62 years of Human Rights, yet no rights since 62

Today marks the 62^nd anniversary of the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Foundation document of international human rights protection, the UDHR represents a self-proclaimed ‘common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations.’ Louise Arbour, former High Commissioner for Human Rights, explained in 2008 that ‘advancing all human rights for all, we will move towards the greatest fulfillment of human potential, a promise which is at the heart of the Universal Declaration.’ Article 2 defines the universal perspective of the provision as ‘without distinction of any kind such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.’ The UDHR is the only human rights instrument adopted by all UN member states, and many of its provisions have been further implemented in international law under various conventions and treaties.

Despite this, there are many instances around the world where the theory of non-differentiation is not applied – sometimes by the UN itself. In the case of the stateless Kurds in Syria, the universalism of human rights protection remains purely symbolic. As Jwan Hassan from the mainly Kurdish town of Qamishli in North-East Syria put it, ‘while I might have rights on paper, I have no papers in my name.  Despite being born in Syria to parents born in the territory, having never lived elsewhere, I am not a citizen of this country and have no access to civil rights here.’ While Article 15 of the 1948 Declaration enshrines the universal right to nationality, Jwan goes on to explain how ‘in 1962 I was made a foreigner in Syria, and this was a full 25 years before my birth!’ Indeed the only document the 23 year old possesses (a certificate of non-recognition) records his date of birth, accompanied by the statement ‘did not respond to the Syrian Arab census in the Province of al-Hassake in the year 1962.’

The single-day census in August 1962 was ordained by legislative decree and executed unannounced to the inhabitants of al-Hassake Province. Government justification for this measure was to identify Kurds entering Syria since 1945. In practice, anyone absent on the day, or without all the required paperwork became ‘foreign’ overnight, and anyone who refused to participate was recorded as ‘undocumented’. This highly arbitrary process stripped some 150,000 Kurds of Syrian nationality, and classified siblings, even twins, differently. After almost 50 years the government has provided no remedy and the fact that statelessness can be inherited at birth leaves current estimations at approximately 300,000 stateless Kurds. 

Citizenship, for Hannah Arendt is ‘the right to have rights’, and this is certainly the case in a country like Syria, where presentation of national ID is an integral part of many everyday tasks. As a result, the right to freedom of movement (UDHR, Article 13), property ownership (Art 17), freedom of opinion and expression (Art 19), peaceful assembly and association (Art 20), participation in government (Art 21) as well as many other human rights are severely limited. Furthermore, stateless Kurds find that their peculiar status produces a Catch 22: unable to benefit from ‘the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution’ (Art 13) – as to qualify as a refugee requires leaving one’s country of origin or habitual residence – and at the same time lacking the necessary travel documents to enjoy the ‘right to leave any country, including [their] own’ (Art 12). In recent years the UN has given increased focus to the plight of Internally Displaced Persons, assisting and possibly relocating such individuals. While those who are up-rooted from their home, yet remain in the country, qualify for assistance as IDPs, those who are down-rooted and unable to travel outside their own municipality are – in the case of the Syrian Arab Republic – beyond UN assistance. 

            This is despite Refugee Agency UNHCR’s unique global mandate concerning Statelessness and Stateless Persons. The Agency is a self-professed non-political, humanitarian organization, which – like all UN bodies – functions according to universal principles and without discrimination. However, UNHCR’s operations in Syria are selective, according to the political agenda of the host country. As Syria is neither a signatory of the 1951 Refugee Convention, nor its 1967 Protocol, a special operating contract was draw up with UNHCR, which effectively restricts the Agency’s work to assisting Arab refugees (mainly from Iraq) and excludes UN intervention in the problems of Kurdish statelessness. 

While the UDHR underlines the clear necessity ‘to promote the development of friendly relations between nations’, it also highlights the duty of ‘every individual and every organ of society’ to secure ‘universal and effective recognition and observance’ of the human rights and freedoms it outlines. Since Syria has not only adopted the UDHR, but has also ratified subsequent legislation (ICCPR/ICESCR), it ought to be held accountable and encouraged to comply with international responsibilities. In practice, however, the Syrian government is being allowed to dictate UN policy. How is ‘every individual’ expected to respect universal human rights when the very organization mandated to do so fails to uphold the principle?

Perhaps the UN ought to review its operating procedure for cases where one of its agencies finds itself faced with a conflict of mandate responsibilities, towards different groups of non-citizens within the same state. This is especially pressing if – as in Syria – the policy produces a situation of differentiated rights according to ethnicity or other discriminatory base. Understandably the UN is committed to assisting the principle host of Iraqi refugee diaspora in a country already supporting the protracted Palestinian refugee situation; yet the cost is clear. Stateless Kurds are victims of political pragmatism, as UN actors become complicit in the Ba’ath Party’s exclusionary Arabist ideology. Although Syria refuses to nationalize stateless Palestinians in order to preserve their eventual ‘right to return’ to the homeland, the state assures broadly the same rights and duties given to Syrian citizens, and UNRWA registered Palestinians can receive identity and travel documents. Stateless Kurds, in contrast, are offered no UN assistance and are deprived of many public services.

In attempting to raise the profile of stateless Kurds in Syria, I in no way wish to damage the valuable work the UN does around the world; on the contrary I aspire to see its core ideology, essentially that embodied in the UDHR, performed to full capacity. Today therefore is indeed a cause for celebration – of the values and promise formally identified 62 years ago. Yet we must not merely cherish the Declaration, but – through constructive criticism and hard work – strive for its universal application.