Problems In Declaration

Press, Volume CVIII, Issue 31774, 3 September 1968, Page 16

Problems In Declaration

The great variety in cultures of nations was not allowed for when the Declaration of Human Rights was written in 1948, and this created difficulties in understanding for some countries, the Secretary of Justice (Dr J. L. Robson) said last evening when giving the first of four lectures to be given before Human Rights Day on December 10.

Dr Robson said the declaration placed a heavy emphasis on rights and this represented what the victorious countries thought was good for others and for themselves. This idea was not favoured by some Eastern countries such as Japan, where there was a great difficulty in understanding the emphasis on rights. The Japanese understood the Idea of obligation much better, as did the Indonesians.

Calling the declaration a declaration of human responsibilities might be the next step, and the whole declaration might be refashioned to bring about a more balanced document, said Dr Robson. It had to be remembered that the events of 10 years before the declaration, which included World War 11, affected its contents, said Dr Robson. It reflected events in the Western World and ideas dominant in the minds of the victorious powers, and it was dominated by English and American powers, and in par-

ticular American intellectual initiative. If the declaration was to stand for all time, it placed too much emphasis on rights, said Dr Robson, but It was still a document of international standing and it was designed to get results. To the extent these results had been achieved the emphasis could be justified. The declaration was deceptive in its simplicity, said Dr Robson, but its simplicity concealed a mass of difficulties and problems. In censorship two considerations competed. There was the right of the individual to express himself in the way he wanted to, and there was the right of the individual to have his feelings respected.

There was a continual struggle between these two and the problem was to strike a balance. The Declaration of Human Rights did not contain a specific reconciliation. Where the balance in censorship was struck varied from age to age, and it was more in favour of freedom than ever before in New Zealand, said Dr Robson. He said he referred particularly to the

present policy of the Indecent Publications Tribunal. The historian seemed more interested in the evil done than the good. Although this approach might result in distortion, it did in fact nourish the conscience and helped men to strive for higher standards and values, said Dr Robson. These values had “dripped on the stone of evil and worn it away to some extent.” “But I would stress that we must struggle much harder than we have done up till now if the values and the standards to which we aspire are to become more firmly entrenched in our way of life,” said Dr Robson.