Embedded Files
The Politics Shed- A Free Text Book for all students of Politics.
In 1948, the United Nations issued the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, establishing that human rights apply equally to everyone, regardless of nationality. Although non-binding in international law, it serves as a powerful commitment to protect the equal and inherent rights of all people.
Since then, human rights protections have expanded through new conventions and institutions. However, sovereign nation states remain a major obstacle: when states defy international human rights law, holding them accountable is exceptionally difficult.
International law originated in ancient cooperative agreements like the 1258 BCE treaty between Egypt and the Hittites. It evolved through Roman jus gentium, Renaissance concepts of state sovereignty, and Hugo Grotius's foundational 17th-century natural law theories, eventually standardizing globally through modern treaties, the United Nations, and international tribunals.
Ancient and Medieval Roots
Early Treaties: Earliest recorded pacts include a border agreement between Mesopotamian city-states (2100 BCE) and Egyptian-Hittite non-aggression treaties (1258 BCE). [1]
Roman Influence: Developed jus gentium (law of nations) to govern relations involving foreigners.
Religious and Natural Law: Medieval scholars like Thomas Aquinas blended natural philosophy with legal rules governing the legitimacy of warfare
The Birth of the Modern State System
Peace of Westphalia (1648): Ended the Thirty Years' War and established the framework for modern nation-states and sovereign equality.
Hugo Grotius (1583–1645): Widely regarded as the father of modern international law, he argued that states are bound by a common system of secular natural law and treaty-based customs.
Effective global human rights governance relies on four key pillars: explicit international legal standards, nation states willing to enforce them, courts prepared to condemn violations, and a readiness for international intervention during severe abuses.
Since the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, international human rights law has grown increasingly detailed and legally binding. It encompasses two main types of rights:
Civil and political rights ("negative freedoms"): Protect individuals from government overreach (e.g., freedom of speech, fair trials, protection from torture).
Economic and social rights ("positive freedoms"): Enable personal development and well-being (e.g., access to education and healthcare).
Unlike domestic law, international law lacks a centralized enforcement authority. Because sovereign nation states operate outside a single global jurisdiction, international human rights law is often considered "soft law," making accountability difficult to enforce. Since 1948, however, its scope has steadily expanded through new treaties, conventions, and oversight bodies.
l December 1948 The UN General Assembly approves the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
l December 1948 The UN General Assembly adopts its first convention, making genocide a crime and requiring signatories to prohibit it.
l 1950 The Council of Europe agrees the European Convention on Human Rights. It becomes operational in 1953, and in 1959 the European Court of Human Rights is opened in Strasbourg to rule in cases involving the convention.
l 1966 The Economic, Social and Cultural Rights Covenant develops the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to also include positive rights such as an adequate standard of living, social security and education. In addition, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights requires signatories to ‘protect the rights enshrined in the treaty’ such as freedom from torture (Article 7) and right of peaceful assembly (Article 21). Together with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, they comprise the International Bill of Human Rights.
1979 The UN Convention on the Elimination of Forms of Discrimination against Women requires signatories to recognise in their domestic law the equality of men and women and prohibit any form of discrimination.
l 1984 The UN Convention on Torture requires signatories ‘to prevent acts of torture in any territory under its jurisdiction’ and ‘no exceptional circumstances whatsoever … may be invoked as a justification for torture’.
l 1989 The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child is the most widely ratified of all the UN’s conventions and forms the basis of the work of the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF).
l 1990 The UN Convention on the Protection of Migrants and their Families. Since migrant workers are potentially a highly vulnerable and marginalised group, the convention requires ‘appropriate international protection’.
l 1993 The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights is created to promote respect for human rights and denounce serious human rights violations.
In 2022, the incoming UN High Commissioner, Volker Türk, warned that, ‘There is no place for dehumanising the other by using reductionist labels or identity politics’ and urged nation states to return to the basic values of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
l 2002 The International Criminal Court is established to prosecute individuals accused of significant human rights abuses.
International courts
International courts
Laws are only as effective as the courts that enforce them. Sovereign nation states can hold lawbreakers accountable because they possess functioning police forces and judicial systems to arrest suspects and administer justice.
International law, however, is far harder to enforce. There is no international police force to detain suspects, nor is there a judicial body with the overarching authority required to compel sovereign states to obey.
To navigate this, global politics relies on three main types of international courts:
International Court of Justice (ICJ)
Role: The UN’s primary judicial branch, established in 1945 to adjudicate legal disputes between nation states.
Contentious Cases: Submitted by states; the resulting judgments are legally binding.
Advisory Opinions: Requested by the UN General Assembly or Security Council; these offer legal guidance but are non-binding.
European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR)
Role: Enforces the European Convention on Human Rights across member states. While its rulings are legally binding, it relies on political consensus rather than direct enforcement mechanisms.
International Criminal Court (ICC) & Ad Hoc Tribunals
Role: Focus on individual accountability for grave atrocities (such as war crimes and genocide) rather than disputes between states.
International Court of Justice (ICJ)
International Court of Justice (ICJ)
The ICJ cannot initiate cases independently. While 73 states have signed an optional agreement permanently recognizing its compulsory jurisdiction, non-signatories—including the US, China, and Russia—can only bring or join cases through a special mutual agreement. Because the ICJ handles disputes between states rather than individuals, criminal prosecutions for atrocities fall under the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court (ICC).
ICJ judgments are legally binding, and states often comply to maintain global stability. However, non-compliant states face few consequences, as enforcement through UN Security Council resolutions is extremely rare.
European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR)
Established in 1953 by the Council of Europe, the ECtHR enforces the European Convention on Human Rights across its 46 democratic member states (including non-EU nations like the UK, Ukraine, and Turkey; Russia was expelled in 2022 following its invasion of Ukraine).
Although ECtHR decisions are binding, the court lacks formal enforcement power, relying instead on political negotiations via its Committee of Ministers. Nevertheless, voluntary compliance has significantly strengthened European human rights standards—leading to legal reforms such as the decriminalization of same-sex acts in Northern Ireland (Dudgeon v. UK, 1981) and stronger anti-enslavement laws in France (Siliadin v. France, 2005).
International tribunals
International tribunals
Established through specific UN Security Council resolutions, ad hoc international tribunals are temporary courts created to investigate war crimes in specific conflict zones, including the former Yugoslavia, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, and Cambodia.
Backed by UN peacekeepers or post-conflict political shifts, these tribunals successfully detained and prosecuted key perpetrators of severe human rights abuses. Notable convictions include Bosnian Serb leaders Radovan Karadžić and Ratko Mladić (former Yugoslavia) and Khmer Rouge leaders (Cambodia).
Furthermore, these courts set groundbreaking international legal precedents:
Jean Kambanda (Rwanda): The first head of government convicted of genocide.
Charles Taylor (Sierra Leone): The first head of state convicted of war crimes since Karl Dönitz at Nuremberg.
Rape as Genocide: The Rwanda tribunal established that mass sexual violence can constitute an act of genocide.
Media Accountability: The Rwanda tribunal proved that media outlets can be prosecuted for inciting genocide.
Despite these successes, tribunals have struggled as global deterrents, as evidenced by ongoing atrocities in Syria, Myanmar, Yemen, and Ukraine. They have also faced criticism regarding post-war reconciliation and impartiality—such as Serbian claims of anti-Serb bias and allegations of "victors' justice" for failing to investigate atrocities committed by the Rwandan Patriotic Front or NATO civilian casualties in Serbia.
Established in 2002 by the Rome Statute, the International Criminal Court (ICC) is a permanent tribunal that investigates and tries individuals for the gravest international crimes: genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. Its jurisdiction is restricted to member states (123 as of 2023) and crimes committed after 2002. Since 2021, the court has been led by British Chief Prosecutor Karim Khan.
Challenges to Authority & Enforcement
State Sovereignty: Key non-signatories—including the US, Russia, China, Syria, and North Korea—remain outside the court's reach.
UN Security Council Dynamics: While the Security Council can authorize investigations into non-member states (such as Libya), veto powers held by permanent members make inquiries into the US, Russia, China, or their allies unlikely.
Lack of Enforcement: With no independent police force, the ICC depends entirely on state cooperation. For example, former Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir evaded arrest for years due to state protection.
Low Conviction Rate & Political Pushback: By 2023, the court had secured only ten convictions—all tied to African conflicts. This led to accusations of bias, prompting African Union withdrawal threats in 2017 and the Philippines' exit in 2019.
Key Achievements & Progress
Convicted high-profile warlords (such as Thomas Lubanga and Germain Katanga in the DRC).
Established groundbreaking precedent in 2017 by prosecuting "cultural terrorism" (Ahmad al-Mahdi, Mali).
Expanded investigations beyond Africa to Venezuela, Myanmar, Palestine, and Afghanistan.
Secured Sudan's agreement in 2021 to hand over Omar al-Bashir.
Documented atrocities during Russia's invasion of Ukraine despite Russia's non-member status.
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse