The Image of the Person in the Human Rights Concept

In human rights conferences, organizations, and tribunals, most often discussions and decisions about human rights involve specific rights. For example, issues include: to what extent should the protection of life prevent capital punishment or abortion? To what extent should guaranteed free speech be restricted when it offends other individuals? To what extent should poor individuals or communities have claims against affluent individuals or communities in the name of social justice? Positive law provides answers to such questions in either national constitutions and statutes that secure rights of the individual or in universal or regional instruments of human rights. Other problems have not yet been resolved by binding national or international law. For the problems that have been addressed, however, disputes still revolve around how to interpret those rights and what weight should be given to competing individual or public interests.

These disputes usually mirror the differing views of particular groups and cultures within one state, or between several countries or blocs of aligned governments. Thus, in all human rights controversies, whether arising from the formulation of new rights or the interpretation of established rights, a divide opens up between the claim to universal validity and the persistence of a particular understanding of these rights. The tensions between the universal and the particular understanding of human rights may be addressed by various methods. One may, for example, opt for a political discussion; one may prefer a legal analysis, using accepted methods of interpretation; or one may try to develop a conceptual framework that addresses not only particular problems in identifying human rights but also the divide between universality and particularity of human rights claims.

The course taken here follows the conceptual route and expounds on the notion of “person” that lies behind the human rights concept found in the history and contemporary scope of human rights documents. The purpose of this approach is to develop an image of the human person with which all cultures may identify, at least to some extent. I hope that the image of the person presented here may provide an intellectual framework that could be used to overcome tensions between the universality of human rights claims and the particularity of their conceptualization in various cultures all over the world. An intellectual framework, regardless of its strengths or weaknesses, cannot replace political and legal efforts to effectuate human rights protection. At the same time, however, political and legal discussions of human rights issues presuppose the kind of ideas that are presented here. This will be illustrated by reference to the German Federal Constitutional Court’s usage of this exact “image of the person” in the context of the German Constitution. ²

I. The Historic Development and the Legal Endorsement of Human Rights

In speaking about “the image of the human person” that underlies the concept of human rights, advantages and disadvantages arise. Reference to an “image” facilitates a comprehensive and holistic view of human rights. Such a perspective seems advantageous in light of the fact that a host of different political claims have been proposed or recognized as human rights. ³ Using a comprehensive and holistic perspective facilitates focusing on the universal core that exists within the multitude of particular claims. Moreover, contemplating the image of the person in connection with the idea of human rights also fosters “humanizing” academic reflection. It does so in such a way that it adds an emotional basis of commitment to human rights—and it enables people to recognize themselves in such an image and appreciate its human characteristics.

A disadvantage to this human rights approach, on the other hand, may be the danger of an ideological nexus to a particular culture. Every culture is marked by “images” of the human person in both general and more specific roles that persons are expected to assume, such as parent, teacher, priest, friend, and patriot. Unlike photographic pictures, these images represent “master ideals” ⁴ of the culture in question because they are role models of successful human development. Now, if the master ideals of a particular culture were taken as mandatory achievements of...