Course Catalogue

View Specification Document | Reading List

Despite forming part of public international law (PIL), international human rights law (IHRL) - influenced by concepts of natural law and regulating an unequal relationship - tends to rest on fundamentally different principles than the contractual, bilateralist model of traditional public international law, which is built on state consent and reciprocity between equals. These distinct foundations impact the very fabric of the law when it comes to IHRL, including law-making (often done by international courts, not states) and law enforcement (where inter-state cases, though nominally possible, remain severely underutilized). Furthermore, they often result in an uneasy fit between IHRL and PIL, leading to tensions and attempts to resolve them through legal reasoning, including by invoking the exceptional nature of IHRL.

In light of these dynamics, students in this course will consider how IHRL interacts with both (1) the secondary rules that are foundational to the international legal system as a whole (treaty law and the law of state responsibility, including issues such as interpretation and attribution), and (2) particular areas of PIL, especially those that are more traditional (e.g. immunity or trade).

In doing so, students' learning will focus on linking the theoretical foundations of PIL and IHRL with the practical application of rules in both. On the one hand, the course delves into the conceptual basis of the relevant rules and investigates the impact of - often unspoken - assumptions in legal (particularly judicial) reasoning. On the other hand, this is done with a focus on how the arising tensions are tackled - or evaded - in concrete cases by international (quasi-)judicial bodies, both within IHRL and in other areas of PIL.

10 x 2-hour seminars

This course is only available to LLB students. 

Students must have achieved a pass in the Level 1 Public International Law course (LAW1006). (Visiting students must have completed an introductory course in public international law at their home institution.)

None

None

The summative assessment consists of two essays: one essay that is both formative and summative, 2000 words (30% of the overall grade) and one that is purely summative, 3000 words (70% of the overall grade).

Reassessments are normally available for all courses, except those which contribute to the Honours classification. Where, exceptionally, reassessment on Honours courses is required to satisfy professional/accreditation requirements, only the overall course grade achieved at the first attempt will contribute to the Honours classification. For non-Honours courses, students are offered reassessment in all or any of the components of assessment if the satisfactory (threshold) grade for the overall course is not achieved at the first attempt. This is normally grade D3 for undergraduate students and grade C3 for postgraduate students. Exceptionally it may not be possible to offer reassessment of some coursework items, in which case the mark achieved at the first attempt will be counted towards the final course grade. Any such exceptions for this course are described below. 

The aim of this course is to enable students to conceptually situate international human rights law in the broader context of public international law, in light of their largely different theoretical basis and the tensions that this can generate at the level of concrete rules, and to consider the implications of these potential tensions. By looking beyond the concrete rules to consider why those rules are the way they are and what logical consequences they draw, the course aims to stimulate and improve students' critical thinking. Students will also have the opportunity to develop their argumentative and advocacy skills through in-class debates and litigation exercises.

By the end of this course students will be able to:

■ Identify and evaluate differences between international human rights law (IHRL) and general public international law (PIL) in terms of theoretical underpinnings;

■ Appraise the manner in which (differing) deeper theoretical and structural foundations of IHRL and PIL can translate into (differing) concrete rules;

■ Assess the extent to which IHRL has had an impact on different areas of PIL;

■ Evaluate the most common strategies used by (quasi-)judicial bodies for resolving tensions between IHRL and PIL;

■ Identify and critically analyse arguments in favour and against IHRL exceptionalism in PIL.

Students must submit at least 75% by weight of the components (including examinations) of the course's summative assessment.