Exemplar Essay On Similarities And Conflict Between The Universal Declaration Of Human Rights And The Charter Of The United Nations To Write After

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Charter of the United Nations are all supporting documents that were drafted by exists and technocrats drawn from all active member states and subsequently unanimously upheld as binding treaties. The major mission as contained in the two documents is to emphasize on the recognition of every human being as equal and insistence on a peaceful and harmonious existence. Although most of the information as contained in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Charter of the United Nations seems to converge, some articles and chapters are implicitly conflicting. Safe from the similarities, the disputes between the two documents has brought out numerous controversies especially when it comes to acceptance and implementation of the two documents as instruments of peace.
The preamble and opening remarks in both the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Charter of the United Nations have one common message: emphasis on the need for all member states to uphold peace as a fundamental pillar for harmonious existence. The Charter of the United Nations Rights for instance, while refereeing to the first and second world wars, acknowledges that the scourge of war has yielded constant sorrow to humanity. The Universal Declaration of Human similarly recognizes, in the preamble, that the disregard and contempt for human rights, especially by member states, has been the primary source of brutal acts that have continuously outraged the conscience of humankind.
The common message in the preamble of the two documents is thus one that reminds members states of the various atrocities and crimes against humanity that have been brought about by animosity and deteriorating peace between countries of the world. The First World War, as well as the Second World War, was as a result of failure to apply diplomat approaches meant for amicable conflict resolution. It is thus evident that all countries that pledge allegiance and adherence to The Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Charter of the United Nations willingly accept to be ambassadors of peace in the world. Peace is what will prevent states at the conflict from resulting to solutions that are inhuman or likely to yield misery to innocent civilians.
Another similarity can easily be pointed out between chapter six articles 55 of the Charter of the United Nations and the article two of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Chapter six article 55 of the Charter of the United Nations insists on the respect for the principle of equal rights and forbids any segregation or discrimination of citizens from member states by their religion, sex, skin color, economic level, illiteracy levels or whatsoever. In the same regard, article two of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights explicitly states that each human being is entitled to all the right and freedoms as stated in the declaration and forbids any discrimination of any status. In fact, it further forbids sitting governments from discriminating citizens by their political inclination, jurisdiction or territorial status.
Despite the similarities, a comparison between The Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Charter of the United Nations reveals some conflicting information as contained in the chapters and articles of the two documents. Article twenty of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that every human being has a sovereign right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association and thereby, no individual has power or authority to compel another person to belong to any organization. According to this article, non-membership of any organization thus implies that one is not a party to any accords, agreements or treaties meant for members and subsequently exonerated from effects of such binding conclusions.
Contrary to article twenty, chapter one, article two in section of the Charter of the United Nations states that while executing its mandate, the Secretariat of the United Nations shall make sure that non-member States to the United Nations comply and act in accordance with the set principles as laid down in the charter so as to maintain international peace and security. Section two of Article six thus implies that when implementing international peace and security policies, states that are not affiliated with the United Nations shall be compelled to abide by such policies. Such compulsion is in contravention of article twenty of the Declaration of Human Rights which grants freedom of association to every state. Implementation of section two, therefore, means that all nations of the world are members of the United Nations by default when it comes to matters relating to international security and peace in the world.
The impact of the conflict on freedom of association as highlighted above is that it has yielded more misery and suffering to humankind as well as jeopardized efforts to have a peaceful world. Somalia, for instance, is not a party to the Rome Statute that established the International Criminal Court (ICC). While citing article twenty of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to which it is a party, the president of Somalia has from time and again insisted that criminal charges can only be instigated against him if he is within the territorial boundaries of states that are members of the United Nations. Provided the president or any other Somali citizen implicated in the civil conflicts remains within the territorial boundaries of Somalia, the United Nations have no powers to initiate any criminal proceedings against the said person. As a result, any attempts by the United Nations to compel the Somalia regime to abide by the peace and security policies have always been rebuffed by loyal forces allied to the sitting government in the administration. The result is that the innocent Somali citizens have been subjected to endless suffering yet no humanitarian support can be accorded to them.