FX 18 – Gender, society, and human rights: a contemporary area of divergence at the Human Rights Council How to build mutual understanding and bridge differences?

Over the course of the life of the Human Rights Council, there have been certain human rights concerns that have regularly led to disagreement and division between States. These ‘issues of divergence’ have included: incitement to religious hatred/freedom of expression; racial discrimination; the right to development; almost all country-specific human rights situations; human rights defenders; and civil society space. Recent years, however, have seen a clear increase in inter-State divergence on issues related to societal or cultural norms. This clash has centred on issues around women’s rights (and ‘gender’), including sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR), sexual orientation and gender identity, and even – over recent years – children’s rights; and has tended to pit more socially-progressive worldviews against more socially-conservative ones.

Such disagreements and divisions have, of course, been present ever since the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and centre on the tension between the universality of human rights ‘regardless of [States’] political, economic and cultural systems,’ and the latitude available to States to promote and protect those rights in light of ‘national and regional particularities and various historical, cultural and religious backgrounds,’ (paragraph 5 of the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action).

This inherent tension, reflected in different parts of paragraph 5, has led to varying interpretations of international human rights law by different States (as evidenced by many of the reservations made by States parties to the international human rights treaties). It has also increasingly played out, at the Human Rights Council, in debates over whether certain practices and laws, particularly those touching on societal issues (e.g., women’s place in society), represent a violation of universal human rights or are acceptable in light of States’ ‘historical, cultural and religious backgrounds.’

Against this background, the dialogue will consider the following questions:

1. What has been the main cause of growing disagreements and divisions around societal issues at the Human Rights Council?
2. Can this more correctly be described as a clash between ‘universalists’ and ‘cultural-relativists’ or as a difference of interpretation/emphasis over paragraph 5 of the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action?
3. Do the two sides in these debates make sufficient effort to understand each other’s positions and concerns – and, on the other hand, to explain the cultural or religious basis of those positions and concerns?
4. Considering the culturally- and/or religiously sensitive nature of many of these issues at national level, are UN resolutions an effective means of driving positive change on the ground?
5. Considering the polarised nature of the debates at the Council on these societal issues, is it possible (or desirable) to find common ground on women’s rights (including SRHRs), children’s rights, and SOGI?
6. What steps might States take to secure improved dialogue and understanding on these sensitive issues of divergence?