The geographical scope of the states’ human right commitments is no more restricted merely to the territory within their sovereignty; but as it seems the scope is gradually moving forward to acquire a wider concept so that it obliges member states to a convention of human rights, to respect and protect the rights and freedom set forth therein in a vaster geographical domain. It is also worth noting that the positive obligations of States in securing the terms and rights set forth in a convention as such, either inside the territory (where a state exercises full sovereignty) or outside the territory, require to be proportionate to the extent and expansion of the control in fact and practically exercised by those States in the either region. In other words, through proving a number of conditions and subsequently through expansion of framework of the scope within their jurisdiction of states, it brings about the discussion of the responsibility of states to be attributed to the state breaching the contractual obligations (directly or indirectly) derived from human rights treaties whom is a party to outside the bordering territory thereof, or even in a territory where the said obligations are not typically implemented.
Madani, S. Z. (2008). International Obligation of State to Respect Human Rights: Narrow to Locality?. International Law Review, 25(38), 233-259. doi: 10.22066/cilamag.2008.17531
MLA
Seyed Ziya-edin Madani. "International Obligation of State to Respect Human Rights: Narrow to Locality?". International Law Review, 25, 38, 2008, 233-259. doi: 10.22066/cilamag.2008.17531
HARVARD
Madani, S. Z. (2008). 'International Obligation of State to Respect Human Rights: Narrow to Locality?', International Law Review, 25(38), pp. 233-259. doi: 10.22066/cilamag.2008.17531
VANCOUVER
Madani, S. Z. International Obligation of State to Respect Human Rights: Narrow to Locality?. International Law Review, 2008; 25(38): 233-259. doi: 10.22066/cilamag.2008.17531
)