Extraterritorial Application of Human Rights Treaties: Law, Principles, and PolicyQuestions as to when a state owes obligations under a human rights treaty towards an individual located outside its territory are being brought more and more frequently before both international and domestic courts. Victims of aerial bombardment, inhabitants of territories under military occupation, deposed dictators, suspected terrorists detained in Guantanamo by the United States, and the family of a former KGB spy who was assassinated in London through the use of a radioactive toxin, allegedly at the orders or with the collusion of the Russian government - all of these people have claimed protection from human rights law against a state affecting their lives while acting outside its territory. These matters are extremely politically and legally sensitive, leading to much confusion, ambiguity and compromise in the existing case law. This study attempts to clear up some of this confusion, and expose its real roots. It examines the notion of state jurisdiction in human rights treaties, and places it within the framework of international law. It is not limited to an inquiry into the semantic, ordinary meaning of the jurisdiction clauses in human rights treaties, nor even to their construction into workable legal concepts and rules. Rather, the interpretation of these treaties cannot be complete without examining their object and purpose, and the various policy considerations which influence states in their behaviour, and courts in their decision-making. The book thus exposes the tension between universality and effectiveness, which is itself the cause of methodological and conceptual inconsistency in the case law. Finally, the work elaborates on the several possible models of the treaties' extraterritorial application. It offers not only a critical analysis of the existing case law, but explains the various options that are before courts and states in addressing these issues, as well as their policy implications. |
From inside the book
Results 1-5 of 76
Page ii
... Force against Non-State Actors Noam Lubell The Collective Responsibility of States to Protect Refugees Agnès Hurwitz Jurisdiction in International Law Cedric Ryngaert The Interpretation of Acts and Rules in Public International Law ...
... Force against Non-State Actors Noam Lubell The Collective Responsibility of States to Protect Refugees Agnès Hurwitz Jurisdiction in International Law Cedric Ryngaert The Interpretation of Acts and Rules in Public International Law ...
Page xi
... forces 4. Exercise of a legal power D. The personal model collapses 4. A Third Model: Territorial Jurisdiction and the Distinction Between Positive and Negative Obligations A. Universality unbound B. Textual interpretation and implicit ...
... forces 4. Exercise of a legal power D. The personal model collapses 4. A Third Model: Territorial Jurisdiction and the Distinction Between Positive and Negative Obligations A. Universality unbound B. Textual interpretation and implicit ...
Page xix
... British Columbia Civil Liberties Association v. Chief of the Defence Staff for the Canadian Forces et al., 2008 FC 336, hereinafter Afghan Detainees FC.......................................................................................
... British Columbia Civil Liberties Association v. Chief of the Defence Staff for the Canadian Forces et al., 2008 FC 336, hereinafter Afghan Detainees FC.......................................................................................
Page xxi
... force 18 July 1978.............. 12, 17–18, 108, 127, 180, 183, 213, 222, 231 Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, 1465 UNTS 85, entered into force 26 June 1987 ........... 12, 19–20 ...
... force 18 July 1978.............. 12, 17–18, 108, 127, 180, 183, 213, 222, 231 Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, 1465 UNTS 85, entered into force 26 June 1987 ........... 12, 19–20 ...
Page xxii
... force 28 February 1987 .................................12, 31, 38–39 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD), 660 UNTS 195, entered into force 4 January 1969 ...............................
... force 28 February 1987 .................................12, 31, 38–39 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD), 660 UNTS 195, entered into force 4 January 1969 ...............................
Contents
1 | |
19 | |
III Policy Behind the Rule | 54 |
IV Models of Extraterritorial Application | 118 |
V Norm Conflicts International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights Law | 229 |
General Conclusion | 262 |
Bibliography | 266 |
Index | 275 |
Other editions - View all
Extraterritorial Application of Human Rights Treaties: Law, Principles, and ... Marko Milanovic No preview available - 2013 |
Extraterritorial Application of Human Rights Treaties: Law, Principles, and ... Marko Milanovic No preview available - 2011 |
Common terms and phrases
actions acts actually agents Al-Skeini approach argument armed Article attributable authority avoidance Bankovic basis Chamber Chapter Commission committed Committee concept concerned concluded conduct considered Constitution Contracting Convention course Covenant Cyprus detained detention domestic ECHR effective effective control effective overall control enforcement establish European Court examined example exercise extend extraterritorial application fact force further hand held human rights treaties ICCPR IHRL individual international law interpretation Iraq issue Italy Judgment jurisdiction jurisdiction clauses Justice killing least limited Lord matter meaning military norm conflict object obligation occupation para paras particular parties personal model persons political positive obligation possible practical prevent principle protection provides question reason refers regard relevant requires respect responsibility result rules scope secure ship simply situations sovereignty spatial state’s territory tion torture Turkey United United Kingdom universality violation