International human-rights law and institutions | Edexcel A-Level Politics
Updated: Sep 29
For Specification 9PL0
Edexcel A-Level Politics | Free Revision Notes
Estimated study time:Â 50 minutes
International human-rights law and institutions A-Level Politics revision focuses on how rules that operate beyond individual states have developed alongside international courts and human-rights bodies. You need to understand the International Court of Justice (ICJ), International Criminal Court (ICC), special United Nations tribunals and European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), as well as the importance of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This builds directly on your understanding of the United Nations [The United Nations] and prepares you for wider debates about human rights and sovereignty.
Learning Objectives 🎯
By the end of this revision page, you should be able to:
Define international law, human rights and universal human rights.
Explain the development of international human-rights law and institutions.
Distinguish the roles of the ICJ, ICC, special UN tribunals and ECHR.
Explain the significance of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Analyse important differences between international courts and tribunals.
Apply knowledge of international institutions to examination questions about global politics.
Revision Notes đź“š
What is international law?
International law is defined by the Edexcel specification as law that governs states and other international actors.
This is different from domestic law, which operates within a particular state. International law creates rules and expectations that operate across borders and therefore forms an important part of modern global politics.
This creates an important relationship with national sovereignty [The state: nation-state and national sovereignty]. A sovereign state claims ultimate authority over its own affairs, while international law establishes rules that states and other actors may be expected to recognise.
The development of international law is therefore part of a wider change in global politics. States remain central actors, but they operate alongside international organisations, courts and shared legal principles.
Human rights and universal human rights
Human rights are rights that people are entitled to by virtue of being human.
The idea of universal human rights goes further. These are rights that apply to people in all societies regardless of cultural or other differences.
The word universal is important in examinations. It means that entitlement to these rights is not supposed to depend on:
nationality
the political system of a particular state
the culture of a particular society
decisions made by an individual government.
The emergence of universal human-rights principles contributes to the development of global politics because the treatment of individuals is no longer viewed purely as an internal matter for individual states.
This connects with the broader effects of globalisation on the state system [Globalisation and the state system], particularly the growing importance of international rules and institutions.
The development of international human-rights law
For this part of the Edexcel specification, the key development is the growth of institutions and sources of authority through which international law can operate.
A useful sequence is:
Development | Significance |
Creation of the ICJ alongside the United Nations | Established a principal judicial institution within the UN system for disputes involving states. |
1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights | Established an important source of authority for the concept of universal human rights. |
Development of the European Court of Human Rights | Created a regional judicial institution dealing specifically with human-rights protection. |
Special UN tribunals in the 1990s | Developed international criminal justice through tribunals established for particular situations, including Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia. |
Establishment of the ICC in 2002 | Created an international institution able to prosecute individuals accused of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. |
The overall pattern is important. International law developed beyond rules governing relations between states to include institutions concerned with the treatment and criminal responsibility of individuals.
The International Court of Justice
The International Court of Justice (ICJ)Â is the principal judicial organ of the United Nations.
Its central role is to deal with legal disputes between states.
This makes the ICJ strongly connected to the traditional state-based structure of international politics. Rather than prosecuting an individual for committing a crime, the ICJ deals with legal disagreements involving countries.
Why is the ICJ significant?
The ICJ is significant because:
it places international legal decision-making within the UN system
it provides a judicial mechanism for disputes between states
it demonstrates that relations between sovereign states can be governed by international legal principles
its connection with UN membership gives it a particularly broad position within global politics.
Understanding the ICJ also reinforces your knowledge of the judicial role of the UNÂ [The United Nations].
The International Criminal Court
The International Criminal Court (ICC)Â prosecutes individuals for the international crimes of:
genocide
crimes against humanity
war crimes.
This is one of the clearest differences between the ICC and ICJ.
The ICJ is principally concerned with states, whereas the ICC deals with the criminal responsibility of individual people.
The ICC was established in 2002. Its development therefore represented a further stage in international criminal justice following the use of special tribunals during the 1990s.
Why is the ICC significant?
Its importance lies in the principle that individuals can potentially face international prosecution for extremely serious crimes.
This means that international law is not concerned solely with governments and relations between states. It can also address the actions of individual political or military actors.
The ICC is more independent from the United Nations than the ICJ and does not have the same universal membership. This distinction can be very useful in examination comparison questions.
Special UN tribunals
International tribunals are organisations established to prosecute individuals in specific states for:
genocide
crimes against humanity
war crimes.
The Edexcel materials identify special tribunals relating to Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia as important examples of this development during the 1990s.
These tribunals helped establish the principle that individuals could be held internationally accountable for serious human-rights violations.
Special tribunals versus the ICC
Do not treat the ICC and special tribunals as identical.
Special UN tribunals | International Criminal Court |
Established for particular situations or states | An international criminal court with a broader remit |
Important examples developed during the 1990s | Established in 2002 |
Prosecute individuals | Prosecutes individuals |
Deal with genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes | Deals with genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes |
Linked to particular conflicts or situations | Not created for only one specific conflict |
The tribunals are therefore important partly because they demonstrate a stage in the development of international criminal justice before the creation of the ICC.
The European Court of Human Rights
The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR)Â is another institution named specifically in the Edexcel specification.
Unlike the ICJ and ICC, the ECHR is a regional human-rights institution.
Individuals can seek redress through the ECHR for alleged violations of rights protected by the European human-rights framework. Its significance therefore lies in applying international human-rights principles at a regional level.
The ECHR demonstrates that international human-rights governance operates at different levels:
global, through institutions such as the UN, ICJ and ICC
specific international situations, through special tribunals
regional, through institutions such as the ECHR.
This layered system is useful when analysing how international law has developed.
ICJ, ICC, special tribunals and ECHR compared
This comparison is especially important for 12-mark questions.
Institution | Main focus | Who or what is involved? | Key significance |
ICJ | International legal disputes | States | Principal judicial organ of the UN and a major part of state-based international law |
ICC | International criminal justice | Individuals | Prosecutes genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes |
Special UN tribunals | Criminal justice in particular situations | Individuals | Apply international criminal law to specific states or conflicts |
ECHR | Human-rights protection | Individuals and states within its regional framework | Demonstrates regional judicial protection of human rights |
đź“Ś Exam tip:Â Begin comparisons with the most fundamental difference. For the ICJ and ICC, that is usually states versus individuals.
You can then develop the comparison through:
purpose
relationship with the United Nations
breadth of jurisdiction
membership and reach
significance within international law.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)Â was adopted in 1948Â and is specifically identified by Edexcel as a source of authority for international human-rights law.
Its central significance is that it establishes the idea that human rights are universal.
This means rights are understood as belonging to people because they are human, rather than simply because a particular government has chosen to grant them.
Why is the UDHR significant?
The UDHR matters for several connected reasons.
First, it gives the concept of universal human rights an important international source of authority.
Second, it helps shift the discussion of rights away from being exclusively a domestic issue. Human rights become a legitimate concern of the wider international community.
Third, it forms part of the development of a broader international human-rights system involving courts, tribunals and international agreements.
The UDHR should therefore not be confused with the institutions themselves.
The UDHR is a source of authority for human-rights principles.
The ICJ, ICC, tribunals and ECHR are institutions involved in applying or developing international law and human-rights governance.
How these developments created a more global system of politics
Taken together, these developments show the expansion of international law in several directions.
From states to individuals
The ICJ reflects a system in which international law primarily regulates relations between states.
The ICC and special tribunals demonstrate that individuals can also become subjects of international criminal justice.
From national to international human-rights standards
The 1948 UDHR expresses the principle that some rights should apply universally.
Human-rights protection can therefore become a matter for institutions beyond the individual state.
From global to regional governance
The ECHR demonstrates that international human-rights governance can also develop through regional institutions.
These developments help explain why contemporary politics cannot be understood simply by studying individual states in isolation.
The tension between these international institutions and sovereign governments is developed further in human rights and state sovereignty [Human rights and state sovereignty].
What you need to be able to do in an exam
Knowing definitions is only the starting point.
For an examine question, accurate knowledge should be used to develop analysis.
For example:
Knowledge:Â The ICJ deals primarily with disputes between states, while the ICC prosecutes individuals.
Analysis:Â This means the ICC represents a development beyond a purely state-centred system of international law because individuals themselves can face international criminal responsibility.
That second sentence turns accurate AO1 knowledge into AO2 analysis.
Questions may also connect international institutions to wider human-rights issues. The next stage of the topic considers humanitarian intervention [Humanitarian intervention], where attempts to protect human rights can involve direct action within sovereign states.
Key Words 🔑
Key word | Student-friendly definition | How it may be used in an exam |
International law | Law governing states and other international actors. | Use when explaining why international institutions can influence behaviour beyond individual states. |
International Court of Justice (ICJ) | The principal judicial organ of the United Nations. | Contrast its focus on states with the ICC's prosecution of individuals. |
International Criminal Court (ICC) | An institution that prosecutes individuals for genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. | Use when explaining the development of international criminal justice. |
International tribunals | Institutions established to prosecute individuals in specific states for genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. | Compare special tribunals with the broader role of the ICC. |
Universal human rights | Rights that apply to people in all societies regardless of cultural or other differences. | Use when explaining the significance of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. |
Hints from the Examiner Reports đź’ˇ
Examiner hint:Â When comparing institutions, structure the answer around the differences or similarities themselves, rather than writing everything you know about one institution and then everything about the other. In 2023, stronger answers on the ICJ and ICC directly identified and explained differences and supported them with appropriate examples.
Examiner hint:Â Accurate knowledge alone is not enough in a 12-mark question. Examiner feedback repeatedly rewards candidates who develop their knowledge into clear logical analysis. For example, do not stop at saying that the ICC prosecutes individuals. Explain what this shows about the development of international law.
Examiner hint:Â Keep returning to the exact wording of the question. The 2025 examiner report noted that stronger responses retained focus on the required issue, while some candidates lost marks by discussing the general success or failure of human-rights institutions instead of addressing the precise debate being asked.
Examiner hint:Â Where a question names two institutions, cover both. A detailed response on only one body cannot provide the consistent comparative analysis expected at the highest level.
Common Mistakes ⚠️
Mistake: Confusing the ICJ with the ICC
Why this is incorrect: Their functions are fundamentally different. The ICJ principally deals with disputes involving states, whereas the ICC prosecutes individuals for genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes.
How to improve: Remember the distinction:
ICJ = states
ICC = individuals and international crimes
Mistake: Treating the ICC and special UN tribunals as identical
Why this is incorrect: Both prosecute individuals for serious international crimes, but special tribunals are established for particular situations or states. The ICC represents a broader development in international criminal justice.
How to improve: When comparing them, identify both a similarity and a difference. Their subject matter overlaps, but their scope and institutional form differ.
Mistake: Describing the UDHR as another international court
Why this is incorrect: The 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights is identified by the specification as a source of authority for human rights. It is not one of the judicial institutions named alongside the ICJ, ICC, tribunals and ECHR.
How to improve: Separate the topic into two categories:
source of authority:Â UDHR
institutions:Â ICJ, ICC, special tribunals and ECHR.
Mistake: Writing two separate descriptions in a comparison question
Why this is incorrect: Describing the ICJ in one half of the answer and the ICC in the second half may demonstrate knowledge, but it makes direct comparative analysis harder to sustain.
How to improve: Organise each paragraph around one comparison:
who each institution deals with
its relationship with the UN
its reach and membership
its role in international law.
Mistake: Drifting into humanitarian intervention
Why this is incorrect: Humanitarian intervention is part of the wider human-rights topic, but it is distinct from explaining the origins and development of international law and institutions.
How to improve: Check the wording carefully. If the question is about courts, tribunals or the UDHR, keep those institutions at the centre of the answer.
Exam-Style Questions ✍️
Question 1
Define international law. (1)
Answer:
Law that governs states and other international actors. (1 mark)
Question 2
Identify the principal judicial organ of the United Nations. (1)
Answer:
The International Court of Justice (ICJ). (1 mark)
Question 3
Explain two differences between the ICJ and ICC. (4)
Indicative answer:
The ICJ deals principally with disputes between states, whereas the ICC prosecutes individuals. (2 marks)
The ICJ is the principal judicial organ of the United Nations, whereas the ICC is a distinct international criminal institution. (2 marks)
Question 4
Consider the following situation:
State A and State B disagree over an issue of international law. Separately, an individual political leader is accused of genocide and crimes against humanity.
Identify the international institution most relevant to each situation and explain your choices. (4)
Answer:
The dispute between State A and State B is most appropriately associated with the ICJ, because it deals with international legal disputes involving states. (2 marks)
The individual accused of genocide and crimes against humanity is most appropriately associated with the ICC, because it prosecutes individuals for genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. (2 marks)
Question 5
Explain the significance of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights in the development of international law. (6)
Indicative mark scheme:
Credit developed explanation of points such as:
it provides an important source of authority for international human rights
it expresses the idea of universal human rights
it establishes that human rights apply across different societies
it contributes to the movement of human-rights protection beyond purely domestic politics
it forms part of the wider development of international human-rights governance.
Higher-mark answers should explain the significance of these developments rather than simply state what the UDHR is.
Question 6
Examine the differences between the International Criminal Court and special UN tribunals. (12)
Indicative mark scheme:
AO1: Knowledge and understanding
Students may explain that:
both prosecute individuals
both are concerned with genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes
special tribunals operate in relation to particular situations or states
examples include tribunals relating to Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia
the ICC was established in 2002 as a broader international criminal institution.
AO2: Analysis
Students may analyse that:
special tribunals represent a more situation-specific approach to international criminal justice
the ICC represents a further institutional development beyond tribunals created in response to individual situations
both demonstrate the movement of international law beyond relations between states towards individual criminal responsibility.
For the highest level, comparisons should be sustained throughout rather than presented as two separate descriptions.
Question 7
Examine the different roles played by the ICJ and ECHR in the development of international law. (12)
Indicative mark scheme:
AO1: Knowledge and understanding
Credit points including:
the ICJ is the principal judicial organ of the UN
the ICJ principally deals with legal disputes involving states
the ECHR is a regional human-rights institution
the ECHR allows alleged human-rights violations to be considered within a regional judicial framework.
AO2: Analysis
Students may explain that:
the ICJ reflects the traditional importance of sovereign states in international law
the ECHR demonstrates the development of international legal protection focused more directly upon human rights
the contrast shows how international law has developed through different global and regional institutions.
Question 8
Evaluate the view that the International Criminal Court has been more significant than the International Court of Justice in the development of international law. (30)
Indicative mark scheme:
A strong response should consider the argument and the alternative in a balanced way.
Arguments supporting the view may include:
the ICC extends international law directly to the criminal responsibility of individuals
it prosecutes genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes
its establishment in 2002 represents an important development in international criminal justice
it builds on the earlier development of special international tribunals.
Arguments challenging the view may include:
the ICJ is the principal judicial organ of the United Nations
the ICJ is embedded within the wider UN system
its focus on disputes between states reflects the continuing central importance of states in international politics
its broad connection with UN membership gives it a particularly important position within global international law.
Analysis and evaluation:
A high-level answer should compare what is meant by significance. If significance is measured by the development of individual criminal accountability, the ICC has a strong claim. If significance is measured through breadth, connection to the United Nations and regulation of relations between states, the ICJ may be more significant.
Conclusion:
Reach a substantiated judgement based on clear criteria. Do not simply state that both institutions are important. Explain which is more significant and why.
Comments