The Extraterritorial Application Of Selected Human Rights Treaties

In recent years, the question of whether and to what extent states are bound by human rights treaty obligations when they act abroad has given rise to considerable debate in academic circles, courtrooms and military operations. Focusing on treaties considerably jeopardized during the ‘war on terror’, namely the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the European Convention on Human Rights and the Convention against Torture,The Extraterritorial Application of Selected Human Rights Treaties takes stock of the key developments informing the discussion to date. Together with the wording of treaties, critical analysis is made of the ensuing interpretation of treaty provisions by monitoring bodies and states parties. A way forward in this debate is suggested, accommodating conflicting interests while preserving the effective protection of basic rights.

"Whether as a result of the war on terrorism, foreign military intervention, economic globalisation or otherwise, state conduct increasingly affects the human rights of individuals beyond its own borders ... This book focuses on the extraterritorial application of four key human rights treaties: the two UN Covenants on Human Rights and the American and European Conventions on Human Rights. It points out inconsistencies in the practice of the supervisory bodies of these treaties and discusses the pros and cons of both a restrictive and an expansive approach."--Back cover.

Questions 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.

"Few issues have posed more of a challenge for the European Court of Human Rights in recent years than the Convention's extraterritorial application. This book explores why this is by reflecting on how the issue has been approached by the primary interpreters of the treaty: the Strasbourg Court, Contracting Parties and National Courts. This is achieved through a detailed engagement with the previous jurisprudence on the Convention's extraterritorial application, and a particular focus on the activities of British authorities and judiciary during and after the Iraq War (2003). Litigation emerging from this conflict has been pivotal in constructing the current understanding of extraterritorial obligations, as well as drawing out some of its more challenging aspects. The book contends that by focusing on the interpretive behavior of the groups with the primary responsibility for interpreting the treaty, an understanding can be gained with regards to what motivates and constrains their argumentative practices. From this, a better understanding of both how the law has developed and where a solution to the extraterritorial challenge can be obtained. If, as some have argued, it is imperialistic to apply the Convention's obligations extraterritorially, the attention of this book lies with the 'human rights imperialists' who have construed those obligations to apply in this manner, as it is with them that any lasting solution to this particular challenge will be found"--

This book explores to what extent a state owes human rights obligations to individuals outside of its territory, when the conduct of that state impacts upon the lives of those individuals. It draws upon legal and political philosophy to develop a theory of extraterritoriality based on the nature of human rights, merging accounts of economic, social, and cultural rights with those of civil and political rights Lea Raible outlines four main arguments aimed at changing the way we think about the extraterritoriality of human rights. First, she argues that questions regarding extraterritoriality are really about justifying the allocation of human rights obligations to specific states. Second, the book shows that human rights as found in international human rights treaties are underpinned by the values of integrity and equality. Third, she shows that these same values justify the allocation of human rights obligations towards specific individuals to public institutions - including states - that hold political power over those individuals. And finally, the book demonstrates that title to territory is best captured by the value of stability, as opposed to integrity and equality. On this basis, Raible concludes that all standards in international human rights treaties that count as human rights require that a threshold of jurisdiction, understood as political power over individuals, is met. The book applies this theory of extraterritoriality to explain the obligations of states in a wide range of cases.

Focusing on treaties jeopardized during the 'war on terror', this book investigates whether and to what extent human rights treaties apply to states acting abroad. It proposes a way to accommodate conflicting interests, while preserving the effective protection of basic rights.

Within and outside the legal and academic professions, it is now increasingly recognised that the human rights consequences of states' actions are not limited to the domestic sphere but quite often transcend national borders. This is a challenge to the human rights community, which up to the present time has focused almost exclusively on human rights violations and protections solely within a national setting. The term "extraterritorial" effect/application/obligation in international law refers to acts that are taken by one actor (state) that have some kind of effect within another country's territory, with or without this second country's implicit or explicit agreement. Extraterritoriality within international human rights law, then, concerns actions or omissions by one state that have an effect on the human rights of individuals in another state - with or without this other state's agreement. This effect may be positive or negative in that such actions or omissions by foreign states may contribute positively to the enjoyment of human rights; or alternatively, they may result in a deteriorated human rights situation, and even human rights violations. This book gives, for the first time, a comprehensive analysis of extraterritorial obligations in international human rights law by placing the discussion in a larger international law context, interpreting obligations in the various sources of international human rights law, and discussing the way in which extraterritoriality has been approached by international courts and human rights implementation bodies in the United Nations and regional systems.

Explores whether states possess extraterritorial obligations under international law to respect and ensure economic, social and cultural rights.