The decolonization of human rights should be one of the most relevant discussions in the field of contemporary international law today. Far from being a questioning of the universality of rights, this approach seeks to critically examine the historical, political and geostrategic conditions in which these rights have been defined, interpreted and applied. Indeed, as can be seen from multiple analyses published by the International Association for Human Rights and Social Development (AIDHDES), the international human rights architecture has not been exempt from power asymmetries that condition its implementation.
The international system is based on principles clearly established in the Charter of the United Nations, particularly the sovereign equality of States (Article 2.1) and non-interference in internal affairs (Article 2.7).
However, in practice, there is a persistent tension between these principles and certain dynamics of political instrumentalization of human rights, which is manifested in the selectivity of international mechanisms, where certain States are subject to intensive scrutiny while others, despite facing comparable situations, remain relatively on the sidelines.
The phenomenon of selectivity has structural characteristics within the international arena. In the Human Rights Council, during its 61st Session, just to give an example, it was observed how debates and resolutions could be affected by geopolitical dynamics (Venezuela, Iran, Russia, Belarus, among others). In this process, predominantly Western states, in collaboration with the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, non-governmental organizations financed by corporate entities and mass media, contribute to the shaping of these results.
This raises fundamental questions about the legitimacy and credibility of the system, especially from the perspective of countries in the Global South. The decolonization of human rights, in this sense, implies moving towards a more equitable approach, where international standards are applied in a coherent manner and without discrimination; where the law of force does not dominate over the force of law and above all of justice.
The impact of unilateral coercive measures is also a central point in this debate. Various reports and contributions at the UN and beyond have documented how these measures negatively affect the effective enjoyment of economic, social and cultural rights, particularly in contexts of vulnerability. In international law, such measures raise serious doubts regarding their compatibility with international human rights obligations and with the principles of self-determination of peoples.
Decolonization also requires a rethinking of the very content of human rights. Traditionally, the emphasis has been on civil and political rights, while the rights to development, peace and a just international order have been relegated to the background. However, these rights are essential to address the structural causes of global inequality. In this regard, the Declaration on the Right to Development and the recent debates in the Human Rights Council reflect a growing demand to integrate these dimensions into the core of the system.
Geopolitically, the current context of transition towards a more multipolar international order opens up new opportunities to advance this agenda. The emergence of new partnerships and mechanisms for South-South cooperation is helping to diversify sources of normative legitimacy and challenge dominant narratives. This process does not imply the fragmentation of international law, but rather its enrichment through a greater plurality of approaches.
In short, the decolonization of human rights does not imply their relativization, but rather their deepening. It is a question of ensuring that these rights truly respond to the needs and aspirations of all peoples, without exceptions or implicit hierarchies. To that end, it is essential to strengthen multilateralism, promote intercultural dialogue and ensure that international law is applied uniformly and in accordance with its founding principles.
