Addressing over-inclusiveness and under-inclusiveness of Patrick Macklem’s Sovereignty of Human Rights

The critiques of Macklem’s theory, particularly regarding its perceived over-inclusiveness, underscore the necessity of distinguishing “human rights in international law” from the narrower regime of IHRL. Macklem’s theory emphasizes the broader role of human rights across diverse areas of international law, where human rights principles play a significant yet distinct role. By addressing critiques that conflate these concepts, this essay has highlighted how Macklem’s legal conception of human rights enriches our understanding of their dynamic and multifaceted function within the international legal order. Moreover, recognizing the interplay between human rights and other areas of international law, my extended theory proposed in this essay not only mitigates the risk of fragmentation but affirms the adaptability and positive role of human rights in addressing the complexities of global justice.