A Comparative Analysis of Human Rights Frameworks: UDHR, UIDHR, and the Cairo Declaration
By Ghulam Mohiyuddin, New age Islam
23 April 2025
Human rights are commonly understood as universal principles that safeguard the dignity, freedoms, and well-being of individuals. However, interpretations of these rights can vary depending on cultural, philosophical, and religious foundations. This article, written with help from AI, examines and compares three influential human rights documents:
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) by the United Nations (1948)
The Universal Islamic Declaration of Human Rights (UIDHR) by the Islamic Council of Europe (1981)
The Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam (CDHRI) by the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (1990)
Each document reflects a different vision of human rights shaped by its underlying legal, moral, and spiritual framework.
1. Philosophical and Legal Foundations
UDHR:
Rooted in secular liberalism, post-WWII humanism, and natural law.
Emphasizes universal dignity and inherent human rights regardless of religion, race, or gender.
Enshrines individual autonomy and equality as inalienable.
UIDHR:
Based on Islamic Shari’ah as its moral and legal foundation.
Views rights as granted by God (Allah) and framed within religious duties.
Issued by Islamic scholars to offer an Islamic alternative to the UDHR.
CDHRI:
Adopted by the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC).
Seeks to define human rights exclusively within an Islamic context.
Explicitly subordinates all rights to Islamic law, making Shari’ah the ultimate reference.
2. Universality and Applicability
Document ApplicabilityScope
UDHR Universal Intended for all humans, regardless of belief or background
UIDHRPrimarily for Muslim communities Frames rights in religious terms
CDHRIIslamic Countries Tailored to align with Shari’ah and Muslim-majority societies
3. Freedom of Religion and Expression
UDHR:
Guarantees full freedom of thought, conscience, and religion (Article 18).
Includes the right to change religion.
Protects broad freedom of expression, with few restrictions.
UIDHR:
Acknowledges religious freedom within Islamic parameters.
Apostasy (leaving Islam) and blasphemy are not protected.
Expression must respect Islamic values.
CDHRI:
Freedom of religion is conditioned by Shari’ah.
States clearly: “Islam is the religion of true unspoiled nature” (Fitrah).
Prohibits actions that contradict Islamic ethics or challenge Islam.
4. Gender Equality
UDHR:
Promotes complete equality between men and women.
No differentiation in legal, political, or social rights.
UIDHR:
Recognizes dignity for both sexes but affirms different roles.
Men and women are complementary, not necessarily equal in all rights (e.g., inheritance, leadership).
CDHRI:
Affirms the family as a basic unit with men as protectors and providers.
Women's rights are framed within traditional Islamic roles.
Gender-based distinctions are legally upheld based on Shari’ah.
5. Legal Authority and Enforcement
Document Legal Status Enforceability
UDHR Non-binding but highly influential; basis for international treatiesIncorporated into international law through covenants like ICCPR and ICESCR
UIDHRNon-binding; ethical declaration by Islamic Scholars No legal enforcement mechanism
CDHRINon-binding declaration from the OIC Influences national laws in Islamic states but lacks legal force
6. Freedom and Limitations
Area UDHR UIDHRCDHRI
Freedom of Religion Absolute Conditional on Islam Conditional on Shari’ah
Freedom of Expression Broad Subject to Islamic Values Subject to Shari’ah
Equality Universal Contextual (Islamic roles) Within Islamic framework
Source of LawSecular/humanist Divine (Qur’an/Sunnah) Divine (Shari’ah)
Conclusion
The UDHR, UIDHR, and CDHRI each reflect different worldviews on human rights:
The UDHR advocates universal, individual-centred rights, grounded in secular and humanist ideals.
The UIDHR reinterprets these rights within the framework of Islamic theology, balancing personal freedoms with moral duties.
The CDHRI takes a firmer stance, asserting that no right can violate Islamic Shari’ah, emphasizing communal order and religious law over individual autonomy.
This comparison illustrates that while the aim of all three declarations is to promote human dignity and justice, their approaches differ significantly based on ideological and theological underpinnings. Understanding these differences is essential for cross-cultural dialogue and for addressing human rights issues in a pluralistic world.
----
Ghulam Mohiyuddin is a retired psychiatrist.
New Age Islam, Islam Online, Islamic Website, African Muslim News, Arab World News, South Asia News, Indian Muslim News, World Muslim News, Women in Islam, Islamic Feminism, Arab Women, Women In Arab, Islamophobia in America, Muslim Women in West, Islam Women and Feminism