evolving role of indiduals in international law

indidual rights pre ww2

before this period international law largely dealth with relations between states

indiduals were mostly objects of law (protected indirectly via states) rather than subjects with direct duties

jurisction of the courts of danzig 1928

background: after ww1 the free city of danzig was estbalished under the keague of nations. disputes arose concerning the legal rights of induals living there

issue:whehther indduals could bring claims direct,y befre international judicial bodies rather than having to rely on their home state to act on their behalf

signficance: this case ackwloedged the possibility that idnals migt have standing in certain international disputes.

while limited it laid the groudwork for thinking about idnduals as potential subject of international law not just objects represented by states

nottebohm case 1955

background- nottebohm a german born idndual aquired liechtenstein nationality and during ww2 guatamala contested his status for diplomatic protection purposes

key issue- determining whether an induals nationality couldbcreate legitimate standing for diplomatic protection under IL

singificamce- the case clarified that not all claims of nationality grant full protection; the connection between the idnual nd the state must be ‘genuine’

highlighted the limtations of state based protection and emphaised that indiduals legal rights in il depended on comlex jurisctional rules

post ww2 transofrmation

indiduals moved from passive objects of protection to active subjects who could both claim rights and bear duties

this evolution was gradual, marked by judicial decisions,treaties and insitutional devlopments

this is still an ongoing process with modern challenges like digiita rights and enviornmental law contnuing to reshape the scope of indidual rights

nuremberg trials 1945- turning point in international law

• for the first time induals were held directly accountable for vioations of international law, such as war crimes, crimes against huanity and genocide

• this estbalished a principle that indiduals could bear legal responsibility, not just states

• singificance: laid the groundwork for a legal framework where indiduals were recgonised as autonomous actors under international law (seperate from their nation states)

universal declaration of human rights 1948

• adopted by the united nations this was the first global declaration asserting that all inidvuas inherently possess fundamental HR

• rights were recongised INDEPENDANTLY OF STATE NATIONALITY OR STATUS, shifting the perspective from indiduals as subjects of protection via the state to direct right holders

• eg right to life,liberty,security

international human rights treaties (1960s-80s)

• isntruments like the international covenant on civil and poltiical rights and the international covenant on economic, social and cultrural rights trasnlated the principles of the UDHR into binding legal obligations

• these treaties strenghtne the legal status of indivudals giving them concrete mechanisms for the protection of rights at the international level

• indiduals were increasingy seen as legal subjects not merely passive beneficiaries of state oblgiations

rome statute of the international criminal court 1998

• created the international criminal court ICC

• allowed indiduals to be directly prosecuted for genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and later aggression

• singificance: this insitutionalised the ricniple that indiduals are direct bearers of duties under IL completing a long hisotrical shift from state centred law to idndual centred accountability

lagrand case 2001-

background: two german nationals were scentenced to death in the us without proper consular notification

issue: whether violations of consukar rights under the vienn convention could be directly invoked in an international forum

signficance:case demonstrated that indual rights under treaties international treaties can grant rights directly to indiuals not just obligations between states

reinforced that states have obligations not only to each other but also toward protecting the rights of foreign nationals, indirectly stregnthening the idnduals position