Abstract

Nowadays, the universal nature of main international treaties on human rights is being called into question by certain countries with increasing frequency. At present time, representatives of some Asian, African and Near Eastern countries state that the contemporary international law of human rights is more oriented to Western countries, which had accepted Christian religion values and extensively fell under the influence of Roman law. This point of view is worth noticing, despite the fact that Western scholars and experts permanently assert that the international law as a whole and the law of human rights in particular are not a product of the West only, but are a global one.

This paper is devoted to searching for an answer to the question of to what extent positions of the both parties have been proved and what the international community should do to find a common ground between the opposite camps in this issue. It also determines the nature and peculiarities of the International Law of Human Rights as part of the universal international legal system, reveals the merits and defects of “Universalism” and “Cultural Relativism” conceptions and shows that the effective implementation of international legal norms on human rights is impossible without taking into consideration the peculiarities of historical and cultural development as well as ethnical structure of different countries, which determine specific character and content of national archetypes of the attitude to the law.

 

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.