ABSTRACT
The international human rights system and its actors are often being identified with the sources of law that they interpret, apply and develop. The crisis or criticism appears to reflect dissatisfaction, frustration or resistance towards key aspects of international cooperation and the ensuing transnational phenomena affecting national legal systems. Although apparently plausible, tends to be a misconceived view inasmuch as members of most international monitoring bodies are actually appointed by political entities. Certain politicians and the media often tend to simplify concrete cases, especially those concerning criminal suspects or offenders, blaming international human rights obligations for causing excessive procedural protection or resulting in insufficient sanctions with which they are dissatisfied. Domestic fundamental rights, properly enforced, could be subjected to similar challenges as the international human rights system by reference to notions of majoritarian rule as the sole basis of democratic legitimacy.
