With the rise in diversity and the focus on the cross-cultural dialogue as opposed to furthering the colonialist policies of foisting European culture on other communities, the importance of acknowledging cultural values has risen. However, in some cases, due to drastically different perspectives on the ideas of justice, social hierarchy, and the related notions, some cultural values may turn out to be in partial or complete disagreement with the UN Declaration of Human Rights. Although acknowledging the rights of racial and ethnic minorities for self-actualization and the development of a cultural identity must be respected, the essential principles of human rights as stated in the UN Declaration must be adhered to in order to retain fairness and humanity in addressing people’s needs.
The current UN principles of human rights have been built based on the existing experience of supporting and protecting vulnerable minority groups., which is why they must be adhered to at all costs. Using the standards of the “universal and inalienable; indivisible; interdependent and interrelated” as its core values, the UN has established its human rights standards as the essential principles of fairness that allow every voice to be heard (United Nations Population Fund, 2005). At the same time, in case of discrepancies between the perception of human rights as they are seen by the UN and how they are perceived by members of a specific culture, the opportunity for the latter to represent their point of view should be provided. Nevertheless, the UN has come a long way in ensuring that the needs of all population groups, including those of ethnic or cultural minorities, are fully met. The universality of the rights in question allows applying them to every population type, ethnic group, or a specific individual, which suggests that the UN standards for human rights should remain the main arbiter in the situations suggesting a conflict of needs.
However, there are instances when the traditions and values established in specific cultures clash violently with the modern perception of human rights. The specified discrepancy becomes particularly apparent when the health, life, or dignity of an individual is at stake in the debate regarding the choice of cultural values over UN standards. For example, the tradition of performing a female genital mutilation (FGM) on girls has been rightfully defined by the UN as a barbaric practice and overwhelmingly condemned as illegal, which is an entirely rightful and reasonable position (Nabaneh & Muula, 2019). In the described case, the regulations of the UN override cultural values and traditions. Moreover, it is the responsibility of the UN to contribute to the fight against FGM and the related cultural traditions that are fundamentally in conflict with the basic premise of human dignity and human rights.
Therefore, to ensure that the needs of every vulnerable population are addressed and that the dignity and human rights of all participants of the dialogue are recognized, the UN should follow its established standards. Built specifically to protect vulnerable populations and support those in need, protecting them from colonialist policies and oppression, these principles must be upheld at all costs. Otherwise, the threat of failing to recognize the humanity of all people without exception may emerge. While the UN must approach each culture individually and respect the cultural practice and traditions of specific ethnic groups, the foundational standards for promoting justice and protecting vulnerable populations by enforcing their human rights must remain in place.
Reference
Nabaneh, S., & Muula, A. S. (2019). Female genital mutilation/cutting in Africa: A complex legal and ethical landscape. International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics, 145(2), 253-257.
United Nations Population Fund. (2005). Human rights principles. Web.