Human rights treaty derogation and COVID-19: WHO guidance and state response

Abstract What explains when states derogate from international human rights law during the COVID-19 pandemic? Conventional understanding of treaty derogations suggests that domestic democratic structures, not the crisis at hand, explain derogation submissions. I argue that during COVID-19, global crisis measures mattered. WHO legitimacy and issue framing of the crisis made states more likely to perceive the pandemic as a severe one and derogate from the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Using country-day level from January 2020 to February 2021 analysis of over 70,000 observations, I test the determinants of ICCPR derogations during the COVID-19 pandemic. I find that global crisis measures of WHO responses and global COVID-19 deaths were significant, positive indicators of ICCPR derogations while domestic crisis measures were not. This piece contributes to our understanding of how states use international law during crises, derogations, international organization legitimacy and of human rights law during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Global Constitutionalism
Published
2026-01-14
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1017/s2045381725100208
Primary Topic
COVID-19 Digital Contact Tracing
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Human rights treaty derogation and COVID-19: WHO guidance and state response

Audrey L. Comstock
Global Constitutionalism
COVID-19 Digital Contact Tracing
article

Human rights treaty derogation and COVID-19: WHO guidance and state response

Audrey L. Comstock
article en

Abstract

Abstract What explains when states derogate from international human rights law during the COVID-19 pandemic? Conventional understanding of treaty derogations suggests that domestic democratic structures, not the crisis at hand, explain derogation submissions. I argue that during COVID-19, global crisis measures mattered. WHO legitimacy and issue framing of the crisis made states more likely to perceive the pandemic as a severe one and derogate from the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Using country-day level from January 2020 to February 2021 analysis of over 70,000 observations, I test the determinants of ICCPR derogations during the COVID-19 pandemic. I find that global crisis measures of WHO responses and global COVID-19 deaths were significant, positive indicators of ICCPR derogations while domestic crisis measures were not. This piece contributes to our understanding of how states use international law during crises, derogations, international organization legitimacy and of human rights law during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Global Constitutionalism
Arizona State University (US)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 93%
COVID-19 Digital Contact Tracing
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.