ABSTRACT
This chapter focuses on the relationship between the regional human rights and UN treaty bodies when acting in a judicial or quasi-judicial capacity. To some extent fragmentation and divergent interpretations of international human rights law are inevitable due to the number of international human rights bodies that have been established and the commonalities in the rights provided in their governing treaties. Where the parties and the facts are the same, the international human rights body must still consider whether the alleged violations are the same to satisfy the principles of lis pendens and res judicata. The chapter engages with the challenges and explores practical ways in which the risk of fragmentation can be reduced through greater engagement with each other’s jurisprudence and peer-to-peer dialogue. International human rights law is often cited as contributing to fragmentation due to its nature as a specialised regime of international law.
