Defining the Right to Participate in Cultural Life as a Human Right

Abstract

Drawing on Cass Sunstein's theory of incompletely theorized and specified agreements, this article intends to describe, explain and assess the legal regime of the right to participate in cultural life in international law. It offers a redefinition of this human right as an incompletely theorised and specified agreement in order to make this human right suitable for a certain degree of operationalization. As a first step, this article qualifies the right to participate in cultural life as an incompletely generalized agreement: people do not agree on the theoretical foundations of this human right although there seems to be a loose agreement on the recognition of some component of this human right. As a second step, this article intends to show that the right to participate in cultural life worked and still works as an incompletely specified agreement: monitoring bodies have not yet received much possibility to make clear and operationalise it even if there was an agreement reached on this human right as a low level principle. This contribution then offered a redefinition of the right to participate in cultural life which aims at authorising an agreement on this human right as a ‘mid-level principle’ whenever there is still disagreement existing on the foundation of this latter right. Taking into account the dynamic and moving features of cultural life and the general and adaptive nature of international human rights law, this article intends to elaborate a legally relevant definition of the right to participate in cultural life as an incompletely generalised and specified agreement on a low level principle. This definition tries to open a third way between a restrictive definition of the right to participate in cultural life as a right to access a set of definite artworks and the broad ‘anthropological’ definition given in General Comment No. 21 of the Committee on economic, social and cultural rights.

Rethinking and Advancing a ‘Bottom-up’ Approach to Cultural Participation of Persons with Disabilities as Key to Realising Inclusive Equality

“…Specifically, the right to participate in cultural life is considered as encompassing a two-fold individual dimension and a collective aspect. The two-fold individual dimension entails, respectively, the right to access cultural activities, goods and services, and the right to active involvement in culture, which includes engaging in the creation of cultural products (Romainville, 2015). In this respect, the right to participate in cultural life has been mostly associated with the right to participate in and practice creative arts (i.e.…”

Enhancing Access to Digital Culture for Vulnerable Groups: The Role of Public Authorities in Breaking Down Barriers

“…In respect of the article, it is important to note that the right to culture places obligations on States, and concomitantly, on public authorities, to facilitate the right to culture. 4 In addition, public authorities should be guided by, and take action in accordance with, international human rights law frameworks in adopting legislation and policies in the sphere of culture which impact on vulnerable groups[ 71 ].…”

Understanding the nature and scope of the right to science through the Travaux Préparatoires of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights

“…While inclusion of the right to science in both the UDHR and the ICESCR was uncontroversial at all stages, consensus on the right was evident at a more abstract level; states never truly reached agreement on the precise nature and the scope of the right. In this way, the right to science might be interpreted, as the right to culture has been, 49 as an 'incompletely theorized agreement'. 50…”