This paper puts forward a third situated description by utilising the case of the IAHRS to frame it as an appropriate ‘space’ of political and legal contention that promises to address some of the shortcomings of IHREL. The latter attitude responds to these critiques by referencing the historical victories of rights movements that tactically mobilised the law to change oppressive patterns. The former contends that the emergence and application of IHREL encompass a structural legitimacy deficit because of its colonial and liberal underpinnings and operation, rendering the solutions for tackling global challenges, such as the climate crisis, ineffective. These views are clustered between a spectrum that goes from the Baroque ethos to the Realist ethos, two categories borrowed from critical theorist Bolívar Echeverría. As a heuristic tool, the paper employs the analogy of international law as a continuum that constantly oscillates to distribute said scholarly views. In so doing, the paper contrasts broader critical International Human Rights and Environmental Law (‘IHREL’) scholarship with the IAHRS innovative norms, thereby highlighting its opportunities and shortcomings. This paper aims to appraise the normative potential of the Inter-American Human Rights System (‘IAHRS’) to respond to the threats posed to the enjoyment of human rights in the face of the climate crisis.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |