摘要
Introduction After the birth of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights （UDHR）, ＂universal human rights＂ became a novel formal legal term both in the field of jurisprudence and in the international community. The notion of ＂universal human rights＂ indicates the ideal of ＂all human rights for all.＂ As the provision in Article 2 of the UDHR stated： ＂Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, color, sex, language, religion, politi cal or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.＂ However, some nonWestern govern ment officials and intellectuals have expressed doubts about the justifi ability of the term, which seems only to be a reflection of unique Western culture rather than Asian or Arabian ones. At the Vienna World Human Rights Conference, many heads of state said that universal human rights cannot be compatible with nonWest em culture. Even Lee Kuan Yew, the former leader of Singapore, declared in 1996： ＂Asian values are universal values. European values are European values.＇＇~ This statement is obviously a rejection of the idea that human rights are universal. In contrast, universal rights extremists and human rights activists and NGOs, such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, try to propagandize unified international human rights standards and international human rights re gimes. The debate continues from the diplomatic field to the academic field. But, in the foreseeable future,
Introduction After the birth of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights （UDHR）, ＂universal human rights＂ became a novel formal legal term both in the field of jurisprudence and in the international community. The notion of ＂universal human rights＂ indicates the ideal of ＂all human rights for all.＂ As the provision in Article 2 of the UDHR stated： ＂Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, color, sex, language, religion, politi cal or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.＂ However, some nonWestern govern ment officials and intellectuals have expressed doubts about the justifi ability of the term, which seems only to be a reflection of unique Western culture rather than Asian or Arabian ones. At the Vienna World Human Rights Conference, many heads of state said that universal human rights cannot be compatible with nonWest em culture. Even Lee Kuan Yew, the former leader of Singapore, declared in 1996： ＂Asian values are universal values. European values are European values.＇＇~ This statement is obviously a rejection of the idea that human rights are universal. In contrast, universal rights extremists and human rights activists and NGOs, such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, try to propagandize unified international human rights standards and international human rights re gimes. The debate continues from the diplomatic field to the academic field. But, in the foreseeable future,
