Human rights discourse and postcolonial Africa: The call for intervention in Darfur
MetadataShow full item record
While they have emerged as global ideals based on the recognition of liberty, dignity and universal rights to 'all individuals' within the global community, human rights have faced numerous criticism and scepticism from the Global South. This research paper argues that such scepticism has had negative impact on the drive for the protection and promotion of human rights and International Human Rights Law in global politics. Given such huge challenges, this research paper points out that, unless the global human rights discourse undergoes significant reform and shift, its Western-centric domination will result into more harm than good in the international community's agenda for human rights protection and promotion. Postcolonial Africa has been at the forefront of the debate on the power-political use of the notion. As such, it has been argued that human rights discourse has influenced relations and policies between the West and the Third World, especially Africa. In this relationship, human rights have been viewed as a strategic tool for powerful states in global politics, to use in their quest to legitimise the case for political change. Furthermore, human rights have also been employed by governments seeking to justify their interference in the domestic affairs of other states, especially the West in the case of postcolonial Africa. It has therefore emerged that the human rights rhetoric/ discourse has been understood by postcolonial Africa as serving to establish a powerful perspective relating to the present and past collective experiences of injustice, exclusion and domination within global politics. Here, the global human rights regimes and Africa seem to be at a crossroads regarding the role of human rights in international politics.