlying beliefs about what is right. The Commission believes
that much of the apparent conflict between custom and humanrights is due not to the underlying values but to customary practices, and to resistance to calls for change to such practices by
those in power within Pacific societies.

278

H u m a n R i g h t s E d u c at i o n i n A s i a - Pa c i f i c

The distinction between “customary values” and “customary practices”
is also significant in examining cultures in Asia. Converging Currents provides a view on customary practices:
Some customary practices need to change to accommodate
human rights, and to bring practice more into line with underlying customary values, but this does not require the wholesale
repudiation of custom. Indeed, by looking for common groundbetween custom and human rights, both may be enhanced.
Human rights will be strengthened in the Pacific if they can be
expressed in terms of local culture and customary values.
Just as there are cultural interpretations that say human rights are incompatible with local cultures, there are also cultural interpretations thatshow support for human rights in local cultures.
Reinterpretation approach
There are people who support the view that there are inherent contradictions between traditional cultures and human rights. They see little possibility of human rights being accommodated in particular cultural systems.
The continuing caste system, for example, is seen as proof that Hinduism
is not capable of allowing the principle of equality to exist. One author explains that58[T]he Hindu tradition does not believe in the concept ofequality. The practice and prevalence of inequality has both
the divine sanction and the sanction of the Law Books or the
Dharma Shastras. There is no equality before the law or equal
protection of law, since society has been arranged through arigid system of social hierarchy based on caste.
Another author argues on practical grounds against the cultural values
based on Buddhism to promote human rights:59
In the context of the survival of the caste system and the apparent lack of influence of Buddhism over its continuity, we canpose a number of serious questions regarding the utility of using
traditional categories or norms in propagating contemporary
human rights values.

Teaching Human Rights: The Culture Question279

As earlier discussed, there are efforts that support the link between various religions in Asia and human rights. These efforts are largely premisedon the principle of reinterpreting religious principles and traditional values
in order to make them relevant to current realities.
Neo-Confucianists would look for ideas within the Confucian thoughtthat would yield values shared with human rights.60 As one scholar explains:61
The original construction of the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights involved the participation of Confucians, andgained the subsequent adherence to it of countries sharing
Confucian cultures. There is thus no basis for asserting any inherent compatibility between Confucianism and human rights
to which most nations subscribe.
The person as understood by Confucianism in the context
of human relationships is no less entitled to respect than the individual in Western human rights concepts. Thus the dichotomyof “individual” versus “community” rights is inapplicable andmisleading in this case.
xxx		 xxx		 xxxOther Confucians called for schools and academies as centers of public discussion, and for a constitutional order providing
for wider participation in the political process. Thus, although
the Confucian communitarian tradition has been overshadowedby state power and bureaucratism, it did continue to propose,
albeit in adverse circumstances, consensual alternatives for promoting a more balanced relationship among the individual, thecommunity, and the state. It is to such Confucian advocates, andnot spokesmen for state power, that one should look for a genuine Chinese communitarianism as the basis for the advancement of human rights.
Another proposes the “possible transformation of Confucian virtues
into rights” described in the following manner:62
the cultivation of virtues by individuals-in-community should
lead to an awakening of duty consciousness in an individual tothe community and the public, which in turn should call forth
an awareness of the individual’s legitimate potential for participating in public affairs (no individual can be separated from thepublic). But claims to such participation on the part of the individual require participation also in an independent rational
discourse of the public interest. It further calls for a conscious-

280

H u m a n R i g h t s E d u c at i o n i n A s i a - Pa c i f i cness of the need for the ruling political power to conform to the
public interest. Should rulers fail to conform to the public interest, protest and revolution against usurpation and oppression
may well ensue, with the attendant assertion of people’s rights
against political encroachment.
It is also important to point out that there is at least one other idea thatis known in Chinese society, Daoism. As against the emphasis on Confucian“bureaucratism,” others would look to Daoism for its “eco-democratic humanism.”63 Daoism has played an important role in Chinese cultural development. As one author explains:64
Daoism played an important role not only as an alternative
cosmology (or more precisely cosmogony) to Confucianism but
facilitated the syncretism between Chinese thought and othercultural/intellectual traditions. Already when China broadened
its cultural contacts with the surrounding civilized and “barbar”
societies, Daoism facilitated the integration of the non-Chinese
cultures to the Chinese, and vice-versa. For example, Mahayana
Buddhism is known to have received a strong influence from
Daoism, and some specialists believe that a Confucian China
would not have been able to accept this Indian religion without
the mediation of Daoism.
Daoism therefore is an important cultural influence in Chinese thinking. And with its differing ideas from the Confucian ones, it is a crucial element to consider in discussing human rights in the context of China.
On Hinduism, one author supports the view that the Hindu Code ofManu propounds “essential human freedoms and controls and virtues ofgood life.”65 Citing another author, he explains that the “first five tenets ofsocial assurances” include:
freedoms [sic] from violence (ahimsa), freedom from want (asteya), freedom from exploitation (aparigraha), and freedom
from early death and disease (armritava or arogya). To these five
freedoms corresponded five virtues or controls: “absence of intolerance (akrodha), compassion (adroha), knowledge (vidya orgyan), freedom of conscience or freedom from fear, frustrationand despair (pravritti, abhaya, dhriti).

Teaching Human Rights: The Culture Question

281

He asserts that a fundamental requirement of human rights is the capacity to choose the preferred way of life that flows from the “freedom frommaterial control of the mind.”
These and many other features of the Hindu belief support the idea of
human rights. But there are also elements in Hinduism that go against human rights such as the caste system. He asserts that the caste system is a
result of orthodox cultural practices, rather than the principles of Hinduism(or Rig Veda66 specifically). He explains:67
Rig Vedic traditions did not scheme a stratified society. The
division of labor was conceived to be a crucial instrument for the
regulation of society. The division of labor was founded on theconcept of ‘equitable distribution of responsibility.’…Vedic traditions were thus absolutely secular, non-discriminatory and equitable. However, the formation of orthodox cultural practices
started to emerge once the interpretation of ‘Vedic traditions’[became dominant] that took place in the form of smritis [writings] of rishis (learned men).
On the other hand, a relationship between caste system and humanrights is seen as possible. One author discusses quite comprehensively thedifferent approaches to reinterpreting the caste system in support of humanrights. The author concludes68
There are thus various ways in which the caste system canbe brought into relationship with human rights, through thetwin concepts of varna69 and jati70. The concept of varna can beviewed as a system of balancing duties and privileges. Humanrights can be brought into relationship with both sides of thisscale. The point at which Hindu thought makes it own contribution to human rights discourse is when it proposes that thediscourse must view rights and duties as an integrated whole.
Moreover, the application of the varna model to the contemporary world results in a surprising extension of human rights
discourse.
In Buddhism, the idea that “each person is the Buddha to be” relates tothe basis of human rights, human dignity.71

282

H u m a n R i g h t s E d u c at i o n i n A s i a - Pa c i f i c

The reformist Islamic thinkers’ interpretation of the concept of justicein the Qur’an support human rights. As one author notes, the Islamic law is“open to adaptation and change.”72 And in reforming Islamic law, the “coreprinciples which form the shared notions of justice in Islam and in international human rights instrument should provide a guide to the developmentof the maqasid [goals of law] for a revitalization of usul fiqh [methodology
of deriving interpretations].73 Examples74 of maqasid include freedom (hurriyah to mean freedom of thought, belief, expression, action), justice andfreedom, human dignity and rights, women’s rights, treating women fairly,
human development and others. Miswanto (pages 100-103) of this publication provides examples of Maqasid al-Shariah (Islamic law principles) thatreconcile with human rights and used in Muhammadiyah school textbook
in Indonesia.
With regard to gender equality, a reinterpretation of the Qur’an can follow a methodology or approach described as a hermeneutical model that
deals with three aspects of the Qur’anic text in order to support
its conclusions. These are, the context in which the text was written; the grammatical composition of the text (how it says what
it says); and the whole text, its Weltanschauung or worldview.
She makes the distinction of making an analysis of the text andnot the interpretations of the text. By going directly to the text
in a fresh reading/analysis, Wadud overcomes the historicity ofpre-modern fiqh and its juridical methodology to re-discover
the universals to the Qur’anic message.75
This methodology allows a reinterpretation of the Qur’an that considers
the concept of equality as understood at present.
Using this methodology, an interpretation of a verse in the Qur’an resulted in the following observation:76…Qur’an worldview supports the equality of women and men,…[and] recognizes difference (sex/biology) and the differencesof roles/functions arising from biological differences. The reading also recognizes that constructed roles like child-caring andmothering are not limited to one’s biology.
The notion that women and men are awliyya (guides andprotectors) of one another suggests a relation of respect and mutual cooperation resting not on the idea of male “superiority” buton the premises of equal partnership.

Teaching Human Rights: The Culture Question283

In other words, the old understanding of traditions, cultural beliefs andreligions are subject to reinterpretation in order to promote, protect andrealize human welfare, potentials and rights. Cultural practices are themselves products of interpretations, some of which are unfortunately causing
injustice and misery. Ending injustice and misery has never been wrong.
Thus a review of the basic principles of traditions, cultural beliefs and religions from a positive vantage point (i.e., in support of human rights) and inconsideration of the current contexts provides a fruitful exercise.
f. Legal concepts approach
Human rights are also considered important because the word “rights”
is a legal concept. Ancient laws in Asian societies provide links to humanrights, whether these laws are in the form of emperor’s edicts as in the caseof Cyrus and Ashoka, or legal codes.
The fifteenth century Hoc Dung Penal Code during the Le dynasty in
Vietnam included provisions similar to European legal concepts such as
the77
protection of civil liability compensation (including punitive
damages) for the victims and the guarantees of procedural due
process for the defendants in criminal law, the larger role of public policy in favour of the economically weak in contract law,the consistent and explicit provision of damages payments for
all kinds of torts against property, person or reputation, the fair
distribution and protection of property ownership, the equalityof men and women in civil and property rights.
This law provides examples of non-European legal concepts that compare with modern legal concepts. They were probably ahead even of thelegal concepts in sixteenth century Europe.
Current legal systems in Asia however developed by adapting legal
ideas from Western Europe and North America not only because of colonial
imposition but also because of recognition by some countries in the regionof the value of, and need for, these late nineteenth century or early twentieth century ideas from other parts of the world. These countries sought
foreign legal concepts and appropriated them into their respective legal
systems from late nineteenth century. Even the formerly colonized countries in Asia continue to use colonial-era laws, though with changes in some284

H u m a n R i g h t s E d u c at i o n i n A s i a - Pa c i f i ccases. This “legal transplantation” started from late nineteenth century. As aconsequence, Spanish, Portuguese, French, German, English and American
legal concepts are found in adapted forms in many national legal systems
in Asia. This is a clear proof that ideas from Western Europe and Northern
America have already been part of the legal structures in Asia, and the supposed conflict of ideas based on different cultural backgrounds has not led
to dysfunctioning legal systems in most of the countries that had undergone“legal transplantation.” Problems that currently occur in the national legal
systems would likely be due to abuse or misuse, rather than defect, of thesystem.
Most countries in Asia have Constitutions that provide for “basic
rights,” “fundamental rights,” or “constitutional rights” that are essentiallyhuman rights. There are also Constitutions in Asia that explicitly mention
human rights, led by the 1947 Constitution of Japan and those that followedin the Philippines, Thailand and recently China.
Also, there are domestic laws on specific issues (privacy, business,
culture) and sectors (women, indigenous peoples, children, persons withdisabilities) that protect human rights. They again prove that our current
societies already recognize human rights, albeit with various degrees oflimitation.
At the international level, business law provides so many rights (intellectual property rights, freedom to engage in business, right to protection
from unfair trade practices, etc.) that have never been questioned by governments in Asia. While not all these business-related rights are humanrights, they certainly resemble human rights in many ways.
Rooting human rights in the domestic legal system is not an issue. It is
the weak recognition of such support for human rights in the domestic legal
system that constitutes a major problem.
ASEAN Experience
The 2007 asean Charter defines its human rights purpose as follows:
7. To strengthen democracy, enhance good governance andthe rule of law, and to promote and protect human rights andfundamental freedoms, with due regard to the rights and responsibilities of the Member-States of asean.

Teaching Human Rights: The Culture Question

285

In terms of principles, the asean Charter provides that asean and its
Member-States should act in accordance with(i) respect for fundamental freedoms, the promotion andprotection of human rights, and the promotion of social justice;(j) uphold the United Nations Charter and international law,
including international humanitarian law, subscribed to by theasean Member-States.
As a concrete human rights measure, the asean Charter provides forthe following in Article 14:
1. In conformity with the principles and purposes of theasean Charter relating to the protection and promotion of human rights and fundamental freedoms, asean shall establish an
asean Human Rights Body.
In sum, the asean Charter provides the over-all framework in terms of
purpose, principles, and mechanism regarding the protection and promotion of human rights in the subregion.
In 2009, asean adopted its Political-Security Community Blueprint(asean Blueprint) that explains its objectives in the following manner:78
Asean’s cooperation in political development aims tostrengthen democracy, enhance good governance and the ruleof law, and to promote and protect human rights and fundamental freedoms, with due regard to the rights and responsibilities ofthe Member States of asean, so as to ultimately create a Rulesbased Community of shared values and norms. In the shaping
and sharing of norms, asean aims to achieve a standard ofcommon adherence to norms of good conduct among member
states of the asean Community; consolidating and strengthening asean’s solidarity, cohesiveness and harmony; and contributing to the building of a peaceful, democratic, tolerant, participatory and transparent community in Southeast Asia.
What could be these “shared values and norms”? The asean Blueprint
could be referring to the values of peace, democracy, tolerance, participation and transparency as gleaned from the asean objective of “building of286

H u m a n R i g h t s E d u c at i o n i n A s i a - Pa c i f i c

a peaceful, democratic, tolerant, participatory and transparent community
in Southeast Asia.” Or could they be the supposed “Asian values” that emphasize obedience to authority, sense of national discipline, restraint in theexercise of rights particularly the political and civil rights, among others?
The asean Blueprint also provides for the “exchange of information in
the field of human rights among asean countries in order to promote andprotect human rights and fundamental freedoms of peoples in accordancewith the asean Charter and the Charter of the United Nations, and the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Vienna Declaration and
Programme of Action” as part of the “actions” to be undertaken.79
Would it be fair to interpret therefore that the asean “shared values andnorms” should include those that uphold the Charter of the United Nations,and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Vienna Declaration
and Programme of Action (vdpa)?
The subsequent implementation of the asean Blueprint as well as that of
the asean Charter led to the establishment of the asean Intergovernmental
Commission on Human Rights (aichr) in 2009 and the asean Commission
on the Promotion and Protection of the Rights of Women and Children(acwc) in 2010.
Under its Terms of Reference,80 the aichr has
1.4 To promote human rights within the regional context,
bearing in mind national and regional particularities and mutual respect for different historical, cultural and religious backgrounds, and taking into account the balance between rights
and responsibilities. [emphasis mine]
The Terms of Reference of the acwc states as one of the objectives81
the following:
2.1 To promote and protect the human rights and fundamental freedoms of women and children in ASEAN, taking into
consideration the different historical, political, sociocultural,religious and economic context in the region and the balances
between rights and responsibilities. [emphasis mine]Teaching Human Rights: The Culture Question

287

The sentence structure of these provisions as well as content provide
a virtual repetition of Article 8 of the Bangkok Declaration. This return to
Article 8 of the Bangkok Declaration has been foreseen in the 1993 Joint
Communiqué of six asean member-states, as discussed above.
On the universality of human rights, the Terms of Reference of aichr
state:
2.2 Respect for international human rights principles, including universality, indivisibility, interdependence and interrelatedness of all human rights and fundamental freedoms, as wellas impartiality, objectivity, non-selectivity, non-discrimination,
and avoidance of double standards and politicisation;
This provision restates Articles 10 and 7 of the Bangkok Declaration
respectively:
10. Reaffirm the interdependence and indivisibility of economic, social, cultural, civil and political rights, and the need togive equal emphasis to all categories of human rights;
7. Stress the universality, objectivity and non-selectivity of
all human rights and the need to avoid the application of double
standards in the implementation of human rights and its politicization, and that no violation of human rights can be justified.
Article 5 of the vdpa states that the “international community must
treat human rights globally in a fair and equal manner, on the same footing, and with the same emphasis.” One wonders why asean decided to use
the language of Bangkok Declaration instead of the vdpa, this latter document is supposed to be upheld by aichr (see Article 1.6, Purposes, Termsof Reference of aichr).
On the whole, the asean terms of reference for its human rights mechanisms emphasize how human rights should be considered, rather than state
the strong commitment to fulfill state obligation on human rights regardlessof backgrounds and other peculiarities of the countries involved.
While the proponents of “Asian values” have not been as strident andvisible in 2000s and 2010s as compared to the situation in early 1990s, theirideas have not entirely disappeared. They are reflected to some extent in288

H u m a n R i g h t s E d u c at i o n i n A s i a - Pa c i f i cinter-governmental declarations such as those related to the establishmentof asean human rights mechanisms.
Will this trend continue in the asean Human Rights Declaration thatwould probably be adopted by the end of 2012? There is fear that this trend
will continue.
The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Ms.
Navanethem Pillay, stressed during the Seventh Official Meeting of theasean Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights on 28 November
2011 that:82[E]ach region of the world has its unique cultures, traditions, institutions and histories. But what is common to all theregions is an aspiration for democracy, the rule of law and human rights.
She explained this point by saying that
One of the most important tasks that aichr is currently engaged in is the drafting of an asean Human Rights Declaration,
which will set the tone for the emerging asean human rights
system. I hope this Declaration will be firmly based on universal human rights standards as contained in international human rights instruments, including the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights. At the very least, regional human rights instruments must maintain international human rights standards, andat their best they can enrich these standards, for instance by focussing on new areas such as the rights of the older persons or
the responsibilities of business in relation to human rights.
She was most likely conscious of the human rights-culture debate or theperspective on contextualized approach to human rights of asean that she
had to make an explicit emphasis on subscription to the international human rights standards in the forthcoming asean Human Rights Declaration.
She was very clear that any regional human rights instrument “must maintain international human rights standards.”
She received support from members of the civil society in Southeast
Asia when they stated that “[T]he ahrd [asean Human Rights Declaration]must fully uphold international human rights law and standards without

Teaching Human Rights: The Culture Question

289

qualification.”83 This view was elaborated in discussing the issues of “[N]ational and regional particularities” and “different backgrounds” that harked
back to Article 8 of the 1993 Bangkok Declaration.
They declared:
We are proud of the rich variety of cultures, traditions,languages and peoples in asean. This diversity can and should
enhance and deepen asean’s contribution to human rights in
the region and globally. However, we are concerned that certain
governments use the notion of “national, regional and cultural
particularities” as a code for imposing restrictions on humanrights within the ahrd. For example, when women’s bodies are
deemed as extension of the community in the name of a culture
or a tradition, women’s mobility within and outside the community tends to be restricted. Yet it is the same mobility, whichmust be protected, to allow women to access and participate intheir culture and its transformation away from those practices
which infringe on their human rights.
Reminiscent of the Asian regional ngo statement in 1993 earlier cited,
the members of the civil society in Southeast Asia made a strong demand:
The cultural relativist approach to “particularities” and“backgrounds” must be firmly rejected, as human rights are universal and the people of asean deserve the same level of respect,
protection and fulfilment of their human rights that is provided
universally and in other regions.
The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and theSoutheast Asian civil society share similar concern that asean would
formalize a stance opposite to the universality of human rights that the1993 vdpa had resolved. The manner by which the asean Human Rights
Declaration is being drafted raises the possibility that asean would revert
to Article 8 of the Bangkok Declaration, and disregard Article 5 of vdpa.
It should be emphasized however that the questions raised on the way
asean governments as a whole define human rights should not lessen theappreciation of the efforts of the women and men whose commitment tohuman rights sustains their work as members of aichr and acwc respectively. The top priority themes under the first five-year Work Plan of acwc

290

H u m a n R i g h t s E d u c at i o n i n A s i a - Pa c i f i cshow the members’ grasp of the human rights issues affecting women andchildren in Southeast Asia:84
elimination of violence against women and children; trafficking
in women and children; women and children living with andaffected by hiv and aids; social impact of climate change on
women and children; promotion and protection of the rights ofwomen and children with disabilities; asean and other instruments related to the rights of women and children; child protection system: integrative/comprehensive approach for children
in need for social protection; the right to quality education,
including Early Childhood Care, Development and Education(eccde); the right of children to participate in all affairs that affect them; women participation in politics and decision making,governance and democracy; strengthening economic rights ofwomen with regards to feminization of poverty, women’s rightto land and property; promoting implementation of international [sic], gender equality in education (textbook, curriculum, andequal access); strengthening institutional capacities of acwc;
and promotion of consultation and dialogue with stakeholders
at national and regional levels.
But how these issues will be addressed by acwc in relation to nationalsituations remains to be seen.
Popular Perceptions
The report on the temporary return of the Cyrus Cylinder to Iran in 2010
cited earlier quotes a young Iranian artist:85
It is so important for us that 2,500 years ago we had human rights in our country. We get very emotional about this.
Government and people are separate. Government think one
thing, and the people something else.
The sentiment expressed relates to the gap between the official statements of governments and also by intellectual elites and the thought andpractice of the people. The same observation is true regarding elite-es-

Teaching Human Rights: The Culture Question

291

poused Confucianism vis-à-vis the popular perception. One author explains
it in this way:86
Popular Confucianism, as it affects the man or woman in
the street, is far removed from high Confucian theory. It is perhaps no more than a vague amalgam of residual ethical beliefs
and a bias towards particular practices not amenable to rational
analysis but nevertheless prompting certain attitudes towards
the family, education, social responsibility and views of government. The family is the focus of attention and close affections,education is respected, public service [is] honoured, but government [is] viewed with a measure of suspicion. There is a concern
to keep some distance between one’s family and the state, whose
intentions cannot, in the last resort, be fully trusted. Such attitudes are neither obviously democratic nor readily authoritarian. They do, however, appear to lend themselves to the kind ofparticipatory community politics which these globalizing societies appear to spawn.
Similarly, in the dynamic business practices of the overseas
Chinese, what we see is not the high Confucianism of the intellectual elite—which is extremely stifling towards entrepreneurial initiative and innovative ideas—but the vulgar Confucianismof ordinary people, far removed from the centre of traditional
culture. A merchant father—as vulgar Confucianist—can send
his sons out to secure their own fortunes and the sons can be
extremely daring in their business dealings, knowing that should
they fail, they have the security of the extended family to fallback on. They can therefore assume risks which they might otherwise not consider. The high Confucian mandarin, on the other
hand, would not dream of allowing his sons to engage in business ventures, as even the smallest risk of failure carries the possibility of dishonouring the family.
Indeed, governments’ use of human rights for political ends does notnecessarily reflect what the people think. At the same time, intellectual
elites are not necessarily able to provide ideas that ordinary people would
subscribe to.
This is the context where human rights education has to operate. Humanrights education has to consider how ordinary people think and behave inorder to be effective. At the same time, there should also be human rights
education for those holding power in government and other institutions in292

H u m a n R i g h t s E d u c at i o n i n A s i a - Pa c i f i csociety that would bridge the gap on perception of human rights between
them and the ordinary people.
The different approaches to understanding human rights vis-à-vis culture briefly discussed in this article are supportive of ordinary people’s perspective. Instead of relying on intellectual discussion, they frame the humanrights idea within the domain of popular knowledge. Human rights should
never be understood as an elitist idea, but an idea that people encounter intheir own languages, religions, folklore, literature, in the histories of theirown peoples and societies, and in their sense of adaptation to the current
world.
Formal institutions related to human rights (including the legal system)
should develop from this popular perspective.
Final Note
Human rights as defined in United Nations instruments have long beenencountering obstacles toward fuller realization among many peoples. The
greatest challenge to full human rights realization comes from the resistanceof various sectors based on a range of reasons: from political to cultural. The
resistance comes from both institutions and individuals.
Studies87 show that there exists a serious gap between the people’s perception of human rights and the states-adopted human rights instruments.
Resistance comes from a misunderstanding of the international humanrights standards. In one survey, teachers would rather teach child rights,
according to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, than the “militant”
content of the udhr.88 This shows the problem of wrong perception of human rights as a whole.89
Some Asian government leaders find it useful to use Asian cultures as
justification for ignoring human rights. This view exploits the existence ofideas within the varied cultures of Asia that conflict with the international
human rights standards, including those practices that oppress people (suchas the caste system and buraku discrimination). Likewise, at the individuallevel, the traditional culture of respect for people of higher classes (bordering on exploitation in many cases), lead people of the lower classes to notrecognize their own freedom and thus reject human rights.
Thus culture must be reassessed to become a means to exercise/regain
freedom. A response to the situation can be cultural in form.

Teaching Human Rights: The Culture Question

293

The words for human rights in many countries in Southeast Asia combine Hindu-Buddhist-Arabic ideas. The concept of freedom is an indigenous idea that has been combined with influences from the religions andcultures that came to the shores of Southeast Asia centuries before. The
colonial experience provided the “national form” of the freedom concept as
people fight as “one nation” against foreign colonizers. One study shows that
cultures can be reinterpreted, synthesized and reappropriated in order tofind support for human rights in traditional principles.90 While some people
see the problem with Confucianism or Hinduism supporting human rights,
others see a different aspect of these influential cultural ideas that support
human rights. Others would look at indigenous concepts (or even folklore)
to show how people have already been practicing ideas within their own
specific contexts that are similar to what we now call human rights.
In all efforts at placing human rights within one’s cultural milieu, andusing culture to promote human rights, a basic rule to follow is reaffirmation. States have time and again formally stated in international documents(including agreements) that they reaffirm “their faith in fundamental humanrights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rightsof men and women.” This is a necessary premise in all their human rights
statements so as not to lose track of the basic foundation of all human rights
initiatives.
Similarly, efforts to promote human rights must reaffirm the basic principles. There is a danger of human rights being used as a political tool rather
than an end in themselves if the basic principles were not given prominence.
Experience in Asia and the Pacific would point to the Convention on the
Rights of the Child as a significant opening to reaffirm the basic principles ofhuman rights. Aside from having been widely ratified by states in Asia andthe Pacific, it also has provisions on culture. It provides for the complete
set of rights—civil, cultural, economic, political and social rights—to be enjoyed by the children.
Human rights education, on the other hand, can follow these culturerelated principle and recommendation:91
Principles
5. Human rights education in Asia-Pacific countries mustdraw on the rich cultural heritage and diversity in this region

294

H u m a n R i g h t s E d u c at i o n i n A s i a - Pa c i f i cincluding appropriate recognition of family and community
values.
Recommendations
2. Evolve appropriate and effective human rights teachingstrategies that build on the liberating elements of indigenous
concepts, folk knowledge and cultural practices.
Since values education is part of the school curriculum of many countries in Asia and the Pacific, it has been considered as one form of teachingor learning human rights. Those values that are seen as generally acceptedby people have been utilized to explain human rights. The idea is that values,
including those considered to be of traditional kind, are underlying principles of human rights. Understanding values can therefore lead to an appreciation of human rights.92 Some values (such as freedom, privacy, respect
for life) are actually human rights themselves. Human rights education cantherefore be taught either as straightforward human rights subject or integrated in core and non-core subjects in the school curriculum. Various
types of education (education for international understanding, education
for sustainable development, peace education, etc.) are vehicles of humanrights education,93 as long as human rights are deliberately presented in appropriate form.
Finally, the promotion of human rights must work with the current fastdeveloping cultural vehicles—the information and communication technologies—that affect a large section of today’s society. The current, and likely
in the future too, dominant mode of information source (including culturechange) has to be mobilized for human rights. It is a significant area of work
since it is currently affecting the world of the young generation. Humanrights education is also a future-oriented endeavor that should aim at continuity as well as change of culture using whatever effective means available.94
Culture change is constant. Human rights must therefore be reaffirmed
as well as developed within the continuing context of culture change.
This is an expanded version of the article of the author published with the title “Conflict on
Asian Values: Human Rights and Culture” in Kazue Muta, Yasumasa Hirasawa and Shinichiro
Ishida, editors, Conflict Between Justice, Gender and Local Traditions (Conflict Studies in the
Humanities Series no. 3) Osaka: Osaka University Press, 2012), pages 123-160.

Teaching Human Rights: The Culture Question

295

Endnotes
1 For a discussion on the debate that is supportive of the “Asian values” argument, see Simon Tay, “Asia’s Contribution to Human Rights,” Tan Ngoh Tiong
and Kripa Sridharan, editors, Human Rights Perspectives (Singapore: United Nations
Singapore, 1999), pages 109-112.
2 De Bary, Wm. Theodore, Asian Values and Human Rights – A Confucian
Communitarian Perspective (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1998), page 3.
3 Ibid.
4 A 1990s account on this debate is as follows:
Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore criticized the Philippine system for causing “... undisciplined and disorderly conditions which are inimical to development”. He explains that the “... Philippines has an American-style
Constitution, one of the most difficult to operate in the world. There is acomplete separation of powers between the executive, legislature, and judiciary. But a developing country faced with disorder and under-development needs a strong, honest government. The Ramos presidency will haveto prove that this democratic constitution can be made to work and thatdevelopment is achievable. Many checks and balances have been written
into the constitution to guard against abuse of power. But they must notlead to paralysis of government. At the end of the day, the discussion anddebate, the legislature must allow the executive to take hard decisions.” [Anauthor countered this view by saying that the] success of the Philippine experiment on development and democracy will prove Lee Kuan Yew wrong
and set a new thesis on development in a developing country setting.” See
Armando Doronila, “Democracy and Development,” INTERSECT, vol. 8
no. 8 September 1994, Institute on Church and Social Issues, Ateneo deManila University, Quezon city, Philippines.
In a November 1996 article in The Economist, it is reported that theconcept of democracy and development seems to be getting realized in
the Philippines. With the economic development that has happened up
to November 1996, “maybe Mr. Lee was wrong.” See “Learning from thePhilippines,” The Economist, November 16, 1996, pages 19-20.
In February 1998, President Kim Dae Jung in his inaugural address
stressed the need for democracy and economic development to be pursued simultaneously. This is obviously a reaction to the lack of democratic
process in the economic system of Korea that caused its present financial
turmoil. But in an earlier published article, it is asserted that the present
financial turmoil in Asia did not spare countries which are considered to
be democratic citing as examples Japan, Korea and Thailand. It is argued
that rather than democracy, it is accountability that is needed to sustain
the economic progress enjoyed for several decades by those countries now
suffering from financial turmoil. See Asad Latif, “Accountability, not democracy, is key,” Japan Times, December 22, 1997. One may ask, therefore,
whether countries lacking in transparency, accountability and access to information can be considered democratic when seen in the context of definition of democracy used in this paper. It is logical to conclude that thesecountries are not fully democratic since the principles of transparency, ac-296

H u m a n R i g h t s E d u c at i o n i n A s i a - Pa c i f i ccountability and access to information, among others, are basic elementsof a democratic system.
The latest word on this debate comes from a forum organized by theWorld Bank and the Asian Development Bank held in Manila in March
1998 where some economic experts said that the investment of thePhilippines in putting in place democratic systems have helped the country
weather the current financial crisis in Asia. They then urged other countries in the region to hasten democratic reforms. This report is the latest
on the democracy and development argument. See “Democracy, investor
confidence linked,” Japan Times, March 12, 1998.
Text taken from endnote number 3 of Jefferson R. Plantilla and Masaki
Yokoyama, “Development and Democracy: Philippines’ Quest for the Next Century- A Study of Social Development, Human Rights and CALABARZON,” HURIGHTSOSAKA Occasional Papers Series 2 (Osaka: Asia-Pacific Human Rights Information
Center, 1998), page 66.
5 Asian Cultural Forum on Development, Our Voice—Bangkok NGO
Declaration on Human Rights (Bangkok: ACFOD, 1993), page 99.
6 This document is formally entitled “Final Declaration of the Regional Meetingfor Asia of the World Conference on Human Rights.” See A/CONF.157/ASRM/8 A/
CONF.157/PC/59, 7 April 1993. Full text of the document available at www.unhchr.
ch/Huridocda/Huridoca.nsf/TestFrame/9d23b88f115fb827802569030037ed44?Op
endocument.
7 ASEAN, Joint Communiqué at the 26th ASEAN Ministerial Meeting (AMM)
in Singapore, 23-24 July 1993, page 3.
8 Brunei Darussalam, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore andThailand.
9 The following countries sent representatives to the conference: Afghanistan,Bahrain, Bangladesh, Brunei, Cambodia, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea,
India, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic Republic of ), Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Laos,
Malaysia, Myanmar, Nepal, Oman, Pakistan, State of Palestine, the Philippines, Qatar,
Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Syria, Thailand, Timor Leste, Turkmenistan,
United Arab Emirates, Uzbekistan, Vietnam, and Yemen. See report on the conference at www.namchrcd.com/Articles/tabid/73/Default.aspx.
10 See full text of the Tehran Declaration and Programme of
Action on Human Rights and Cultural Diversity at www.namchrcd.com/
TehranDeclarationandProgrammofAction.aspx
11 Cambodia, China, Laos, Myanmar, Thailand and Vietnam.
12 ASEAN has adopted by 2004 a plan to establish an ASEAN commission
on the promotion and protection of the rights of women and children under its
Vientiane Action Programme 2004-2010 (VAP). See TOR AICHR, page 1.
13 A/C.3/66/L.31/Rev.1 11, November 2011, available at www.un.org/en/ga/
third/66/proposals/status.shtml.
14 During the deliberation of the draft of this resolution at the Third Committee,
one step before the UN General Assembly adopted it, a concern was raised on its impact on VDPA. The report states:

Teaching Human Rights: The Culture Question297

The representative of Switzerland said it was satisfied to join in theconsensus [that approved the draft resolution], but would like to express
concern that certain aspects of the resolution could be interpreted as
calling into question what was achieved in the Vienna Declaration and
Programme of Action. All human rights were interdependent and should
receive equal emphasis, so Switzerland had difficulty recognizing the resolution’s emphasis on the right to development.
“Third Committee Approves Resolution Recommending Adoption of United
Nations Declaration on Human Rights Education and Training - Other Texts Address
Volunteers, Racist Practices, Mercenaries, Covenants, Indivisible Nature of Human
Rights, Equitable World Order, African Institute,” Sixty-sixth General Assembly,
Third Committee, 45th Meeting (PM) 17 November 2011, General Assembly, GA/
SHC/4030, in www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2011/gashc4030.doc.htm.
15 This section draws largely from the author’s Commentary on the
Presentations on Conflict between Traditional Values and International Human
Rights Standards, presented at the symposium entitled “Conflict between Asian
Values and International Human Rights Standards: The Case of Northeast Asia”
on 13 March 2010 in Osaka organized jointly by the Osaka University Center for
Excellence Program and HURIGHTS OSAKA.
16 See Jefferson Plantilla, “Elusive Promise: Transitional Justice in thePhilippines,” Human Rights Dialogue 1.8 (Spring 1997), available at www.carnegiecouncil.org/resources/publications/dialogue/1_08/articles/553.html.
17 This is based on the presentation of Professor Kim Eun-Shil of the
Department of Women’s Studies, Ewha Woman’s University (Seoul) on the historyof the human rights movement in Korea and the question raised on the treatment ofminority issues as human rights issues. The presentation was made during the symposium entitled “Conflict between Asian Values and International Human Rights
Standards: The Case of Northeast Asia.”
18 Maria Serena Diokno, “Once Again: The Asian Values Debate,” in Michael
Jacobsen and Ole Brauun, Human Rights and Asian Values (Surrey: Curzon Press),
page 87.
19 Visit HURIGHTS OSAKA website for the full text of this declaration, www.
hurights.or.jp/archives/other_documents/section1/1983/03/declaration-of-the-basic-duties-of-asean-peoples-and-governments.html.
20 Later in the same decade, in 1989, jurists in the Pacific drafted their own
human rights charter to reflect the relations between human rights and the Pacificculture, political and social systems, and economic situation. See Draft PacificCharter of Human Rights, in www.hurights.or.jp/archives/other_documents/section1/1989/03/draft-pacific-charter-of-human-rights.html.
21 At the international level, a series of world conferences occurred in the
1990s that further refined human rights in relation to many issues of global significance. From 1990 in Jomtien on education and in New York on children, to 1992
in Rio on development and environment, to 1993 in Vienna on human rights, to1994 in Cairo on population and development, to 1995 in Bejing on women, to 1996
in Istanbul on human settlement, all have human rights provisions for each of the298

H u m a n R i g h t s E d u c at i o n i n A s i a - Pa c i f i c

specific issues. The conference declarations that were adopted were important statements on how human rights should apply to particular issues.
22 Harro von Senger, “Chinese Culture and Human Rights,” in Wolfgang
Schmale, editor, Human Rights and Cultural Diversity—Europe, Arabic-Islamic
World, Africa and China (Goldbach: Keip Publishing, 1993), pages 286-293.
23 Johannes Morsink, The Universal Declaration of Human Rights: Origins,
Drafting, and Intent (Philadelphia: Pennsylvania Studies in Human Rights, 1999),
page xiv.
24 Mahatma Gandhi, “A Letter Addressed to the Director-General of
UNESCO,” in United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, editor, A Collective Approach to the Problem of Human Rights (Provisional Manuscript),(Paris: UNESCO, 1948).
25 Sebasti L. Raj, “Human Rights and Indian Cultural Values,” in Jefferson R.
Plantilla and Sebasti L. Raj, SJ, editors, Human Rights in Asian Cultures—Continuity
and Change (Delhi/Osaka: Asia-Pacific Human Rights Information Center, 1997),
page 50.
26 Justice J.S. Verma, “Human Rights Redefined: The New Universe of Human
Rights,” Journal of the NHRC, Vol. 1, 2002, 2.
27 University Grants Commission, XI Plan Guidelines for Human Rights
Education (Delhi, University Grants Commission undated), pages 2-3.
28 Wesumperuma and R. P. Berndt, editors, Religion and Culture in theDevelopment of Human Rights in Sri Lanka (Colombo: Sri Lanka Foundation, 1982)
page x.
29 The book is entitled Human Rights and Religions in Sri Lanka—A
Commentary on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, published by the Sri
Lanka Foundation in 1988.
30 Sri Lanka Foundation, Human Rights and Religions in Sri Lanka—A
Commentary on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Colombo: Sri Lanka
Foundation, 1988), pages x-xi.
31 Ibid., page 279.
32 Ta Van Tai, The Vietnamese Tradition of Human Rights (Berkeley: Instituteof East Asian Studies, University of California Berkeley, 1988), page 45.
33 Thun Saray, editor, Human Rights Through Khmer Culture (Phnom Penh:
Cambodia Human Rights and Development Association, 1997).
34 John Humphrey was the representative of the UN Secretariat to theCommission on Human Rights. He was the Director of the Human Rights Divisionin the Secretariat’s Department of Social Affairs. (See www.udhr.org/history/
Biographies/biojh.htm)
35 Morsink (op. cit, page 30) took this citation from John Humphrey, Human
Rights and the United Nations: A Great Adventure (New York: Transnational, 1984)
page 23.
36 Morsink, op. cit., page 21.
37 The discussion here of approaches to linking cultures to human rights complements similar discussion viewed from an international perspective in “Human
Rights and Cultural Values: A Literature Review,” in Plantilla and Raj, op. cit.

Teaching Human Rights: The Culture Question

299

38 Ben Hoyle, “Ancient bill of rights has a message for Tehran,” The Times, 24
April 2011.
39 Shapour Suren-Pahlav, Cyrus The Greats’ [sic] Cylinder - The World’s First
Charter of the Human Rights, text available at www.cais-soas.com/CAIS/History/
hakhamaneshian/Cyrus-the-great/cyrus_cylinder.htm. A complete translation of
the text of the cylinder is available at the British Museum website: www.britishmuseum.org/explore/highlights/article_index/c/cyrus_cylinder_-_translation.aspx.
40 Sri Lanka Foundation, op. cit., pages 115-116.
41 Ibid., page 60.
42 Dao Tri Uc, “Basic Information for Legal Research - A Case Study ofVietnam,” in Doing Legal Research in Asian Countries (Tokyo: Institute of Developing
Economies) pages 204-205.
43 Ibid., page 203.
44 See Ta Van Tai, op. cit.
45 The text of the True Decalogue cited here is from a translation from
Tagalog language by Randy David, “On being Filipino,“ Philippine Daily Inquirer,
13 June 2009, available at http://opinion.inquirer.net/inquireropinion/columns/
view/20090613-210237/On-being-Filipino.
46	  Jose Pereira, editor, Hindu Theology—Themes, Texts and Structures (Delhi:
Motilal Benarsidass Publishers Pvt. Ltd., 1976) pages 374-375.
47 Buraku Liberation and Human Rights Research Institute, The Declaration
and General Principles of the Suiheisha (Levelers Association) (Osaka: Buraku
Liberation and Human Rights Research Institute, 2002).
48 Vo Van Ai, “Human Rights and Asian Values in Vietnam,” in Michael
Jacobsen and Ole Brauun, Human Rights and Asian Values (Surrey: Curzon Press,
2000), page 93.
49 Robert Traer, Faith in Human Rights: Support in Religious Traditions for a
Global Struggle (Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press, 1991), page 158.
50 Diego II Quejada and Romelino Obinario, “Cultural Values and Human
Rights: The Philippine Perspective,” in Plantilla and Raj, op. cit., pages 192-195.
51 Binai Srinivasan, “Culture, Women and Human Rights,” in Plantilla and Raj,
op. cit., page 128.
52 Thun, op. cit., page 26.
53 Proserpina Domingo-Tapales, editor, Filipino Women and Public Policy(Manila: University Center for Women’s Studies, University of the Philippines,1992),
page 13 cited in Quejada and Obinario, op cit., page 195.
54 Quejada and Obinario, op. cit., pages 195-196; Srinivasan, op. cit., pages
107-121.
55 For a discussion on how cultural values relate to several countries in Asia,
see Plantilla and Raj, op. cit.
56 New Zealand Law Commission, “Converging Currents: Custom and Human
Rights in the Pacific,” FOCUS Asia-Pacific, December 2006 Volume 46, 8. Also available at www.hurights.or.jp/archives/focus/section2/2006/12/converging-currentscustom-and-human-rights-in-the-pacific.html. For a full discussion of the convergence between Pacific customs and human rights, see Law Commission, Converging

300

H u m a n R i g h t s E d u c at i o n i n A s i a - Pa c i f i c

Currents: Custom and Human Rights in the Pacific (Wellington: Law Commission,2006).
57 Ibid., pages 8-9.
58 Raj, op. cit., page 53.
59 Sasanka Perera, “Human Rights and the Buddhist Ethics in Sri Lanka,” inPlantilla and Raj, op. cit., page 160.
60 De Bary, op. cit., page 10.
61 Ibid., pages 155-156, 157.
62 Chung-ying Cheng, “Transforming Confucian Virtues into Human Rights:
A Study of Human Agency and Potency in Confucian Ethics,” in Wm. Theodore
de Bary and Tu Weiming, Confucianism and Human Rights (New York: Columbia
University Press, 1998), page 151.
63 Kinhide Mushakoji, “Japan and Cultural Development in East Asia:
Possibilities of a New Human Rights Culture,” in Plantilla and Raj, op. cit., page 306.
64 Ibid., page 304.
65 Yubaraj Sangroula, Concepts and Evolution of Human Rights: Nepalese
Perspective (Kathmandu: Kathmandu School of Law, 2005), page 26.
66 Rig Veda or Rg Veda is the first and earliest of the four Vedas, the foundational scriptures of Hinduism. Taken from Arvind Sharma, Hinduism and Human
Rights (New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2004), page 204.
67 Sangroula, op. cit., page 83.
68 Arvind Sharma, Hinduism and Human Rights (New Delhi: Oxford
University Press, 2004), pages 65-66.
69 Varna denotes one of the classes constituting the four-fold classification ofsociety in Hinduism into Brahmanas, Ksatriyas, Vaisyas, and Sudras. Sharma, ibid.,
page 205.
70 Jati means a group to which one belongs by birth, such birth often determining the nature of one’s occupation and the social circle to which one belongs.
Sharma, ibid., page 200.
71 Vo, op. cit., page 103.
72 Salbiah Ahmad, “Islamic Law and Women’s Rights,” in Jefferson R. Plantillaand Salbiah Ahmad, editors, Law, Jurisprudence and Human Rights (Kuala Lumpur:
SIRD and HURIGHTS OSAKA, 2011), page 325.
73 Ibid.
74 As cited by Ahmad on page 317. Citation of sources deleted.
75 Ibid., page 314.
76 Ibid., page 315.
77 Vo, op. cit., page 105.
78 ASEAN Political-Security Community Blueprint (Jakarta: ASEAN, 2009)
page 2. Text available at www.aseansec.org/18741.htm.
79 Ibid., page 6.
80 Text available at www.aseansec.org/22769.htm.
81 ASEAN, Terms of Reference of the ASEAN Commission on the Promotion
and Protection of the Rights of Women and Children (Jakarta: ASEAN, 2010), page
2. Text available at www.asean.org/ACWC.htm.

Teaching Human Rights: The Culture Question

301

82 United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights,“Seventh Official Meeting of the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on
Human Rights Address by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human
Rights,” 28 November 2011, www.ohchr.org/en/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.
aspx?NewsID=11651&LangID=e.
83 Statement of the 4th Regional Consultation of ASEAN and Human
Rights, Bali, Indonesia, 27-29 November 2011, text available at www.forum-asia.
org/?p=11769.
84 ASEAN, Second Press Release of the ASEAN Commission on the Promotion
and Protection of the Rights of Women and Children (ACWC), Solo, Indonesia, 8September 2011, www.aseansec.org/26613.htm.
85 Hoyle, op. cit.
86 C.O. Khong, “Asian Values: The Debate Revisited,” Proceedings of the First
Shizuoka Asia-Pacific Forum: The Future of the Asia-Pacific Region, 28 March 1997,
Shizuoka, Japan, text available at http://archive.unu.edu/unupress/asian-values.
html.
87 See Jefferson R. Plantilla, editor, Educational Policies and Human Rights
Awareness—Japan, India, the Philippines and Sri Lanka (Delhi: Academic Excellence,2008).
88 Lolita H. Nava, Zenaida Q. Reyes, Maria Carmela T. Mancao, Maria Victoria
C. Hermosisima, and Felicia I. Yeban, Human Rights Education in Philippine Schools:
Analysis of Education Policies and Survey of Human Rights Awareness (Manila:
Philippine Normal University, 2006), page 78.
89 This author once visited a school in Mumbai, India where a non-governmental organization (NGO) implemented an education program. When a staff was
asked if the NGO was doing human rights education, the answer was in the negative.
The NGO staff said the NGO was doing child rights education. What really is the difference between human rights education and child rights education? None, exceptthat the latter was likely more acceptable to educators in general.
90 See Plantilla and Raj, 1997, op. cit.
91 See Final Document of the Conference-Workshop on Asia-Pacific Human
Rights Education for Development (Manila, Philippines, December 15, 1995. Text
available at www.hurights.or.jp/archives/other_documents/section1/1995/03/finaldocument-of-the-conference-workshop-on-asia-pacific-human-rights-educationfor-development.html.
92 See discussion on this topic in Dialogue on Human Rights Education in
www.hurights.or.jp/archives/focus/section2/2001/03/dialogue-on-human-rightseducation.html.
93 See for example the education programs of the UNESCO-affiliated AsiaPacific Centre of Education for International Understanding. By and large, humanrights are included in these programs.
94 A survey of HURIGHTS OSAKA reveals that the internet is a poor sourceof human rights information whether in a country with highly developed and pervasive internet infrastructure (specifically, Japan) or in countries with less developed
infrastructures (such as India and the Philippines). It seems that the internet has notbeen attractive enough for the young people to get the human rights information
they need. See Plantilla, 2008, op. cit., page 246.