Oral

Despite near-universal declarations concerning the “universality” of human rights, nearly every aspect of human rights – the responsibility for violating human rights, the duty to protect human rights, and the obligation to enforce human rights law – has been based on territorial considerations. Thus, in some ironic or even perverse way, there has been almost nothing about international human rights law that has been “international.” As globalization proceeds apace, this “domestic” human rights model will become even more divorced from reality – but also by the ultimate goal of international human rights law itself. This session provides a dramatically different vision of human rights, but one that is consonant with the original intent of the framers of the Universal Declaration and the two international covenants. Under this approach, while states have human rights obligations within their own territorial borders, what also has to be recognized is that they have human rights obligations outside their own borders as well. This session will challenge the conventional thinking of four key principles that have long dominated “human rights”: (state) responsibility, territory, accountability, and enforcement.

Session Objectives: Analyze the meaning of territorial obligations from a state and international perspective. Discuss human rights obligations within and outside of state borders. Critique the principles of responsibility, territory, accountability, and enforcement in relation to territorial obligations.

CE Credits: CME, Health Education (CHES), Nursing