The workshop addresses issues of fragmentation of international law within a specific field of international law – international human rights – brought about by the proliferation of adjudicating courts/bodies. The workshop will try to answer whether there is a different understanding of human rights in the case law of three selected courts/bodies: the Human Rights Committee with the ICCPR, the European Court of Human Rights and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. The workshop thus focuses on issues stemming from institutional fragmentation of international human rights law. More specifically, the focus of the workshop will be the different rights as they are developed by the three courts/bodies taking a specific comparative law approach to the study. The questions under discussion will include: whether the fragmentation of institutions has led to the fragmentation of doctrines which has led to a difference in outcomes where one set of factual situations would lead to differences in protection. Does the fact that different courts use different doctrines but arrive at the same result (if the research points in that direction) matter for claims about fragmentation? Do we have fragmentation if we have an overlap of results but a divergence of legal doctrine and justification? How much of the regional or global context matters in deciding a case, how do such contexts contribute to or prevent problematic fragmentation, and how do contexts lead to some issues simply never arising in a specific jurisdictional context?
