CULTURAL CLASH PUTS WOMEN’S RIGHTS IN THE TRASH?
Are differences between nations having an impact on their human rights policies?
By Gemma Downing
There was much discord between cultures today at the 2018 Model United Nations General Assembly on Tuesday 17th July, particularly during the debate over women’s rights. This resolution was sponsored by Canada and Germany, and some of the legislation sparked controversy among delegates. There were many votes on changes to the wording of statements, which although still progressive in terms of women’s rights, may be considered hampered by the differing views of nations.
During the opening statements, there was little mention of the issue of women’s rights beyond a few passing remarks, such as Canada’s statement about the Canadian Human Rights Act. Iran, one of the more vocal countries in the debate, made a point of noting that 62% of their female population have a secondary education; Saudi Arabia also emphasised how they were ‘taking strides in liberalising women’s rights’, citing the recent lifting of the ban on women driving.
Once they adjourned to the Ban Ki-Moon Room, the delegates began to debate the finer points of the resolution. The first point of argument was the clause which stated that the nations should be unable to accept the argument that human rights are culturally determined, and that women’s rights should not differ depending on their country or beliefs. Many countries felt that this was unjust - Iran stated that they could not accept this due to their Sharia Law having a significant effect on people’s lives and the South Korean delegate suggested that this legislation seemed to deny people their right to have their culture. The sponsors were quick to refute this idea. “We’ve got to adapt and learn from the past,” stated the German delegate, going on to say that the present laws “[needed] to be altered due to modern views.” The issue was resolved when the Chinese delegate proposed altering the wording of the statement to ‘calls upon countries to recognise culture whilst also recognising international human rights agreements’, and the majority of the floor voted in favour of this change.
Another point of discussion was one of the first proposals, relating to women having equal access and participation in all aspects of life, including employment. The controversial part of this declaration was the proposal to introduce ‘quota-systems which set aside a specific number of posts especially for women irrespective of prior experience’. Iran stated that this did not take Sharia Law into account, where women are typically expected to spend time raising their families in order to better prepare the next generation. South Korea was in agreement with this, and suggested that in order to have less of an impact on women in domestic life, the idea of quotas should be removed from the resolution. The Canadian delegate responded by asserting that this system meant that women were stuck in a cycle of housewifery, and their goal was to enable them to “work and do what they want to do.” Two proposals were made for changes to the legislation, with the United Kingdom recommending that the wording was revised to say that nations should work on ‘introducing systems that encourage equal employment of men and women’ and Russia saying that “there should be no discrimination about who is hired.” Despite some objections, the Russian proposal was voted in.
There were also some objections to the clause which stated that nations should ‘ensure that girls are included in their educational systems equally with boys up to and including Tertiary level’. Iran opposed this once more on the grounds of Sharia Law, and suggested that the legislation be altered so that it only covered up to secondary education so that it would not interfere with traditional domestic lifestyles. Initially, Bangladesh was in agreement with this, but once the Canadian delegate clarified that this did not mean tertiary education was compulsory for women, they withdrew their argument. Iran’s suggestion was voted on, but overruled.
Although the debate remained civil, there were some tensions in the room over certain alterations to the legislation. Canada and Germany seemed reluctant to budge on some of their policies, but were outvoted by the other delegates. It’s clear that the United Nations still has some way to go with its policies on women’s rights.