ABSTRACT
The question of the scope of the extra-territorial applicability of international human rights law is both topical and controversial. It does not appear to be an argument between general international lawyers and human rights lawyers, but seems to be taking place within the latter group. It is an appropriate subject for an essay to mark the contribution of Professor Sir Nigel Rodley to the development of human rights law for a variety of reasons. First, determining the scope of the applicability of human rights law is central to the issue of implementation. Nigel’s focus has always been on taking the law off the page and making it ‘real’. Second, Nigel has himself contributed to the debate. He was the Rapporteur of the Human Rights Committee responsible for the drafting of General Comment No. 31 on the Nature of the General Legal Obligation on States Parties to the Covenant, in effect on the operationalization of the concept of implementation.1 He has also taken on in print the most famous of the objectors to any form of extra-territorial applicability.2 Third, the issue has been the subject of frequent discussions between Nigel and the author, discussions which have perhaps been marked more by the heat than the light generated.3 This chapter is an attempt to redress the balance between
1 General Comment No. 31, The Nature of the General Legal Obligation Imposed on States Parties to the Covenant, A/59/40 (29 March 2004). The Human Rights Committee (HRC) is the body of independent experts which monitors the implementation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
