This chapter seeks to demonstrate, among other things, that these dangers to personal liberty far outweigh the threats to human safety posed by serious ‘terrorist’ threats. The reader will acquire an appreciation of the obligation of states to protect their citizens from terrorism, including the debate as to whether terrorists possess human rights obligations. We shall then proceed to examine the most pertinent human rights violations in counter-terrorist operations. These include the application of the principle of legality to terrorist legislation, the permissibility of relevant derogations, the right to life and the practice of targeted killings, the various contours of unlawful detention against terrorist suspects, torture and ill-treatment in order to gather intelligence information and promote confessions and finally the practice of abductions, unlawful extraditions and illegal rendition. To be sure, counter-terrorist operations have been found to infringe a range of other civil and political rights, such as the freedom of expression and the right to a fair trial.

Although the new growth strategy for the EU, ‘Europe 2020’, includes the goal to remove 20 million people from poverty, the Treaty of Rome was not an anti-poverty manifesto. Part One of the Treaty of Rome laid out the principles of the Community. It was designed to deliver ‘a harmonious development of economic activities, a continuous and balanced expansion, an increase in stability, an accelerated raising of the standard of living, and closer relations between the States belonging to it’. The goal was to create a common market, a single trading area, not a European welfare state. It is no longer assumed that a common market requires common rules. The legislative goal has moved from the creation of harmonised rules to minimum standards and best practice. The judicial approach has also evolved, especially in relation to non-fiscal rules. Brexit and COVID 19 have been 'stress-tests' for the free movement rules.

The regulation of services pursues both economic (market failure, protection and promotion of competition) and non-economic objectives. The regulation has to accommodate different ‘modes’ – the World Trade Organization identifies four ‘modes’ of trade in commercial services. The modes will be used as themes to explore the concepts used by the Court to create a single internal market in services. Cases arising from broadcasting rules and gambling will demonstrate the deference to national autonomy in issues of ‘cross-border supply’. However, cases concerning ‘consumption abroad’, in particular of healthcare services, demonstrate a less deferential approach. The strongest defence of free movement of services and establishment appears in cases dealing with ‘commercial presence’ and ‘presence of natural persons’. It will be seen that the CJ tries to defend the rights of natural and legal persons under these provisions. Before plunging into the case law, the primary and secondary rules will be laid out.

The task of the provisions in EU law providing free movement to workers is to tackle national rules that hinder movement. Rules obstructing entry and settlement of migrant workers and their families have to be removed or disapplied. As seen from the opening extract, the European Commission study found no evidence of benefit tourism. This chapter explores three specific themes in relation to the full exercise of free movement of EU workers. First, it will explore the definition of a worker – who gets to enjoy the privilege of an international career in the EU? Is the movement from one state to another an EU norm as it is in the United States? Second, what is the level of transnational solidarity for the economically active, and how does national action help or hinder this? Finally, what situations do not attract the protection of Article 45 TFEU – when can member states undermine the creation of an internal labour market? However, before looking at these themes in detail, the Treaty provision and related secondary law providing rights to the employed will be fully set out.

International human rights law imposes obligations on States that have jurisdiction over facts occurring in the ‘grey zone’, namely, the territorial State and the outside State. The principal question which the chapter answers is dual: what the scope of the obligations binding the concerned States is in respect of the ‘grey zone’ and what the limits are of these obligations, especially compared to the obligations binding them in a ‘normal’ situation where the State has effective control over its entire territory. The chapter claims that the degree of the State’s effectiveness and the lawful limitations the State introduces can decrease the modalities of the expected protection but cannot restrict the heart of the obligations under human rights conventions.

This chapter discusses the development and application of international humanitarian law (IHL) and its interrelationship with human rights law. It further examines this special relationship, which is of particular importance for the protection of civilians, especially where the applicability of IHL is contested or where IHL constitutes an exception to certain rights, such as the right to life, or fails to prevent and/or provide effective remedies for violations. The chapter seeks to identify the scope of application of IHL and demonstrate the degree to which the two can be reconciled. Moreover, a special case is made for the law applicable in situations of military occupation whereby human rights are subordinate to IHL. Despite this subordination, in practice because international human rights tribunals are not mandated to apply humanitarian law they necessarily interpret and enforce the rights of the victims on the basis of the rights found in their respective statutes. As a result, the jurisprudence of human rights tribunals is not always consistent with IHL. Yet, such tribunals are hard pressed to accept jurisdiction over situations which would otherwise be resolved on the basis of IHL alone. This chapter therefore goes on to discuss the exercise of extraterritorial jurisdiction by human rights tribunals.

The responsibility for implementing and complying with international standards rests firmly with states. However, post-conflict states often lack resources and may also face significant socio-political challenges. Chapter 3 explores whether international child rights standards make any allowances for the context in which they are to be implemented, reviewing the ‘escape’ route of derogations, considering whether the economic, social and cultural context may be taken into account, and addressing textual flexibility. It also expounds factors, including resources and public opinion, that might affect the operationalisation of juvenile justice standards in particular. The state does not, however, operate in a vacuum. There is a range of international mechanisms that promote implementation of, and compliance with, human rights. This chapter reviews these mechanisms as they relate to children’s rights, examining in particular the Committee on the Rights of the Child established by the CRC to monitor state compliance with the treaty, before focusing in some detail on UNICEF. The chapter provides an overview of UNICEF’s institutional nature, its relationship with the CRC and its stance on juvenile justice, all of which are key to understanding UNICEF’s involvement in Rwanda and its approach to child génocidaires.