Fragmentation in International Human Rights Law – Beyond Conflict of Laws

Divided but harmonious? The interpretations and applications of article 31(3)(c) of the vienna convention on the law of treaties

“…Such 'policy conflicts', 134 are thus found when judicial fora substantially 'use different doctrines, tests and justifications to handle similar cases'. 135 The fragmentation of international law may have amplified the problem of disparate policy 'forces' not concerting well. 136 Fora might be so isolated from one another that norms within one regime are seen as having an underlying philosophy completely separate from, and possibly antagonistic to, another's.…”

Interpreting the ECHR in its normative environment: interaction between the ECHR, the UN convention on the elimination of all forms of discrimination against women and the UN convention on the rights of the child

“…1 When looking at the field of human rights through an institutional lens, the widening takes place through the adoption of new human rights treaties both on regional and international levels 2 , whereas the thickening refers to a situation where a legal question may involve state obligations under more than one human rights instrument due to normative overlap between them. 3 While there is normative overlap in the content, the supervision of the human rights instruments is structured in a onedimensional way: Courts and other supervisory bodies (such as UN treaty bodies) are set up with the expressed aim to enforce the treaty under which they have been established, and only in relation to States that have become Parties to that treaty. It is for instance stated in Article 19 of the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR) that the task of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) is to 'ensure the observance of the engagements undertaken by the High Contracting Parties in the Convention and the Protocols thereto', not to ensure that States Parties uphold their human rights obligations established under other human rights instruments.…”

“…Other researchers have used case law from the ECtHR for the purposes of critically discussing systemic integration as an interpretive method 10 ; to explicate and detect the normative basis for the Court's interaction with other international law 11 ; and for comparing practice from the ECtHR with practice carried out by other supervisory bodies in order to detect wether the supervision of similar questions result in fragmented human rights protection in practice 12 . This article offers insight into the issues of systemic integration from a substantive rightsoriented perspective.…”

Assessing Access to Medicines in Preferential Trade Agreements: From the Trans-Pacific Partnership to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership

“…1021-1038, Yu (2007), pp. 1039-1149, Trechsel (2004), International Commission of Jurists (2011), Ajevski (2014), pp. 87-98, Payandeh (2015), p. 297.…”