Universality and Particularity of Human Rights: a Vietnamese Buddhist Viewpoint

Human Rights in Southeast Asia Series 1 14 BREAKING THE SILENCE UNIVERSALITY AND ParticuLARITY OF HUMAN RIGHTS: A Vietnamese BUDDHIST VIEWPOINT Vo Van Ai The debate on universality and particularity of human rights in Southeast Asia is overshadowed by the “Asian Values” premise which contends that human rights are not universal, but “Western-imposed” or contingent on national cultural and religious particularities. Taking Vietnam as a starting point, the author argues that human rights are a fundamental and an ancient feature of Asian culture, rooted in a cultural heritage many thousands of years old The debate on universality and particularity of human rights inevitably raises the spectre of “Asian values” – the concept advanced by a group of Southeast Asian leaders in the 1990s and formally enshrined in the “Bangkok Declaration” to the UN World Conference on Human Rights in 1993. The concept collapsed after a financial crisis in 1997 caused Southeast Asia’s economic bubble to burst; but it still haunts international fora, generally as a justification for escaping international human rights commitments. This paper considers this argument from a Vietnamese perspective, examining both official and popular perceptions of human rights, the conflicting imperatives between the official government human rights discourse and internal policies, and the relevance of the cultural heritage – especially Buddhism – in the development of a contemporary, dynamic human rights culture in Vietnam and Southeast Asia in general. Universality and Particularity of Human Rights: A Vietnamese Buddhist Viewpoint 15 1. Universality vs. Particularity of Human Rights When considering universality and particularity of human rights, two false premises must be exposed. Firstly, that recognizing the particularity of human rights justifies its derogation to internationally-recognized human rights standards and norms. In fact, the 1948 United Nations Universal Declaration on Human Rights (UDHR) enshrines a set of political, social, cultural and economic rights that are both universal and indivisible, and any State acceding to UN instruments has a binding legal obligation not only to uphold and promote these rights, but also to incorporate their provisions into domestic law. Ironically, many of the States that most vocally challenge the universality of human rights today are signatories of UN human rights covenants. Vietnam, for example, has acceded to seven core UN human rights treaties, yet it continues to publicly reject universal principles and declares that it has its own particular concept of human rights. The second false premise is that human rights are a “Western concept” imposed from the outside and used as “the Trojan horse to insert Western cultural power into non- Western contexts” as Monshipour, et al (2003) have observed.1 On the contrary, I believe that human rights are an ancient feature of Asian culture, rooted in a cultural heritage many thousands of years old. In Vietnam, as this paper will examine, Confucianism and Buddhism are the two pillars of this original human rights concept, which was incorporated into Vietnamese laws and daily life from a very early date. 2. The Rise and Fall of Asian Values Articulated principally by ASEAN leaders such as Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad of Malaysia and Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore, and supported by countries such as the Philippines, Indonesia, China, Burma and Vietnam, the “Asian values” premise contended that Asians do not aspire to individual freedoms like people in the West; that Asians traditionally place society above self, family, clan or dynasty; that they value duties as opposed to rights, prosperity more than freedom, single party rule over pluralism. Singapore, with its high income rate and lack of public contestation, was put forward as proof that Asians accept authoritarian rule because it is the key to economic success. In fact, for the fast-growing economies of the “Asian tigers”, the values argument was a way of challenging what they perceived to be Western political and economic hegemony, and asserting their independence. Vietnam entered the “Asian values” debate at the 1993 Bangkok Regional Preparatory Meeting to the UN World Conference on Human Rights. Although it had formally accepted the principles of universality by acceding to UN human rights instruments such as the International Covenants on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) since 1982, Vietnam’s delegation nevertheless stated at Bangkok that “there exists no ready-to-serve formula for human rights that can be imported or, worse still, imposed successfully from outside”. Along with 49 Asian countries, Vietnam signed 16 Vo Van Ai the Bangkok Declaration which emphasized the principles of “non-interference in the internal affairs of States, and the non-use of human rights as an instrument of political pressure” and stressed the “significance of national and regional particularities and various historical, cultural and religious backgrounds”. Implicitly, the Declaration’s signatories demanded for a re-drafting of the UDHR to accommodate the Asian exception to universal rule. Vietnam’s adherence to the “Asian values” concept reflects a paradox, to say the least. Whilst Vietnam denounces the incompatibility of “Western-imposed” human rights with Vietnamese cultural traditions, its own political system is based on a fundamentally Western ideology – Marxism-Leninism - to the exclusion of all other forms of political expression or thought. Indeed, the monopoly of this doctrine, imported and completely self-imposed, is enshrined in Vietnam’s 1992 Constitution: “The Vietnamese Communist Party, acting upon the Marxist-Leninist doctrine and Ho Chi Minh thought, is the force leading the State and society”, (Article 4). Although the Bangkok Declaration was the first time Vietnam used cultural relativism as a conceptual argument to challenge the West, the Government has long held its own perception of human rights which differs markedly from the universal view. 3. Human Rights and Independence The idea of human rights was introduced to Vietnam at the beginning of the 20th century, initially by way of the French, who initiated Vietnamese intellectuals to the works of Voltaire, Montesquieu and Jean-Jacques Rousseau, to the 1789 Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen, and later through translations of Western thinking published in China and Japan. Perceived as a means of emancipating the individual, human rights became a central theme in the Vietnamese movement for independence from French colonial rule in the 1910-20s. The first Vietnamese intellectuals to seriously examine this concept were Phan Boi Chau and Phan Chu Trinh, both of whom advocated “the right to life, freedom and human rights for the Vietnamese people”, although they differed on the methods by which this should be achieved. Phan Chu Trinh adopted a non- violent, legalist position, contending that non-violent advocacy within French colonial structures could bring about human rights through a process of education and reform. Phan Boi Chau chose the path of resistance, firmly convinced that human rights could never be achieved under the French colonialists’ obscurantist policies which reduced the Vietnamese people to a state where they “have ears but are forbidden to hear, have eyes but are forbidden to see, have arms and legs but are forbidden to move, have minds but are forbidden to think.” 2 His vision of human rights was universal, and he believed that one day “human rights will rise like a golden sun, flooding the world with light”. Universality and Particularity of Human Rights: A Vietnamese Buddhist Viewpoint 17 Inspired by this example, many Vietnamese patriots adopted the human rights discourse in the 1930s to denounce political repression under the colonial regime. Articles calling for civil and political rights such as press freedom, worker rights and the right to set up trade unions were published in independent newspapers such as Tiêng Dan (The People’s Voice), Tiêng Chuong Re (The Cracked Bell), Dân Chung (The People) in Central and Southern Vietnam. A particularly forceful Petition denouncing the inhuman detention conditions and calling for the release of political prisoners was addressed to the French Overseas Territories’ Inquiry Commission by a prominent revolutionary figure, Huynh Thuc Khang in 1937.3 The Vietnamese Communists also adopted the discourse of human rights during this period, but primarily as a weapon to attack the French colonialists or to attract popular support for the international communist cause. Their prime objective was the establishment of a communist state, as can be seen by the peasants’ demonstrations in Nghe An and Ha Tinh provinces in 1930-31 which were portrayed as the “Nghe Tinh Soviets”.4 Ideologically, the Vietnamese Communists rejected the idea that human rights belong to all people on the basis of human nature. They believed that rights were contingent on the class background, political opinions and revolutionary contribution of each individual, and that they reflected the objective economic and social conditions of each society. As Marxists, they considered civil and political rights as “bourgeois”. As pragmatists, they perceived human rights in general as cumbersome impediments. The people’s ultimate right, in the Vietnamese communists’ view, was the right to national independence. Consequently, the establishment of an independent communist state became synonymous

Load more