Scientific Research Network on Extraterritorial Obligations in Practice
Human rights have traditionally been framed in a vertical perspective (state-individual), with the duties of states confined to individuals on their territory. Obligations beyond this 'territorial space' have been viewed as either non-existent or at best, minimalistic. This territorial paradigm is seriously challenged nowadays, be it by military operations abroad, climate change, transnational businesses, or migration.
The Scientific Research Network (SRN) Extraterritorial Obligations in Practice (ETOs in Practice) seeks to achieve the following three scientific targets with specific focus on state practice:
SYSTEMATIZE
To take stock of progress made over the last decade, since the adoption in 2011 of the Maastricht Principles on Extraterritorial Obligations in the Area of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, in applying the principles, and propose ways forward. We focus on five thematic clusters in which extraterritorial human rights obligations have become most pertinent: development cooperation; environment; investment, finance and trade; migration; and peace and security, and along which the SRN is organized. Legal developments on these five thematic clusters are studied from the perspective of four human rights governance systems: the United Nations and the three regional human rights governance systems (the African Union; the Council of Europe; and the Organization of American States).DEEPEN
To take stock of conceptual progress and propose ways forward, drawing on the work undertaken in the framework of GLOTHRO, a European Research Networking Programme on extraterritorial human rights obligations (2010-2015). There are two key doctrinal puzzles that need to be examined: the jurisdictional hooks to assign extraterritorial obligations to states, and the question which principles may guide the distribution of obligations among states (and responsibility for violations).BROADEN
To ensure cross-pollination with other disciplines and civil society work in the area of extraterritorial obligations: on the one hand, we want to learn empirically from civil society work through concrete cases they are involved in or aware of, including through strategic litigation, and to deepen the interdisciplinary dialogue on ETOs. On the other hand, we want to share with civil society and other disciplines our thematic and conceptual findings in order to have them tested and refined. Through multidisciplinary co-creation of knowledge, we want to expand the knowledge base on ETOs.