- The UNDHR/UDHR does not cover tourism visa bans, it's a country-level decision
- The EU does not have the power to ban visas, it's a country-level decision
- Tourism visa bans of all citizens of a country is at odds with UNDHR/UDHR axioms
Too many trolls making disingenuous or specious comments below.
The question originally asked about an EU tourism visa ban, and asks if some kind of global (as in all-comprising) visa ban is compliant or not with the UNDHR or UDHR, however you want to refer to it. It is the UN's declaration, not that of any other organisation - and it is just an organisation's policy that countries choose to accord with or not.
Call it what you want, we all know what we're talking about.
It doesn't cover "tourist visas", or visa bans, so the question is not directly applicable.
As has recently been demonstrated, decisions on visa policy rest with governments of countries, not the EU. Organisations like the UN, through parts of it, like the SC, can, through treaty, exert pressure on countries to comply with things like sanctions and visa bans, but ultimately countries decide, and usually they are applied to invdividuals.
If proposed targets of visa bans and sanctions are security council members with veto, it all starts to look more like theatre than anything practicable, as is also demonstrated by recent events.
Despite the fact that the organisations like the EU and UN can't issue visa bans, the concepts in the UNDHR are about the rights of freedom to leave and enter countries. By definition, unless you only travel by sea, leaving any country implies that you enter another one. If you live in a land-locked country and you are trying to argue that you can leave your country, without entering another one, perhaps you have a space rocket or a mining machine to travel through the earth, but in most cases, leaving one jurisdiction means entering another. Anyone arguing to the contrary is possibly being disingenuously pedantic.
The "spirit" of a law, its its inferred intention. In the case of human rights axioms, the inferred intention is pretty self-evident: that people are not treated as a category and suffer penalties for things they didn't do.
In a very practical sense, there are perhaps a million Russian citizens holidaying, working, or living in the EU right now, and many will be dual nationals. The impracticability of a visa ban is multifaceted, and the infraction of human rights of such people is self-evident. There are likely to be some cases, for example with dual nationals resident in the EU with families, for whom a visa ban would certainly be in conflict with human rights principles expressed in the UNHDR/UHDR.
EU rules appear to be irrelevant on this topic, as some countries do not support the precedent of national visa-bans in peacetime.