... Rights?theextentthattheyhavebeenenshrinedinpositivelaw.HewouldnodoubthavethoughtthatwedeludeourselvesifwebelievetherightsoftheConventiontobetheexpressionofnatural,self-evidentrights.TheconstructionoftheConvention,containingjusticiablerightsinscribedwithinasystemwherecomplaintsareheardinaverylegalisticway,mayvindicatethisview.OnepointonwhichBenthamwaswrongwastofearthatadocumentsuchastheFrenchDeclarationwouldleadto‘perpetualinsurrection’.However,thismaywellbebecausehewascorrecttodenythatrightscouldbeabovethestate .The doctrineofthemarginofappreciationandthepossibilityofderogatingfromtheConventionunderArticle15bothindicatethatstatistconsiderationsassumeapositionofchoiceundertheConvention.Indeed,somecommentatorswouldarguethathumanrightslawdoesnotmakeitpossiblefortheauthorityofthestatetobesufficientlyquestioned.ThiswouldcomeasnosurprisetoIRrealists.Thoseamongthemwhothinkthatthestateshouldnotabandonitsowninterestsinfavourofauniversalmoralitymayevenwelcomesuchaconclusion.Otherswouldsimplypointoutthatstateinterestsandpowerplayarolewhichmustbeacknowledgedratherthanignoredininternationalaffairs,includinghumanrightsinternationallaw .The Strasbourgcaselawoffersampleevidenceinsupportofthisargument,ashasbeenillustratedinthischapter.Realism,however,shouldnotbeexaminedonitsown.Itismoreusefultoconsiderhowrealismandidealism,statismandsupranationalism,areintensionwitheachother.Indeed,inthecaselaw,theCourtcanbeseenbothtoconcurwithandtostanduptothestate.Inconclusion,theConventionoffersneither‘real’nor‘imaginary’rights,butwhatcouldbereferredtoastherelativeprotec-tionofthesandbag.Notes1Thisisnottodenythattheutilitarianandrealistaspectsofhisthoughtaredirectlyrelated ... Rights?theextentthattheyhavebeenenshrinedinpositivelaw.HewouldnodoubthavethoughtthatwedeludeourselvesifwebelievetherightsoftheConventiontobetheexpressionofnatural,self-evidentrights.TheconstructionoftheConvention,containingjusticiablerightsinscribedwithinasystemwherecomplaintsareheardinaverylegalisticway,mayvindicatethisview.OnepointonwhichBenthamwaswrongwastofearthatadocumentsuchastheFrenchDeclarationwouldleadto‘perpetualinsurrection’.However,thismaywellbebecausehewascorrecttodenythatrightscouldbeabovethestate .The doctrineofthemarginofappreciationandthepossibilityofderogatingfromtheConventionunderArticle15bothindicatethatstatistconsiderationsassumeapositionofchoiceundertheConvention.Indeed,somecommentatorswouldarguethathumanrightslawdoesnotmakeitpossiblefortheauthorityofthestatetobesufficientlyquestioned.ThiswouldcomeasnosurprisetoIRrealists.Thoseamongthemwhothinkthatthestateshouldnotabandonitsowninterestsinfavourofauniversalmoralitymayevenwelcomesuchaconclusion.Otherswouldsimplypointoutthatstateinterestsandpowerplayarolewhichmustbeacknowledgedratherthanignoredininternationalaffairs,includinghumanrightsinternationallaw .The Strasbourgcaselawoffersampleevidenceinsupportofthisargument,ashasbeenillustratedinthischapter.Realism,however,shouldnotbeexaminedonitsown.Itismoreusefultoconsiderhowrealismandidealism,statismandsupranationalism,areintensionwitheachother.Indeed,inthecaselaw,theCourtcanbeseenbothtoconcurwithandtostanduptothestate.Inconclusion,theConventionoffersneither‘real’nor‘imaginary’rights,butwhatcouldbereferredtoastherelativeprotec-tionofthesandbag.Notes1Thisisnottodenythattheutilitarianandrealistaspectsofhisthoughtaredirectlyrelated ... power in all the self-creating ofsociety, became a plaything of government and lawyers. The game of human rightshas been played in international statal organizations by diplomats and bureaucrats,and...