This essay reveals the institutional dynamics of hard times in the issue area of human rights. I show that the human rights regime has developed innovative-yet-informal institutions like individuals-based coalitions for the international protection and progressive development of human rights. Yet, as these informal institutions function very much based on, first, the interpersonal relations among their members, and, second, legal instruments that require no further consent by states, the advocacy success of liberal human rights defenders has, in turn, provided a playbook for advocates and governments from the illiberal end of the ideology spectrum. In addition, new human rights advocates in the form of certain private law firms have entered the UN through their pro bono work. They promise valuable resources for a crisis-ridden system but often represent corporate clients with conflicts of interest. Given the imminent risk of ideological capture and illiberal interests in human rights paralyzing the system, I reemphasize the need for regulating access to the human rights global governance institutions.

This article examines the effects of changes in 2018–19 to the Income Tax Act and Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) regulations that were ostensibly intended to facilitate public policy engagement by Canadian charities. The article examines a case study of charities in the international development sector through interviews with charity leaders and quantitative analysis of data from the Canada Revenue Agency, Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying, and House of Commons Standing Committees. The article finds that the 2019 change in CRA regulations had very little effect on policy engagement by international development charities. Rather, a series of other factors continue to shape and constrain policy engagement by charities—including concerns about the future repoliticization of the CRA, misunderstandings of the regulations, difficulties fundraising for public policy work, fears of jeopardizing federal government funding, and a strategic preference for insider approaches to policy advocacy.

Faith-based organizations that are rooted in India’s diverse faiths give shape to their roles in an operational space shaped by the Hindu nationalist government. This paper, based on interviews with 34 FBOs, compares how FBOs rooted in five different faith traditions perceive that operational space, and how they relate to the state based on their perceptions of these conditions. One key finding is that there are important similarities in these FBOs’ perceptions and ways of responding. Another key finding is that ways of understanding and responses vary in ways that can be explained at least partly by the differentiated position of diverse faith communities in Indian society itself and the specific challenges faced by members of each faith tradition. That is, the specific context of marginalization or promotion of a religious community by the state positions FBOs to advance their objectives through collaboration, confrontation, or by keeping distant from state agencies.

Japanese migrant policy prioritizes immigration control over migrant rights and welfare, which has clear consequences for migrant healthcare. A literature review and interviews of migrant healthcare advocates revealed that disadvantaged migrant groups have poor health and face barriers in accessing mainstream healthcare, particularly for emergency, HIV/AIDS and maternal and child care. Advocates fashion a provisional safety net from existing policies to connect migrants with essential care, but this approach is of limited effectiveness. Policy solutions and relevant advocate opinion are considered in light of the failure of existing policies to meet uninsured migrants' healthcare needs.

Ken MacLean's Crimes in Archival Form (University of California Press, 2022) explores the many ways in which human rights ‘facts’ are produced rather than found. Using Myanmar as a case study, the book examines the fact-finding practices of a human rights group, two cross-border humanitarian agencies, an international law clinic, and a global campaign led by a nongovernmental organization. Foregrounding fact-finding in critical yet constructive ways prompts overdue conversations about the possibilities and limits of human rights documentation as a mode of truth-seeking. In raising these issues, the book calls on practitioners and scholars alike to be more transparent about how human rights ‘fact’ production works, why it is important, and when its use should prompt concern.

Aotearoa New Zealand provides an important example of successful citizen activism in the form of anti-nuclear peace advocacy. The collective efforts by peace actors over several decades resulted in the successful demand for a nuclear-free nation. This paper highlights the widespread participation and political support that facilitated the process and assesses its achievements.

The participation of non-state actors in global health law has undergone tremendous change over the years, with non-state actors playing an increasingly important role in the formation of global health law — in terms of engagement in international health governance forums and health policy decision processes. Global health movements and advocacy groups dedicated to specific diseases (for instance HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria) and health rights have been increasingly pivotal in ensuring that global health policies are rights-based. This article interrogates the role that nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) have played in shaping global health law. Looking at how the historical and traditional roles of NGOs have evolved over time, this article analyzes the contribution that NGOs have made in advancing and defining a rights-based approach to health.

Despite the growing recognition of representation as a fundamental principle in global governance, the ICJ Bar continues to exhibit pronounced gender imbalances. This study adopts an empirical frame of reference to scrutinise the gender and professional composition of legal teams appearing before the ICJ over the last decade. It involves a systematic examination of oral proceedings in contentious cases before the Court between 2013 and 2023, breaking down the gender and professional role of counsel for each party in every case. The manifest invisibility of women in international courtrooms challenges the perceived neutrality of the international legal system and raises the question; is international law gendered? This article posits that the predominance of male and academic perspectives delimits the interpretation and application of international law as issues and viewpoints that could strengthen the adjudicatory process are at risk of being overlooked. Thus, the findings herein seek to contribute to a nuanced and holistic discourse that not only informs academic scholarship, but also empowers practitioners to navigate the complexities of the ever-evolving international legal order. The integration of representative voices and heterogeneous perspectives in representations to the Court is a cornerstone of a legitimate, equitable, and effective international system. This article calls for a concerted effort by the international community to diversify the faces of ICJ advocacy.

In 2020, amid aggressive and inflammatory political discourse and an unprecedented wave of violent attacks against migration Non-Governmental Organizations and their staff, the Greek Government sought to establish a new legal framework for the registration of Non-Governmental Organizations active in the fields of international protection, migration and social inclusion, and their members. This Article aims at providing an overview of the EU-law based litigation brought by Greek Civil Society organizations to challenge the new framework for breaching fundamental rights, and at exploring its effects beyond the Court proceedings. This Article concludes that, counterintuitively, the existence of pending litigation against the Regulation establishing the NGO Registries hampered advocacy on this issue with the European Commission.

This paper examines a long-standing doctrine in charities law – that if an organisation's main purpose is political then it cannot be charitable. This doctrine is not without controversy because it has the potential to exclude many worthwhile organisations from charitable status, and fetter worthwhile advocacy by those that do have status. While no jurisdiction remains unwaveringly committed to the orthodox political purpose doctrine, we argue that none so far have confronted the public benefit – and detriment – of political advocacy adequately. This paper proposes a way of assessing the public benefit of political advocacy in liberal democratic societies. It argues that political advocacy can give rise to clear public benefit: this is an indirect or process benefit associated with advocacy itself regardless of the end advocated for. However, recognising political advocacy purposes as charitable should still be subject to two constraints: the altruism requirement (reflected in the ‘public’ aspect of public benefit); and consistency with liberal democratic values (as part of the ‘benefit’ aspect). These constraints are needed because, while political advocacy can generate benefit, detriments may also be associated with political advocacy.