Chapter 7: Universalization of internationa lhuman rights norms: reassessment
One popular suggestion to reconcile different human rights perspectives is to apply the doctrine of margin of appreciation utilized by the European Court of Human Rights. A more realistic and feasible solution is to accept that religious relativism in human rights may be justifiable only where the act inimical to human rights is not a mere tradition or custom not prescribed by the actor’s religion. For example, female genital mutilation and child marriage can be terminated without violating any religious norm. Blasphemy of Islam and apostasy must also be considered in the light of the latest developments. Whenever a government invokes human rights relativism, it must prove how its non-compliance is determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and general welfare in a democratic society.
You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.
Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.
Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.
Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.