By Christina Binder
This blog post is published to honour the career of Professor Elina Pirjatanniemi. See more here.
1. Human rights in turbulent times: an overview
‘Human Rights in Turbulent Times: What role for the local level?’ is a sadly relevant topic. These are indeed turbulent times for human rights, as illustrated by numerous and worrying signs. Firstly, alarming trends towards authoritarianism, nationalism, and populism are observable; in the USA under the Trump II administration, as in several European states (Hungary under Orbán (until April 2026), Slovakia, and Poland under the PiS government (until 2023)). This goes hand in hand with attacks on the rule of law and democracy – e.g., the independence of the judiciary is called into question. Likewise, free and independent media are under pressure; directly, through so-called SLAPP suits (cf. Trump, Orbán, …) and corresponding bans; and indirectly through alternative platforms (social media) and funding cuts for independent media and public broadcasting. From a human rights and democracy perspective, this erodes the very foundations on which they are built: democratic backsliding seems omnipresent. Also, human rights institutions, such as the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) or the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR), are facing backlash tendencies.
All this comes in times of a triple planetary crisis: human-induced climate change, the loss of biodiversity, and environmental pollution. These phenomena also increase migratory pressure, as natural disasters and the effects of the climate crisis deprive countless people of their livelihoods. Moreover, we are facing growing inequality, both in Europe and worldwide, in times of economic and financial crises. This leads not only to growing social disparities but also, particularly in Western societies, to a loss of faith in the state and in public institutions, igniting populist rhetoric. Further challenges relate to the rapid development of new information technologies and artificial intelligence, posing novel risks to human rights. To this come more general attacks against the multilateral international order on which human rights institutions are built, through power politics as under the Trump II administration.
2. A human rights perspective
The situation is bleak; practically all rights are affected by the current turbulences. To start with, civil and political rights: disinformation encroaches upon the right to freedom of expression; during election campaigns, likewise upon the right to political participation. Issues of data security, particularly in the age of new information technologies and artificial intelligence (social media; surveillance measures), interfere with the right to informational self-determination. The related right to private life is also put at risk by the climate crisis, particularly where the impacts and health consequences of the crisis are concerned (see KlimaSeniorinnen v. Switzerland, 2024). The undermining of domestic courts and the erosion of the judiciary calls into question the rights to a fair trial and to an effective remedy. It also challenges the separation of powers and the rule of law. Likewise, economic and social rights are encroached upon. For example, the rights to health, social security, and education are impacted in times of economic and financial crisis and the accompanying austerity measures. This is particularly bitter since it usually entails a growing social, economic, and financial inequality where marginalized/vulnerable groups tend to be structurally and particularly affected, calling into question non-discrimination and equality guarantees.
At the same time, human rights protection institutions, as the regional human rights courts, come under institutional pressure. They are exposed to populist rhetoric, e.g., the former Hungarian Prime Minister Orbán called the ECtHR a security threat. Even in generally democratic states governed by the rule of law, such as Denmark, the UK, or Switzerland, there are backlash tendencies. Moreover, the erosion of the rule of law and attacks on the independence of the judiciary at the domestic level put pressure on international human rights institutions. They are losing their ‘allies’ at the national level, with ensuing negative effects on domestic implementation and an increasing number of cases before the regional human rights courts. Numerous attacks on human rights and on the institutions that protect them. What are possible responses?
3. Regional human rights courts’ answers to human rights in turbulent times
There are indeed several strategies/possibilities to counter disruptive tendencies at the level of the very regional human rights courts. Several of these are put into action by the ECtHR and the IACtHR. They include a shift towards/a trend towards the recognition of economic and social rights, whose core is increasingly rendered justiciable (see eg IACtHR, Poblete Vilches v Chile, 2018) therewith establishing minimum social rights standards. Also, the human rights impacts of the climate crisis are increasingly recognized, and according state obligations to counter climate change have been established (see IACtHR, AO, Climate Emergency and Human Rights, 2025; ECtHR, KlimaSeniorinnen v Switzerland, 2024). Likewise, we witness the increasing recognition of the close link between human rights and democratic governance in their vertical dimension (see eg increasingly detailed jurisprudence on the right to political participation); as well as of the horizontal entrenchment of domestic structures/democratic forms of government with an emphasis on the rule of law, separation of powers and internal checks and balances (see IACtHR, AO 21/28 of June 2021; see also the ‘bad faith jurisprudence’-of the ECtHR in reliance on Article 18 ECHR). The institutional and constitutional domestic legal framework is thus being scrutinized with increasing rigor by both regional human rights courts. Therewith, both regional human rights courts respond to the challenges posed to human rights in today’s turbulent times.
A lot more can be said respectively. Still, the focus of this blog will lie on the local level: this is why we now turn to municipalities and cities to see how they can contribute/what they can do to counter disruptive trends/the mentioned threats to human rights.
4. The potential of the local level to address human rights threats
To foster a human rights culture, to ensure that human rights are ‘internalised’ by society, and to reinforce their vertical dimension seems indeed essential. An effective protection of human rights requires functioning domestic structures at all levels. Precisely because human rights are not a purely legal project, but are also based on political, sociological, anthropological, and other factors, their embedding across society as a whole seems necessary. And this points precisely to the local level. Thus, municipalities, cities, and regional structures in particular have potential when it comes to realising and ensuring human rights. They are also in more direct touch with the population and therefore particularly well suited to fostering a corresponding ‘human rights culture’ (‘internalisation’, ‘vernacularisation’ of human rights).
The development of such a human rights culture highlights, on the one hand, the intrinsic link between human rights, democracy, and the rule of law as a whole. On the other hand, a human rights project of this kind, supported by large sections of the population, is ideally suited to countering backlash tendencies. It reduces the risk of populist criticism of human rights protection institutions, as such criticism yields little political benefit. An anchoring of human rights across society as a whole, including the local level, could thus also help to curb populist-nationalist tendencies. Through targeted outreach, NGOs and activists could/should furthermore be mobilised and brought on board. Indeed, civil society actors have an important role to play – in two ways: their engagement with public actors and structures seems important to hold decision makers to account. They may also contribute to fostering a human rights culture through the education of policymakers as well as of the general public.
The growing importance of the local level in the implementation of international law and human rights is recognized accordingly. For example, several (soft-law) instruments refer to the role of the local and regional levels in the protection of human rights. Recommendation 280 (2010) of the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe (CoE) emphasises that ‘[l]ocal and regional authorities are not only agents of the central government: they secure human rights at the same time as they fulfil local-self-government’. The Advisory Committee of the Human Rights Council also noted that while ‘[i]t is the central government which has the primary responsibility for the promotion and protection of human rights, […] local government has a complementary role to play’.
The potential of the local level is also recognized in scholarship. According to Frederic Mégret: ‘[…] the embrace by many local actors of their human rights responsibilities remains a productive moment in the history of human rights […] It can help us rethink how international law can actually be constituted from below rather than simply enforced from above. […] It represents an inherently pluralistic form of rights implementation.’ Cities thus become key actors in the field of human rights. They complement (or counteract) the national level in relevant areas, which seems particularly significant in turbulent times.
This growing role of local authorities in international law can also be justified by the principles of subsidiarity and participation , which likewise highlight the importance of local actors in the implementation of human rights. Subsidiarity in particular appears central. In accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, the local level – as the level closest to citizens – is often best placed to identify the appropriate measures for safeguarding human rights. Consequently, the local level/cities play a key role in the field of human rights, particularly in times of disruption. They can contribute to ‘human rights mainstreaming’ and enable a multi-layered human rights architecture.
The potentially fundamental role of the local level – both complementing and, at times, contradicting the central level in times of disruption/turbulent times – is perhaps best illustrated by the example of the European Urban Charter III, which was adopted in October 2023 by the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe. It enshrines many of the aforementioned human rights obligations for the local level, thereby operationalising a number of significant human rights commitments and countering current threats. The Charter’s six thematic sections indeed refer to nearly all of the challenges mentioned above. These sections are, significantly, entitled: 1. Democracy and political participation; 2. Social rights, economic and cultural development; 3. Sustainable development, environmental protection and climate change; 4. Integrity and the prevention of corruption; 5. Security and crime prevention; 6. Digitalisation and artificial intelligence. They form the very core of the Charter. Thus, Charter offers crucial solutions against the backdrop of the aforementioned human rights challenges. In doing so, the European Urban Charter III strengthens human rights at the local level and counteracts disruptive processes in various areas.
5. Final appreciation
The current disruptions of human rights are multifaceted and complex. The challenges have many manifestations/dimensions: a loss of trust in the state; populism and nationalism; social inequality; and the climate crisis. This is what makes countering them so difficult. The various dimensions are interlinked; they are interdependent and reinforce one another. Furthermore, the processes of disruption cannot be examined solely with legal methods: a human rights perspective in turbulent times is inherently interdisciplinary.
Precisely in light of this complexity, the local level/perspective appears as an ideal starting point. It brings state structures closer to the people and may also create new opportunities for public engagement and the development of counterstrategies in times of human rights challenges. The European Urban Charter III (2023) appears as an excellent example thereof.
Christina Binder holds the Chair for International Law and International Human Rights Law at the University of the Bundeswehr Munich since April 2017. Before, she was University Professor of International Law at the Department of European, International and Comparative Law at the University of Vienna. Christina was member of the Executive Board of the European Society of International Law (ESIL) 2014-2022 and also served as ESIL’s Vice-President. She is member of the Council of the Global Campus of Human Rights since 2019. She is member of the ILA Committees “Urbanisation and International Law – Potential & Pitfalls” and “International Law for the SDGs” and was Co-Rapporteur of the ILA Committee “Human Rights in Times of Emergency”.