View previous stories
	Why international law is still the world’s best defence by Fatou Bensouda, Sam Shoamanesh Former Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court   Mar. 2026   Should we permit the foundations of international law to erode, the world would slip once more into anarchy and chaos.   Conceived in the long shadow of global devastation, the post–World War II order was constructed -imperfect yet purposeful – to shield humanity from a similar catastrophe.   In 1943, as the tides of battle in World War II began to turn in favour of the Allied powers, United States President Franklin D Roosevelt warned: “Unless the peace that follows recognises that the whole world is one neighbourhood, and does justice to the whole human race, the germs of another world war will remain as a constant threat to mankind.”   Today, that coveted peace is increasingly fragile.   The post-war architecture conceived to avert great-power conflict, institutionalise interstate cooperation, reduce hot wars, and entrench human rights within binding international law is now under acute pressures. It faces a combustible mix of resurgent ultranationalism, hyperintensified zero-sum strategic rivalries and hegemonic power plays, the fragmentation of longstanding alliances, and the brazen repudiation of established norms.   Multilateral institutions that once underwrote stability are increasingly marginalised or instrumentalised in the service of Machiavellian politics. Foundational treaties are hollowed out or breached outright, compliance regimes weakened, and enforcement mechanisms rendered inert—leaving the post-war international system exposed to the very coercive power politics it was designed to contain.   The result is a palpable drift towards an unchecked “force-based order”, under which might displaces right, and power eclipses principle.   International orders do not suddenly unravel because of political declarations broadcast at podiums, nor because of the conduct of aberrant outliers. They collapse when those collectively entrusted with their stewardship neglect to properly defend them – when resolve gives way to timidity, principle is bartered for political expedience, and moral clarity is supplanted by double standards.   Unless the international community acts with resolve to defend and modernise the international order – fortifying rather than constraining it, including by making it more representative and meaningfully inclusive – the global system will drift toward a far more volatile and perilous disequilibrium.   The United Nations charter – one of the central instruments of the post-war legal infrastructure – is under threat. The charter enshrines the bedrock rule of the modern international order that no state may threaten or use force except in self-defence or with UN Security Council authorisation.   That peremptory norm – the foundation of the collective security architecture – is now visibly fraying. As raw power eclipses legal restraint, and the silence or equivocation of the many emboldens the few, the prohibition on the illegal use of force risks sliding from binding law into empty rhetoric.   Almost overnight, the threat of force – and even unilateral military action undertaken without legal authorisation or meaningful deliberation – has begun to crystallise into a disturbing new normal. This accelerating erosion of established norms is not a passing anomaly; it is a structural shift with profound implications for international peace and security.   Institutions of international law, which have played a decisive role in preventing conflict and advancing accountability are also threatened.   The International Court of Justice – the UN’s highest judicial body – has successfully adjudicated numerous interstate disputes, demonstrating the power of legal mechanisms over hard power and military confrontation.   Efforts to hold perpetrators of atrocities to account – from Nuremberg to the creation of UN ad hoc tribunals – paved the way for the International Criminal Court (ICC). Its creation in 2002 sent a powerful message that mass atrocities as merely politics by other means must no longer receive a pass, that perpetrators must be held accountable, and that impunity can no longer be tolerated.   The historic cultivation of these norms may be considered a crowning achievement as this normative transformation has not only awakened humanity’s consciousness regarding atrocities, but has also reshaped expectations of accountability for such grave crimes, and recast the very narrative and language with which we confront these vital questions.   And yet, those very powers that once shaped, and at least on the surface, nurtured these norms and institutions of international justice, now blatantly erode their integrity—whether by defiance, selective invocation, or politicisation. Thus, the edifice of collective restraint trembles, vulnerable to the machinations of those who prize unbridled power above principle.   To be sure, such regression diminishes the security and prosperity of all participants in the international system, irrespective of their size or influence.   Yet another grave assault on the very foundation of human rights advocacy lies in the entrenched “culture” of convenient indignation and performative empathy by states and self-serving and ideologically inclined actors alike.   Such expedient outrage and hollow sympathy erode the credibility of the pursuit of justice, undermining the universality of dignity for which we strive.   International law cannot be invoked à la carte, nor enforced with expedient selectivity.   Perhaps the greatest threat to international justice is not just outright opposition from ill-wishers but indifference and arbitrary application. The contrasting global reactions to different theatres of conflict in the past decade alone lay bare the hypocrisy that undermines faith in the universality and effectiveness of international law.   When our compassion is contingent upon political expedience, convenience or dictated by the fleeting spotlight of media attention or social media clickbait, we betray the fundamental, universal principle at the heart of human dignity.   Just as questionable are those who conveniently brandish the language of human rights not as “the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family”, but as a tactical instrument of lawfare deployed against political adversaries. Such deceptive tactics not only trivialise the suffering of victims but can also fuel and perpetuate the very conditions that enable even graver human rights abuses.   Indeed, ancient wisdom bears counsel: “beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves”. In this environment, smaller states and middle powers, in particular, cannot afford passivity.   They must coordinate with strategic clarity and act with resolve to defend and reinforce a rules-based global system anchored in real and principled commitment to international law and the peaceful settlement of disputes.   Perspective is important. The Western world, even when considered as a whole, comprises about 11 to 15 percent of the global population; the remaining 85 to 89 percent of humanity resides beyond it.   In a century increasingly defined by multipolarity, the convergent interests of the so-called Global North and Global South in safeguarding peace and stability within – and one hopes beyond – their respective spheres of influence must rise above the complacencies and double standards that have long underwritten the status quo.   True advocacy demands courage – to uphold and apply the law equally and impartially, even when doing so is uncomfortable, unpopular, or personally costly.   It is the discipline to defend rights not only when they align with powerful interests, or “tribal” and prevailing sentiments but wherever justice demands it.   The legitimacy and potency of international justice are also fundamentally anchored in ethical leadership and an unwavering fidelity to principle. It is incumbent upon the stewards of international institutions, courts and tribunals to embody integrity, impartiality, and steadfast dedication to their mandates.   When these ethical foundations are shaken or compromised, the repercussions are deep and lasting: public confidence disintegrates, victims suffer renewed injustice, adversaries are emboldened, and the quest for justice is dealt a blow.   The character and courage of those at the helm are not mere virtues, but the cornerstone upon which the entire edifice of international justice stands.   This is our clarion call: should we permit the foundations of international law to erode—whether through selective justice, passive indifference, or the cynical calculus of unprincipled politics—the world would slip once more into the shadows of anarchy and chaos.   We cannot yield to a world order defined by unchecked aggression, the erosion of sovereign borders under predation, and the unravelling of hard-won international norms. To acquiesce to such decline is to legitimise disorder as a governing principle, invite instability, normalise coercion, and accelerate a descent into systematic violence.   The cost would be borne by societies worldwide, in shattered security, fractured institutions, and immeasurable human suffering. It is our shared responsibility to avert this regression.   By steadfastly upholding international law, nations around the world do more than safeguard their own futures; they erect barriers against the reckless impulses of would-be aggressors, protecting all – including the aggressors themselves – from the dire consequences of unfettered conflict.   Indifference is not an option. Wilful blindness is complicity. In standing in firm defence of international law, we are not only enforcing norms – we are shaping the trajectory of our civilisation and honouring the enduring promise of humanity itself.   The rule of law is one of humanity’s quiet triumph – a beacon guiding our gradual rise from unbridled brute force towards greater order, justice, and civilisation. We must never allow the law to fall silent, for it stands as humanity’s foremost defender.   * Fatou Bensouda is the former Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (2012-2021). Sam Sasan Shoamanesh served as Chef de Cabinet to Fatou Bensouda during her mandate as ICC Prosecutor.
	Liberal Democracy depends on Social Rights by Aoife Nolan Council of Europe, agencies   17 Apr. 2026   Progressive leaders from more than 100 political parties across five continents gather in Barcelona for a Global Progressive Mobilisation.   The meeting brings together political leaders, activists, and progressive representatives from around the world with the aim of coordinating common responses to pressing global challenges. The mobilization seeks to “consolidate progressive leadership, strengthen alliances, and ensure that democracy, equality, and multilateralism remain central to shaping the global future.”   The Progressive Alliance:   At a time of deep global uncertainty—marked by democratic backsliding, widening inequality, climate breakdown, and the resurgence of authoritarian politics—we are called to act together with clarity and purpose. Across more than 100 countries, the Progressive Alliance brings together political forces committed to a simple conviction: democracy must be defended, renewed, and made to deliver for people again, and a fairer, more equal global order is both necessary and possible.   On 17–18 April 2026, in Barcelona, we will come together for the Global Progressive Mobilisation.   Across continents, authoritarian and far-right forces are increasingly organised beyond borders—coordinating narratives, strategies, and resources, often in alliance with economic and technological interests that benefit from inequality, division, and weakened democracy. This coordination is deliberate and structured. Our response must be equally international—and firmly progressive.   At the center of our project is democracy. It is under pressure from disinformation, declining trust, rising inequality, and the growing concentration of power in economic and technological elites.   We need to rebuild democratic resilience—expanding participation, restoring accountability, and ensuring democracy delivers real improvements in people’s lives. This requires broad democratic alliances across parties, trade unions, civil society, reform governments, think tanks, innovators, feminists, and young people—working not only within countries, but also across political contexts to strengthen democratic practice through shared experience and mutual support.   Delivering for people means confronting inequality head-on and transforming our economies. We stand for fair taxation, stronger social protection, decent work, the regulation of big tech and artificial intelligence, and investment in the care economy as a foundation for more equal societies.   Climate justice demands urgency and fairness—ensuring that those least responsible for the crisis are not left to carry its heaviest burdens, and that solutions are shaped through inclusive global cooperation.   Peace and common security must be rebuilt through diplomacy, multilateralism, and human-centered security—addressing both conflict and the inequalities that drive instability.   Gender equality is non-negotiable: no democratic or just global order is possible without the full empowerment of women and marginalised groups, and decisive action against gender-based violence.   The Global Progressive Mobilisation is about turning shared values into shared action: building bridges across movements and parties, and amplifying progressive voices working for equality, democracy, and justice in every region.   As we meet in Barcelona, we do so with purpose: to build momentum, strengthen international cooperation, and move from shared values to collective action. This is about more than resisting authoritarianism. It is about confronting inequality, defending democracy, and advancing a credible progressive alternative the world urgently needs. The challenges are interconnected—and so must be our response.   http://globalprogressivemobilisation.org/en/news http://www.youtube.com/@GlobalProgressiveMobilisation/streams http://globalprogressivemobilisation.org/en/news/Progressive_Approaches http://www.democrata.es/en/politics/progressive-summit-of-barcelona-all-the-keys-of-the-meeting-led-by-sanchez-l-fven-and-lula/   Mar. 2026   Liberal Democracy depends on Social Rights, by Aoife Nolan.   The High-Level Conference on Social Rights-European Social Charter of 18-19 March will take place against a backdrop of the long-term erosion of liberal representative democracy across many parts of the world.   In many democratic societies, growing inequality levels, lower social mobility and economic insecurity have accompanied increased economic stagnation.   These trends were exacerbated by the pandemic and the slow-simmering cost-of-living challenges that brutally accelerated into a crisis as a result of the inflationary surges following Russia’s launch of a full-scale invasion against Ukraine in early 2022.   And inflation is on the rise again following the US-Israeli war on Iran that that began last month – a war whose economic fallout is not yet fully clear but threatens to be significant.   There is the clear and growing evidence that delivery of social rights – rights to housing, education, social protection and decent living standards – is fundamental to sustaining confidence and trust in democracy.   For instance, Eurofound’s Living and Working in Europe 2024 Report highlights declining trust in institutions, closely linked to financial insecurity.   Crucially, Eurofound’s research demonstrates that those more affected by the cost-of-living crisis have a much lower level of trust in national governments (and the EU). This was particularly true of those reporting that they struggle to make ends meet or that they are behind in their energy bills.   The view that liberal representative democracy is an effective deliverer of the goods and services fundamental to social rights enjoyment and the ability to live a decent life is under serious pressure across Europe.   We are now at the point where it is well-established that there is a relationship between enthusiasm for political parties that claim to want to “implement the general will of the people irrespective of existing liberal democratic institutions” and growing concern about access to goods and services linked to social rights enjoyment and the ability to live a decent life.   Indeed, the question of the relationship between social rights, democracy, democratic stability and security is addressed directly in the Reykjavik Declaration that was adopted by heads of state and government at the 4th Council of Europe (CoE) Summit in May 2023.   This Declaration stated that “Social justice is crucial for democratic stability and security, and in this regard we reaffirm our full commitment to the protection and implementation of social rights as guaranteed by the European’ Social Charter system.”   This understanding of the centrality of social rights achievement to democracy security is also reflected in the New Democratic Pact process of the Council of Europe, a key element of which is to protect democracy through safeguarding “the structural integrity of democratic systems, from European and outside actors, while addressing the socio-political roots of disillusionment, extremism, and polarisation”.   In this regard, the Pact speaks of promoting social rights for all, “tackling the impact of socio-economic inequalities that erode confidence in what democracy can deliver – leaving no one behind”.   There has never been a more important time to do this. In its work, the CoE European Committee of Social Rights has seen clearly the legal and political challenges posed by the convergences and divergences between social rights enjoyment and democratic governance in Europe over the last decades.   The ongoing failure of national law, policy and institutions to respond to increasing socio-economic and other inequalities including wealth and income inequality is sharply evident in the Committee’s work on the cost-of-living and housing crises, the erosion of social protection across Europe, as well as our depressingly large body of case-law focused on significant steps backwards in terms of labour rights, which began in the 1980s but has intensified significantly in the last two decades.   Social rights are under pressure in Europe. It is not surprising that democracy is, too.   If the Pact’s aims are to be achieved – that is, “achieving democratic resilience” and “rebuilding trust in democracy”, it is vital that social justice should be given substantive meaning and linked with concrete objectives.   Specifically, social justice and its associated objectives should be conceptualised and framed in terms of legally binding social rights under the Charter. These rights provide content and form to social justice that is not provided by any other CoE or international instrument or initiative.   * Aoife Nolan is president of the Council of Europe European Committee of Social Rights, the leading European monitoring mechanism on social and economic rights. She is professor of international human-rights law and director of the Human Rights Law Centre at the University of Nottingham.   25 Mar. 2026   Council of Europe adopts New Social Rights Declaration. (HRW)   Amid a bleak political landscape of rising authoritarianism and anti-rights political agendas, the Council of Europe and its member states adopted a new declaration last week in Chisinau, Moldova, reinforcing their commitment to social rights.   The Chisinau Declaration recognizes that “democratic stability and security are directly impacted by rising socio-economic inequalities and the cost-of-living crisis” and that “ensuring social rights as enshrined notably in the European Social Charter is essential to countering growing threats to democracy.” This high-level statement has the potential to encourage a necessary change in direction across the region—and it comes at a pivotal moment.   Political actors openly hostile to human rights and social justice are gaining influence. European governments are increasingly implementing policies that either seek to roll back rights protections or do away with them altogether.   First signed in 1961 and then revised in 1996, the Charter is sometimes described as “the social constitution of Europe.” It sets out rights—“social rights” in European legal shorthand—relating to employment, housing, health, education, social security, and the right to be free from poverty and social exclusion, among others.   Aoife Nolan, President of European Committee of Social Rights, the body that monitors the Charter’s implementation, has argued forcefully, citing evidence, that “the delivery of social rights is fundamental to sustaining confidence and trust in democracy.”   Michael O’Flaherty, the Council of Europe’s human rights commissioner and Olivier de Schutter, the UN special rapporteur on poverty, also published a joint statement ahead of the conference, saying, “The current threats to democratic life are largely the result of the sentiment, within certain groups of the population, that they are being left behind and are not benefiting from general progress.”   The Chisinau Declaration recognizes the challenge presented by the gap in democratic trust caused by unfulfilled rights promises, and responds by committing to greater investment in social rights as “both a moral imperative and a strategic choice” to bolster democratic resilience.   Governments and regional institutions across Europe should now use the Chisinau declaration’s momentum to take concrete action, translating rhetorical commitment into practice. They should act with purpose to take seriously the rights concerns of people who feel left behind. The task of rebuilding fractured trust is urgent; improving people’s lives and rights is an essential place from which to start.   http://www.socialeurope.eu/liberal-democracy-depends-on-social-rights http://www.mynewsdesk.com/eurofound/pressreleases/wellbeing-and-social-cohesion-falter-in-europe-despite-economic-progress-3434632 http://www.coe.int/en/web/commissioner/-/social-rights-an-essential-component-of-the-fight-against-poverty http://www.hrw.org/news/2026/03/25/council-of-europe-adopts-new-social-rights-declaration Visit the related web page
	View more stories