ARE HUMAN RIGHTS TRULY UNIVERSAL FOR ALL SOCIETIES? AN EXAMINATION OF ASIAN VALUES AND CONTEMPORARY HUMAN RIGHTS IN CAPITAL PUNISHMENT

Abstract

Since the 1990s, the Asian values debate continues to be denounced as a political instrument devoid of any cultural significance of collectivistic traditions by various human rights defenders and scholars. As a result, contemporary human rights instruments, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, remain the dominant narrative of international law and political systems today. The thesis poses the following question: Are Asian values compatible with universal human rights as expressed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights? I will answer this question with reference to capital punishment, specifically, how a complementary relationship justifies the imposition of the death penalty based on the Asian values framework. This thesis argues that the concept of Asian values is compatible with universal human rights norms based on the idea of an overlapping consensus. Asian values are consistent with contemporary human rights in terms of its common aspirations for human dignity and individual well-being through the community insofar as rights and liberties are claimed through the state. The overlapping consensus argument illustrates the common principles and practices between both discourses relative to the protection of individual dignity and freedoms. It demonstrates the equal significance of the community in pursuing and realizing the good life in both a communitarian-centric and individualistic society. The overlapping consensus argument remains relevant and applicable in the context of imposing and retaining capital punishment in Asian societies. The death penalty is justified by its intention of protecting the community’s sense of security which overlaps with universal human rights norms in protecting individual dignity and wellbeing within an established society.