India can be justifiably proud of having got 173 of the 191 votes to become a member of the new 47-member United Nations Human Rights Council, especially since voting was conducted by secret ballot. But will this body, which replaces the ineffective UN Human Rights Commission, be ‘a strong, effective and efficient’ protector of fundamental freedoms across the world? Unlikely, considering the human rights credentials of some of those elected along with India — China, Cuba, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. But it is some comfort that the newer paragons, Iran and Venezuela, failed to get elected. There is little to distinguish the new body from the old, other than the fact that its members are elected by secret ballot. Proposals to exclude countries under UN sanctions for rights violations and decisions by two-thirds vote were rejected.
While we do live in an era where liberal democracy appears to be a growing trend, there are those — like China, Cuba or Iran — who question its universality. India may have problems with its human rights record, but at least it has a system that recognises that freedom of speech, association or religion mean the same thing in New Delhi as they do in Amsterdam, Dublin or Osaka. That cannot be said of some countries that not only refuse to give its citizens the common fundamental rights we take for granted, but are guilty of egregiously adopting policies that persecute minorities, women, or those who do not accept one-party rule.
But the fault is not just of ideologically-driven regimes but democracies that tend to view human rights in other parts of the world cynically. Switzerland, for example, has nominated a person to the sub-commission on the promotion and protection of human rights, a group associated with the new council which views America is an ‘imperialist dictatorship’ and Cuba and Libya the greatest upholders of human rights. Yes, things can be strange.