Critical Analysis_Should_Human_Rights_Be_Universal

Business Administration and Economics Department
CBE 2006: International Politics
Essay on the topic:
“A Critical Analysis: Should Human Rights Be Universal?”
Prepared by BS15028, BS15051, BS15079

A Critical Analysis: Should Human Rights Be Universal?

2 | 13
Human rights as a concept, in the form it is nowadays regarded worldwide, emerged admittedly
in a politically unstable environment. Predominantly, it was not spread until the anti-colonial
notions’ abatement and the end of World War II, with the threat of the Cold War looming on
the horizon that this notion became the focal point (Ashfari, 2015, p. 885; O’Connor, 2014;
Posner, 2014; Donnelly, 2007, p. 290). Thus, in the 20th
Century, more precisely in 1948, the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights (further referred as the UDHR) was developed by the
United Nations (UN) and signed by a plethora of countries, both Western and Eastern states
which voluntarily voted for and ratified, at an 86 percent rate, the terms and stipulations of this
pronouncement (Ashfari, 2015, p. 886; O’Connor, 2014; Donnelly, 2007, p. 288; Silverman
and Ruggles, 2007, p. 3).
The nature of human rights is described as an innate, inalienable characteristic that is available
to every individual on the planet, regardless of his or her distinctions from other people, simply
based on the inborn essence of humanity (ohchr.org, 2016a). Subsequently, in 1966, intended
to act as the legitimate and mandatory adaptation of the UDHR, the UN generated two treaties,
the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which advocates the so-
called negative human rights, meaning the restrictions imposed on the government, and the
International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), promoting the
positive rights, the required state provisions to its citizens (Mangini, 2016; Ashfari, 2015, p.
886; Donnelly, 2007, p. 288; Silverman and Ruggles, 2007, p. 4).
Whilst the specification of human rights is almost affirmed, an employment of them remains
to be the subject of debates (Gordon, 2015, p. 115). Convictions about human rights were and
persist on being divided between those who support the uniform concept of universalism and
their opponents that struggle for an existence of diversity among different cultures, otherwise
called as moral relativism, their rights and the methods by which they can be interpreted (Le,
2016, p. 203; Melé and Sánchez-Runde, 2013, p. 682). Aside from these positions, the neutral
side in this polemic was occupied by the proponents of a balanced cumulative foundation (Melé
and Sánchez-Runde, 2013, p. 682). It is considered that disputes between these stances were
reinforced with the development of globalization and the amplified interconnectedness of states
(Chin, 2015, p. 1). Similarly, Melé and Sánchez-Runde (2013) elaborate on this notion by
stressing the vital significance of finding a mutual basis among communities (p. 681).
Consequently, the focus of the present debate shifts from the contention over the actuality of


3 | 13
human rights’ universalism, and deliberates on whether they ‘should’ in effect be universal or
not (Dan, 2015, p. 151).
The Debate
From the perspective of relativists, the recognition of the 'universal' rules, as well as the
adoption of the UDHR, will lead to the acceptance of Western ideas and beliefs which failed
to define boundaries among societies, while more crucially, this ‘universality’, according to
the supporters of the adverse notion, will lead to a devaluation of communitarian morals and
loss of cultural identity in a world where the individual will lead the way and not the society in
which he or she resides, associates and consorts within (Dan, 2015, p. 151; O'Connor, 2014,
Posner, 2014). In this way, cultural relativism raises a range of questions relating to its
particular application (p. 682), due to the fact that the sense of morality is differentiated vastly
from country to country (Melé and Sánchez-Runde, 2013, p. 681). What is ratified in one
commune, may be entirely unacceptable or inhumane in another one (Melé and Sánchez-
Runde, 2013, p. 682). Furthermore, the political repression that such activities could produce
is another response of the universalists to such allegations, say the treaty outlawing inequity
against women in Saudi Arabia, that was validated in 2007, when, nevertheless, legally, they
are dependent on men in all aspects of life, claiming their religion, morals and values which
are supported by the Quran and Sharia law, can be reviewed, however, to force the Arab world
means to disrespect their human rights, therefore, it is a coin with two sides (Dan, 2015, p. 152;
O'Connor, 2014; Posner, 2014; fmreview.org, 2012; Tascón and Ife, 2008, p. 308).
Comparably to this, the incidents of female genital excision in African countries, as a standard
traditional custom, and the possibility that even radical conduct like Ku Klux Klan practices
can be reflected as a cultural expression, thus considered salient for a country’s people (Dan,
2015, p. 152; O'Connor, 2014; Tascón and Ife, 2008, p. 308; Logan, 2007, p. 37). As was
mentioned by Melé and Sánchez-Runde (2013), further issues with this concept are based on
the belief that moral relativism can be efficiently used across the world by relying on what is
considered to be right in a particular country without paying attention to the circumstances (p.
683). Additionally, these rights signify the most efficacious reaction yet conceived to an
assortment of standard hazards to human self-possession that bureaucratic nations and market
economies have caused (Donnelly, 2007, p. 287).


4 | 13
The array of explanations and, thus, realizations of the human standards add particularity to the
relativists statements, since contending notions, such as religious tolerance, restrict the
execution of the ‘universal’ human rights in a country per specific social, economic, political
and time-related circumstances (Ashfari, 2015, p. 885-886; Dan, 2015, p. 153; Hopgod, 2014,
p.71; Johansson Dahre, 2010, p. 641; Donnelly, 2007, p. 294; Logan, 2007, p. 39). Such
arguments have their roots from the post-war period of 1945, when due to the influence of the
West, the United Nations, as an international entity with a focus on advocacy of human rights,
was established (Deng Dau, 2014, p. 20). Yet, the basic needs of citizens and the foundational
principles throughout religions, the Golden Rule, per Ashfari (2015, p. 888), Donnelly (2007,
p. 290) and Dan (2015, p. 151), namely the ones backed in the ICCPR, even through these
socio-cultural disparities observed, still maintain their universal nature, mainly since
conceptions such as protection of life, essential liberties, and legal security transcend cultural
and national characteristics (Mele and Sanchez-Runde, 2013, p. 683). It is further supported,
that several human rights, involving genocide, torture, forced disappearances, the rights of
aboriginal peoples, emancipation and security of person, have reached the universal
acknowledgement in both non-Western and Western societies as people have rallied and
demanded recognition in their favour (Chandran, 2015, p. 154; Golder, 2014, p. 79; Donnelly,
2007, p. 299).
Supporters of moral universalism, which is called moral objectivism, consider the statements
of Westernized ideas erroneous as the creation of the UDHR was delegated to experts from
non-Western countries as well, and was aimed to exceed cultural diversity in order to create a
single postulate that would be able to proclaim and defend rights of every person
notwithstanding his or her origin (O'Connor, 2014; Mele and Sanchez-Runde, 2013, p. 684).
Nevertheless, consistent with Ashfari (2015) and Donnelly (2007, p. 290), albeit the input of
the “small nations” (Ashfari, 2015, p. 857) was considerable, the notions being forwarded and
approved were liable to their flawed perceptions that this concept was an invention for the
Western reality and had neither projected nor realised that they would, in the future, be largely
directed to the states they represented. Moreover, even if their participation is irrefutable, the
Global South believes the leaders guiding the process at the time, for instance, Egypt’s Nasser
or Iran’s Shah, were neglectfully circumventing their own nation’s philosophical and societal
rules and omitting their vital protections, thus they were convicted of Westernization (Ashfari,
2015, p. 859) and of a form of cultural imperialism or “hegemony” (Dan, 2015, p. 151). This,


5 | 13
ultimately led to the creation of other pronouncements, as the Bangkok Declaration in 1993 in
the South-East and the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in 1990, based on Sharia law and
perceived as another viewpoint on human rights, which is considered to have divested the
securities that an individual ought to enjoy under global human rights (Ashfari, 2015, p. 866;
Mayer, 2004, p. 354). Nonetheless, these interpretations are still strikingly similar in essence,
say the moral and religious values which protect the human dignity and the need for objectivity,
to the UDHR and henceforth, proving the universal basis and application of them (Chandran,
2015, p. 153; Donnelly, 2007, p. 284).
The multilateral universal approach to human rights has no particular definition and its
perceived as a combination of elements with the inclination to global adoption of unified
human rights (Rainer, 2013, p. 1). The idea of human rights' universality lies in the foundation
of related legislation, including the UDHR, which was established to protect these rights
(ohchr.org, 2016a). Equality in terms of the fair distribution of different types of rights was
embedded in such legal documents to guarantee that all human beings would be treated
identically, despite cultural differences (Donnelly, 2007, p. 283; Franck, 2001). Whether
everyone, or even anyone, however experiences these rights is another concern. Currently, in
unreasonably numerous states, the government not only vigorously rejects their execution, but
wholly and methodically infringes upon the most universally identified human rights, and in
all countries, substantial breaches of at least some human rights ensue on a daily basis, although
which rights are abused and at what level of seriousness fluctuate noticeably (see Figure 1 and
Figure 2) (Donnelly, 2007, p. 283).
Figure 1: States with a high level of case-count (more than 1,500 applications pending before a judicial formation)
(European Court of Human Rights, 2016).


6 | 13
By contrast, opponents of universalism insist on its incomplete framework which does not
consider peculiarities among cultures (O'Connor, 2014), which, according to another source,
impact businesses on different levels, especially, on the international scene where the
intercultural interaction takes place (Melé and Sánchez-Runde, 2013, p. 681). Moreover, the
ambiguity of the UDHR legislature, that allows governments to justify virtually anything with
this excess of inadequately defined obligations, is highlighted (Posner, 2014; Foley, 2009;
Logan, 2007, p. 44; Kennedy, 2001, p. 105). In most republics, the international human rights
of their citizens formally amount to 400, such as to employment, holiday, freedom of
expression and religious veneration that, eventually, offer no assistance to governmental
officials with regulated funds, thus only some human rights ensure protection (Posner, 2014).
Hence, the cultural and communitarian values, as well as the needs of each country are the
factors that contribute over which human rights are to be exercised (Posner, 2014). For
instance, in the United States of America (USA), the right to freedom of expression ranges
even to ‘hate speech’, while, at the same time, in Europe this is not tolerated (Posner, 2014).
Such a vagueness has led to exploitation of universal human rights by various lobbies that use
them as political vehicles according to their own priorities, which can be illustrated in the
proclamations from the National Rifle Association (NRA) in the USA that the privilege to bear
arms is a human right (Smith, 2016; Melé and Sánchez-Runde, 2013, p. 685). Consequently,
relativists contradict the universal appropriateness of these rights based on the fact that they
may be employed in cases of political authority, manipulation and force (Johansson Dahre,
2010, p. 646).
Figure 2: Human Rights Risk Index in 2014 (Verisk Maplecroft, 2013).


7 | 13
For instance, the issues bounded to gender discrimination and tortures, specifically, across the
Arab civilization, are still affecting the universal human rights as well as considered to be far
from the international norms (Franck, 2001). Referring to the analysis that was made by Franck
(2001), the Islamic order breaches what was already recognized at the global level. The tension
in this region was additionally intensified by a militant group that is known as Islamic State
and which is currently involved in extremist acts that violate various kinds of human rights
(hrw.org, 2016a). Apart from such an exposure on the global stability, questions related to the
human rights infringement were raised in the United States as well (hrw.org, 2016b; Kerry,
2015). The fluctuations in this respect were caused by the newly elected President of America,
Donald Trump, due to his statements that were associated with racism and prejudices against
many, including women (hrw.org, 2016b). In this term, specifically, the prevalent unease lies
not on what the future president might do in office, but to the outcomes of the frictions that
have been incited during his presidential campaign (Carpenter, 2016). Trump’s triumph might
bolster not only extremist parties against minority groups such as Muslims, African-
Americans, participants of the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) society and
Hispanics, but also leftist radicals against supporters of the future president and other right-
wing personalities (Carpenter, 2016). Lastly, it is supported by the challengers of universality
of human rights that these declarations are endorsed by elitist and affluent groups of people,
men and women from both Western and non-Western nations, such as politicians, legislators,
scholars, and a few individuals from Non-Governmental Organizations, as the Human Rights
Watch (Tascón and Ife, 2008, p. 319; Kennedy, 2001, p. 105).
Table 1: Expected Human Rights Infringements by the Future President of the USA, Donald Trump (Carpenter, 2016;
United Nations, 2016).


8 | 13
Likewise, it is stated that it is them that effectively are in command of the outlines and
prioritizations of these rights for the rest of the world in addition to being the ones world-
widely heard and accepted in the related academic literature, thus rendering this a study of the
mighty about the powerless. (Hopgod, 2014, p. 73; Tascón and Ife, 2008, p. 319; Kennedy,
2001, p. 105). For instance, the Human Rights Watch recognizes that developing of the Third-
World countries, such as Laos or Madagascar, cannot conform to all the rights recorded in the
treaties that were ratified, therefore, they opt and rank the ones deemed worthy, essentially
dictating the way that governments around the world ought to operate, often even affronting
Western misinformed civilians who have contributed financially to the NGO (Posner, 2014).
Therefore, the question arises of how can the Human Rights Watch or its contributors
understand to the greater extent the priorities needed per country than the people residing in
them (Posner, 2014). The notion supporting the universality of human rights is to promote a
neutral structure, instead of favouring any specific value or culture, as well as to obtain aid
from political and non-political actors in these terms, not to be exploited by them (Johansson
Dahre, 2010, p. 643). As an example, human rights in India are seen as an inherently politicized
language, thereby, many are sceptical about them for this particular reason (Hopgod, 2014, p.
71).
Findings
The disagreement relating to the origin of human rights and the legal bodies that enforce them
seems to be endless (Baylis et al, 2014, p. 475). While one side affirms the West's influence in
the human rights evolution, another party asserts that this development was based on a
voluntary participation (p. 475), consequently, the thorough and complex approach is required
to estimate this question (Baylis et al, 2014, p. 476).
The foregoing evaluation of cultural relativism and universalism, also, establishes the
differences between both sides and emphasizes the growing ambiguity in relation to the human
rights enforcement (Lower, 2013). Based on Franck's suggestions (2001), issues regarding
cultural distinctions can be eliminated efficiently with the help of combined forces across the
planet. Whilst, at the same time, in accordance to Ramcharan (No date), while approaching
human rights, cultural attributes need to be considered as a modification to practical
implementation and an addition to the general rights (p. 423) that should be defended all over
the world (p. 428). The author emphasizes that cultural relatedness does not contradict to the


9 | 13
existence of universal principles but rather strengthens and accompanies them (Ramcharan, No
date, p. 426).
While human rights are universal in character, it is now largely accepted that their
manifestation and execution in the national context should continue being each government’s
jurisdiction, meaning that the predominant multifaceted variation of problems of different
sociocultural and economic nature, and the distinctive belief systems should be taken into
consideration (Dan, 2015, p. 154). This national competence in this regard not only originates
from the doctrines of autonomy of states, but also is a logical outcome of the beliefs of
independence as well as acquiescence with globally outlined standards, including varied
mechanisms of international actions, such as multilateral, bilateral and transnational (Dan,
2015, p. 154). In spite of the fact that the UDHR has drawbacks, mostly, in terms of the global
application, the major significance lies in objectives of human rights and their impact on the
protection of people across all regions of the world (O'Connor, 2014). Recognition of human
rights by states needs an adherence of linked laws as well as an application of them on the
domestic scale (ohchr.org, 2016c). In case the inner governance failed to fulfil its
responsibilities, the external forces, such as the Human Rights Council, will be involved
(ohchr.org, 2016b; ohchr.org, 2016c).
In addition to the preceding justifications, in terms of acceptance the universalism of human
rights, it is also crucial to take into account today's blurring of frontiers among societies and
their interdependency which were induced by the deeply globalized world (Melé and Sánchez-
Runde, 2013, p. 682). Furthermore, trans-border movements of people have given a rise to the
growing number of weak, defenceless and vulnerable non-citizen populace (Hopgod, 2014, p.
70). Globalization "from above" is stripping workers off their rights and societal protection,
globalization "from below', on the other hand, has formed a growing worldwide civic society,
while claims that international society is forming new rules that permit aggressive intervention
to halt any breach of fundamental and essential human rights are emphasized (Hopgod, 2014,
p. 70; Johansson Dahre, 2010, p. 650). Since, therefore, human rights are a global phenomenon,
and prompt but also long-term universal change in favour of the humane is the goal, then the
discourse of human rights should disentangle itself from politicization and embrace the peoples
voice (Hopgod, 2014, p. 67).


10 | 13
References
Afshari, R. (2015) Relativity in Universality: Jack Donnelly’s Grand Theory in Need of
Specific Illustrations. Human Rights Quarterly, 37(4), p.854-912.
Baylis, J. et al (eds) (2014) The Globalization of World Politics An Introduction to
international relations. 6th edition. Oxford, Oxford University Press.
Carpenter, M. (2016) What a Trump presidency means for the world – The Maplecroft
reaction. [online] maplecroft.com. Available from: https://maplecroft.com/portfolio/
new-analysis/2016/11/09/what-trump-presidency-means-world-maplecroft-reaction/
[Accessed 20th November 2016].
Chin, J. J. L. (2015) Moral Relativism vs Universalism [online]. Springer International
Publishing. Available from: http://link.springer.com/referenceworkentry/10.1007/978-3-
319-05544-2_299-1?no-access=true#page-1 [Accessed 9th November 2016].
Dan, C. (2015) The Universality of Human Rights: Contending Debates. Global Journal for
Research Analysis, 4(7), pp.151-155.
Deng Dau, S. M. (2014) The Dichotomy between Cultural Relativism and Universalism: A
Case for Universalism in the Application of International Human Rights Standards in
Post-colonial Africa [online]. Nova Scotia, Dalhousie University. Available from:
http://dalspace.library.dal.ca:8080/bitstream/handle/10222/54033/Dau-Santino-LL.M-
LAW-August-2014.pdf?sequence=1 [Accessed 13th November 2016].
Donnelly, J. (2007) The Relative Universality of Human Rights. Human Rights Quarterly,
29(2), p.281-306.
European Court of Human Rights, (2016) Analysis of Statistics 2015. Statistics by Year.
[online] Strasbourg: Council of Europe, p.8. Available from:
http://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Stats_analysis_2015_ENG.pdf [Accessed 20th
November 2016].
fmreview.org (June 2012) Islam, human rights and displacement. Forced Migration Review
[online]. Available from: http://www.fmreview.org/sites/fmr/files/FMRdownloads/e
n/FMRpdfs/Human-Rights/human-rights.pdf [Accessed 18th November 2016].
Franck, T. M. (2001). Are Human Rights Universal?. Foreign Affairs [online]. Available
from: https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/afghanistan/2001-01-01/are-human-rights-
universal [Accessed 9th November 2016].
Foley, C. (2009) Beware human rights imperialism. [online] theguardian.com. Available
from: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2009/jun/23/human-rights-
imperialism-western-values [Accessed 20th November 2016].


11 | 13
Gordon, J. S. (28 December 2015). Human Rights and Cultural Identity. De Gruyter [online].
Available from: https://www.degruyter.com/downloadpdf/j/bjlp.2015.8.issue-2/bjlp-
2015-0021/bjlp-2015-0021.xml [Accessed 20th November 2016].
Golder, B. (2014) Beyond redemption? Problematising the critique of human rights in
contemporary international legal thought. London Review of International Law, 2(1),
p.77-114.
Hopgod, S. (2014) Challenges to the Global Human Rights Regime: Are Human Rights Still
an Effective Language for Social Change?. SUR - International Journal on Human
Rights, 11(20), p.67-75.
hrw.org (2016a). Iraq. Human Rights Watch [online]. Available from:
https://www.hrw.org/middle-east/n-africa/iraq [Accessed 10th November 2016].
hrw.org (9 November 2016b). US: Trump Should Govern With Respect for Rights. Human
Rights Watch [online]. Available from: https://www.hrw.org/news/2016/11/09/us-
trump-should-govern-respect-rights [Accessed 9th November 2016].
Johansson Dahre, U. (2010) There are no such things as universal human rights – on the
predicament of indigenous peoples, for example. The International Journal of Human
Rights, 14(5), p.641-657.
Kennedy, D. (2002) International human rights movement: part of the problem?. Harvard
Human Rights Journal, 15(1), p. 101-127.
Kerry, J. F. (2015). Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2015 Secretary's Preface.
U.S. Department of State [online]. Available from: http://www.state.gov/j/drl/rls/hrrpt/
humanrightsreport/index.htm#wrapper [Accessed 9th November 2016].
Le, N. (18 May 2016). Are Human Rights Universal or Culturally Relative?. Taylor &
Francis Online [online]. Available from: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/
10.1080/10402659.2016.1166756?journalCode=cper20 [Accessed 10th November
2016].
Lower, M. (1 December 2013). Can and Should Human Rights Be Universal?. E-
International Relations Students [online]. Available from: http://www.e-
ir.info/2013/12/01/can-and-should-human-rights-be-universal/ [Accessed 9th
November 2016].
Logan, William S. (2007) Closing Pandora’s Box: Human Rights Conundrums in Cultural
Heritage Protection. In: Silverman, Helaine and Ruggles, Fairchild D. (eds) Cultural
Heritage and Human Rights, 1st edition. New York, Springer-Verlag, p.33-52.


12 | 13
Mangini, R. (2016) Spotlights on Health and Rights: Human Rights - Exam. [online]
Healthandrights.ccnmtl.columbia.edu. Available from: http://healthandrights.ccnmtl.
columbia.edu/human_rights/exam.html [Accessed 20th November 2016].
Mayer, Elizabeth (2004) Shifting Grounds for Challenging the Authority of International
Human Rights Law: Religion as a Malleable and Politicized Pretext for Governmental
Noncompliance with Human Rights. In: András Sajó (ed) Human Rights with Modesty:
The Problem of Universalism, 1st edition. Netherlands, Springer, p.349-374.
Melé, Domènec and Sánchez-Runde, Carlos (2013) Cultural Diversity and Universal Ethics
in a Global World. Journal of Business Ethics, 116(4), p.681-687.
O'Connor, T. (11 February 2014). Debating Human Rights – universal or relative to culture?.
DevelopmentEducation.ie [online]. Available from: http://www.developmenteducation
.ie/blog/2014/02/debating-human-rights-universal-or-relative-to-culture/ [Accessed 9th
November 2016].
ohchr.org (2016a). What are human rights?. United Nations Human Rights Office Of The
High Commissioner [online]. Available from: http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ISSUES
/Pages/WhatareHumanRights.aspx [Accessed 10th November 2016].
ohchr.org (2016b). Human Rights Bodies. United Nations Human Rights Office Of The High
Commissioner [online]. Available from:
http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/Pages/HumanRightsBodies.aspx [Accessed 10th
November 2016].
ohchr.org (2016c). International Human Rights Law. United Nations Human Rights Office Of
The High Commissioner [online]. Available from:
http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/InternationalLaw.aspx [Accessed
10th November 2016].
Posner, E. (2014) The case against human rights. [online] theguardian.com. Available from:
https://www.theguardian.com/news/2014/dec/04/-sp-case-against-human-rights
[Accessed 20th November 2016].
Rainer, A. (2013) The Universalism of Human Rights [online]. Netherlands, Springer.
Available from: http://www.springer.com/gp/book/9789400745094 [Accessed 13th
November 2016].
Ramcharan, B.G. (No date) How Universal Are Human Rights? [online]. The Library of the
Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung. Available from: http://library.fes.de
/pdf-files/ipg/ipg-1998-4/debate.pdf [Accessed 10th November 2016].
Silverman, Helaine and Ruggles, Fairchild D. (eds) (2007) Cultural Heritage and Human
Rights. 1st edition. New York, Springer-Verlag, p.3-29.


13 | 13
Smith, S. (2016) Gun ownership is not a human right. [online] theguardian.com. Available
from: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/oct/29/gun-ownership-is-not-
a-human-right [Accessed 20th November 2016].
Tascón, Sonia and Ife, Jim (2008) Human Rights and Critical Whiteness: Whose
Humanity?. The International Journal of Human Rights, 12(3), p.307-327.
Un.org. (2016) Universal Declaration of Human Rights | United Nations. [online] Available
from: http://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/ [Accessed 20th
November 2016].
Verisk Maplecroft, (2013) Human Rights Risk Index 2014. [image] Available from:
https://maplecroft.com/themes/hr/ [Accessed 20th November 2016].

Critical Analysis_Should_Human_Rights_Be_Universal

Recomendados

Recomendados

Más contenido relacionado

La actualidad más candente

La actualidad más candente (19)

Destacado

Destacado (17)

Similar a Critical Analysis_Should_Human_Rights_Be_Universal

Similar a Critical Analysis_Should_Human_Rights_Be_Universal (20)

Critical Analysis_Should_Human_Rights_Be_Universal