International Economic Law and Human Rights: Friends, Enemies or Frenemies?

  • Lorand BartelsEmail author
Part of the European Yearbook of International Economic Law book series (EUROYEAR, volume 7)


A state’s economic policies, including the protection of intellectual property and foreign investments, and trade liberalisation, can have an impact on the enjoyment of human rights. Some of these policies may also be encouraged by international treaties. But it does not follow that any given economic policy is required by those treaties. Determining whether this is the case requires a close analysis of the treaties at issue. In fact, most treaties typically contain exceptions clauses that permit states to comply with both their economic and their human rights obligations. In sum, while Sarah Joseph is right that, in principle, international economic law could hinder the enjoyment of human rights, it is more difficult to identify cases in which this is mandated. But even if this were the case, the logical solution is not to add human rights obligations to international economic agreements. It would be sufficient to ensure that those agreements contain exceptions that can permit—without mandating—states to comply with, and further, their existing human rights obligations.

Sarah Joseph’s article addresses an important question: what is the relationship between international economic law—concerning, principally, trade, intellectual property and investment—and obligations to respect, protect and fulfil human rights. While broadly agreeing with her conclusions, this comment highlights some aspects of this question that merit more detailed consideration.


World Trade Organization Trade Liberalisation United Nations Development Program Trade Rule Investment Treaty 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



I am grateful to friends and colleagues for their valuable suggestions.


  1. Bartels L (2009) Trade and human rights. In: Bethlehem D, McRae D, Neufeld R, Van Damme I (eds) The Oxford handbook of international trade law. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 571–591Google Scholar
  2. Bartels L (2014) The EU’s human rights obligations in relation to policies with extraterritorial effects. Eur J Int Law 25(4):1071–1091CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bartels L (2015) The chapeau of the general exceptions in the WTO GATT and GATS agreements: a reconstruction. American Journal of International Law 109(1):95–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. De Schutter O (2011) International trade in agriculture and the right to food. In: De Schutter O, Cordes K (eds) Accounting for hunger: the right to food in the era of globalisation. Hart Publishing, Oxford/Portland, pp 137–192Google Scholar
  5. Garcia F (2003) Trade, inequality, and justice. Transnational, ArdsleyGoogle Scholar
  6. Häberli C (2013) God, the WTO – and hunger. In: Nadakavukaren Schefer K (ed) Poverty and the international economic legal system. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 79–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hestermeyer H (2007) Canadian-made drugs for Rwanda: the first application of the WTO waiver on patents and medicines. Am Soc Int Law: Insights 11(28)Google Scholar
  8. Hestermeyer H, Broude T (2014) The first condition of progress? Freedom of speech and the limits of international law. Va J Int Law 54(2):295–321Google Scholar
  9. Hoekman B, Martin W, Braga CAP (eds) (2009) Trade preference erosion: measurement and response. World Bank Publications/Palgrave-MacMillan, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  10. Joseph S (2016) Human Rights and International Economic Law. In: Bungenberg M, Hermann C, Krajewski M, Terchechte JP (eds) European yearbook of international economic Law, vol. 7. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 461–481Google Scholar
  11. Kinley D (2009) Civilising globalisation. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Matthews A (2012) The impact of WTO agricultural trade rules on food security and development: an examination of proposed additional flexibilities for developing countries. In: MacMahon JA, Desta MD (eds) Research handbook on the WTO agriculture agreement. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp 104–132Google Scholar
  13. Mercurio B (2012) ‘Seizing’ pharmaceuticals in transit: analysing the WTO dispute that wasn’t. Int Comp Law Q 61(2):389–426CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Mercurio B (2013) TRIPS and access to essential medicines. In: Van Calster G, Prévost D (eds) Research handbook on environment, health and the WTO. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp 233–269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Savarese E (2014) The coherence of EU law: the promotion of investments vs the protection of human rights. Ital Yearb Int Law 23(1):91–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Smith F (2012) Food security and international agricultural trade regulation: old problems, new perspective. In: MacMahon JA, Desta MD (eds) Research handbook on the WTO agriculture agreement. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp 31–49Google Scholar
  17. Stiglitz JE, Charlton A (2005) Fair trade for all. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  18. United Nations Development Program (UNDP) (1997) Human development report. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of CambridgeCambridgeUK

Personalised recommendations