The article examines the concept of universalism of human rights, which came into prominence after World War II. The core of this concept is that human rights belong to everyone, no matter of what status a person holds in society. Every individual has a claim to enjoyment of human rights, wherever the individual resides.The article shows criticism of the universalism. Critics argue that universalism perpetuates colonialist practices, complaining that one group assumes superiority over the other.On the basis of the detailed analysis of the issues connected with the above mentioned criticism of universalism the author underlines that human rights are internationally agreed values, standards or rules regulating the conduct of states towards their own citizens and non-citizens. Human rights, in the words of the preamble of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, are common standard to achieve for all peoples and nations.The article clearly demonstrates that a long process of civilization has imposed norms to restrain human behavior, and these norms of restraint evolved in parallel fashion across different cultures.In conclusion the author underlines that the universal concept of human rights still encounters a legitimate obstacle by local cultural, religious, and legal norms. The World Conference on Human Rights affirmed that “the international community must treat human rights globally in a fair and equal manner, on the same footing. While the significance of national and regional particularities and various historical, cultural and religious backgrounds must be borne in mind, it is the duty of states, regardless of their political, economic and cultural systems, to promote and to protect all human rights and fundamental freedoms”.