By Drishti Alagh, Master of Law Candidate at Lund University and museum team member
Objects have been at the heart of human civilisations since time immemorial. From the bronze sculptures carved during the Indus Valley Civilisation to the artworks sketched (often in secrecy) by prisoners held captive in Nazi Germany’s concentration camps, objects perform a rather unique retroactive function of teleporting one back in time and invoking within oneself a spectrum of perplexities, emotions and ponderances. (International) law, in its constant pursuit of objectivity, rationality and structure, often seems to be disconnected from the everyday lives of people and their lived experiences. It tends to leave behind the humanistic dimensions of law usually by silencing the emotional and sentimental realities of those it affects. The Museum of International Law, however, explicitly challenges these perceptions and attempts to approach and understand the black letter law through the lens of objects. Undertaking this exercise through objects and material culture not only assists in extracting out the emotional underpinnings underlying international treaties or the painful realities hiding behind colonial ventures, but also overarchingly helps develop international law as a rather vivid context-based discipline, swerving organically through time and space.
Stemming from these notions, therefore, the Museum of International Law (MOIL) is a first of its kind initiative that engages with objects, in a way accentuating the relation between objects and individuals, in order to unravel the human dimension of international law. The evocative collection of objects exhibited in the Museum, from a piece of the Berlin Wall to the vivacious Lotus Collection, could be seen as the physical manifestation of the abstract international legal framework, illustrating the stories of individuals whose lives have been entwined with pivotal events that not only shaped the development of international law but also influenced the broader course of history.
Our aim is to bring law to life by exhibiting objects and sharing stories that reverberate the shifting dynamics between international law and the lives of ordinary human beings all across the globe, thereby bringing a humanistic as well as a human rights dimension, spanning across theory and practice, to the discipline of international law. Rather than displaying or depicting international law as a mere myriad of treaties signed and regulations adopted in distant institutions, MOIL is an intellectual space wholeheartedly devoted to exhibiting international law by way of its ubiquitous presence in the everyday lives, struggles and resistances of individuals and communities all around the world. With an unambiguous yet compelling aim of the humanisation of international law, the Museum displays objects that in essence, embody the lived effects of international law-making processes on the lives, emotions and experiences of people. From the UN blue helmet worn by a soldier to an ashtray used by someone aboard the French steamer S.S. Lotus, the museum’s collection not just encapsulates mere objects but also offers evidence of the profound and personal stakes of international law that are felt at the grassroot levels of societies. The museum is not a static archive of objects but a dynamic living space that spans across reflection and action.
Alongside exhibiting objects showcasing the tangible impacts of international law, the museum serves as a space for critical engagement with objects and a platform for voicing the often-marginalised experiences in formal legal discourses. Therefore, with the primary aim to bridge the gap between the theoretical and practical notions of international law, the museum hosts regular events such as discussions on current affairs, seminars and workshops by survivors, scholars, activists, legal practitioners, visiting researchers and artists to speak about the law from the ground up. These initiatives aim to inspire reflections on the promises and limitations of the international legal frameworks by creating dialogue between legal professionals, artists, historians, and communities affected by international law as well as students and learners of law. Very recently, for instance, the museum hosted a conversation with two Lund residents who experienced the end of the second world war as children in Germany, thereby giving all the attendees the opportunity to reflect upon the actual lived experiences of the two children amidst a significant and imperative historical event that shaped the course of contemporary international law.
Furthermore, instead of establishing itself solely as a static and archival exhibit of objects, MOIL aims to constantly and consistently deal with the fundamental questions surrounding international law and navigating through ways to reshape the law. The museum, in this sense, grows, develops and nurtures everyday as an ongoing process, as does the international legal discipline. Moreover, by centring the stories of individuals behind international legal events and their lived experiences and realities evoked through these events, the museum helps reveal the profound moral and emotional dimensions of international law, that are evident in its capacity to heal, its potential for harm, and its indispensable role in the pursuit of dignity, accountability, and justice. The museum is in itself an organic entity where law meets life by way of the stories, emotions and most importantly, objects of those touched by international law, reminding us that behind every treaty signed by states or every legal principle adopted through a judicial decision is a person, a struggle, and a story worth telling, for law is inextricably etched in its own humanness.
Visiting the Museum of International Law
The Museum of International Law has already had a soft launch in the premises of the Raoul Wallenberg Institute in Lund. However, the plan is to open the museum in a more accessible and appropriate location at the Faculty of Law in the near future. For now, the museum is only open by appointment. To book, email: contact@internationallawmuseum.org.
By Lena Halldenius, Professor of Human Rights and Coordinator of the Human Rights Profile Area
On the 29 April 2025, the Human Rights Profile Area and the Swedish Institute for Human Rights organised a Human Rights Dialogue. Around 50 people from Lund University, the Institute for Human Rights, and the Raoul Wallenberg Institute met to discuss, reflect, and start forming new research agendas for pertinent human rights challenges in Sweden today and in the near future.
The Dialogue opened with a presentation of the newly launched Annual Report from the Institute for Human Rights, on how human rights are respected and realised – or not – in Sweden (https://mrinstitutet.se/rapporter/arsrapport-2025-om-manskliga-rattigheter/). The Report found that general support for human rights remains very strong in Sweden, with survey results suggesting that 82% believe that human rights are important to them and reflect their values. A reflection that persisted throughout our discussions was that it would be interesting and important to know more about what is behind those figures. What is the perception of human rights that inform these numbers? A potential research project is beginning to form itself already!
Photo: Abigail Booth presenting the 2025 Annual Report from the Institute for Human Rights to the participants of the Human Rights Dialogue (Photo: Johan Persson).
Discussions continued in small groups around different themes: 1. Discrimination, racism, hate, and threats, 2. Economic,social, and cultural rights, 3. Rule of law and shrinking civil space, 4. Climate and environment, and 5. Methodological challenges for measuring human rights.
Photo: Researchers and practitioners from different academic fields engaged in group discussions (Photo: Johan Persson).
Among the maaaany topics covered, we talked about how big societal transitions (like digitisation and the green transition) bring new challenges that the human rights framework has not been designed for. Do we need to rethink human rights when things we have taken for granted are in flux? In the wake of a weakening democracy and a harsher social climate, we were also alert to a new kind of talk about the alleged “social contract”, where rights are surreptitiously conditioned on duties to behave and blend in. We begin to see how human rights are used to justify – in the name of security – interventions that just recently were seen as obvious violations, like mass surveillance and frisking children without any suspicion of criminal activity. What is the relationship between the individual and the state today, and what is the role for civil society and activism, when democracy is put to the test in an increasingly authoritarian political culture?
Human rights are supposed to be instantiated in law and institutions, but they are also aspirational and normative ideals to strive towards. This is a delicate balance. Is there a risk that aspirations and ideals come at the risk of making formal protective institutions irrelevant? At the same time, rights are also affective and an aspirational framework could help foster a more resilient political culture of rights. We are currently witnessing persistent inequality between countries and growing inequality within countries. Whether economic inequalities in themselves can constitute rights violations is a hotly debated topics. But one thing that seems clear is that vast economic inequalities and wealth concentration in the hands of a few have seriously detrimental effects on democratic institutions and civic participation.
Sweden is often portrayed as a champion of economic and social rights. An international comparison would be valuable to assess whether this perception holds true. But how can large scale studies of the progressive realization of economic and social rights be done? What are the indicators and the relevant data? Dealing with such methodological challenges will be a crucial part of human rights research ahead. We are just getting started!
Photo: The Human Rights Dialogue offered ample opportunities to connect with other Profile Area members. The Human Rights Profile Area has increased substantially during the last year and now has more than 130 members from 6 faculties at Lund University(Photo: Johan Persson).
Martin Sunnqvist, coordinator for the Advanced Study Group ”Oaths and Courts – from Forum to the Future” at Pufendorf Institute presented during the Human Rights Lunch Online on May 16th, 2025.
Within the ASG ”Oaths and Courts – from Forum to the Future” at the Lund University Pufendorf Institute for Advanced Studies, a group of researchers working within law, history, legal history, ancient history, theology and languages (Latin and Greek) gather. The independence and impartiality of judges, and the ambition to find the truth through judicial proceedings, have been defined by different types of oaths from Antiquity and onwards. In the ASG, we discuss how we can understand these legal oaths today, what they mean and what role they play in finding the truth and for the independence and impartiality of judges. And what do the standards of independence and impartiality mean when AI becomes part of decision-making?
The right to a fair trial is a fundamental human right. It is not only a right on its own, but it also provides individuals with an avenue to enforce other human rights. The right to a fair trial is, for example, described in art. 6 ECHR as the right to a ‘fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law.’ Art. 10 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights provides everyone with the right ‘to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal’. The right to a fair trial is also defined in many constitutions. The right has been further defined in many judgments from the European Court of Human Rights.
In ancient Greece, oaths of judges are known from the 4th century B.C. Judges then swore to vote in accordance with the laws and decrees of the Athenian people, to listen to both parties equally, and to judge with their most just judgment without favour or hostility. These are standards that we still recognise as part of the right to a fair trial. In the period from 1150 to 1250, when judges and lawyers were in a process of professionalisation, oaths were an important part of the transition. In the 1230s, oaths for lawyers were formulated in France, England and Sicily. Lawyers should swear that they should not present unjust cases and that they should be loyal to their clients. This was a development of the Roman calumny oath. Furthermore, oaths for judges were formulated in the same decade in the German empire and in Sicily. Judges should swear that they should not hand down wrongful judgments, neither because of love nor hate, prayer nor reward, fear nor favour. These phrases then spread all over Europe and traces can be seen in the historical development of oaths of judges in many jurisdictions, often still today.
During the Middle Ages and the Early Modern Period, the correct behaviour of a judge was not only communicated through oaths but also with the help of images. In town halls, such as in Siena in Italy, in Monsaraz in Portugal, and in Gdansk in Poland, there are allegories from the 14th -16th centuries of good and bad government or the good and bad judge. Also in legal manuscripts, the good judge and the fair trial could be shown and contrasted to the deceitful judge. In this way, the desired behaviour was clarified.
Maître de 1346, Le tribunal de Justinien, Digestum vetus cum glossa Accursii, vers 1345. Copyright BnF, Manuscript Latin no. 14339.
One example from a manuscript is from the mid-14th century. Maria Alessandra Bilotta (Lisbon), art historian specialised in medieval legal manuscripts, explained during a seminar 7th March 2025 how emperor Justinian as a judge is surrounded by six virtues, three on either side, representing caritas – charity (looking upwards and holding parchment scrolls, one upwards with the three first commandments and one downwards with the other seven commandments), temperantia – temperance (holding a locked castle where vices are kept), fortitude – strength (holding a lion in its jaws), prudentia – wisdom (holding a circle or mirror with a book, and symbols of day and night), fides – faith (holding a tree in which are hanging 15 medallions representing the declaration of confession) and spes – hope (holding an anchor). Justinian himself symbolises the virtue of justice. Below are people with gifts, and as the judge refuses bribery, justice is incorruptible. A soldier is cutting the head of someone as an exemplum for the people, also reminding us about the development in human rights as the prohibition of capital punishment was, for example, not even included in the original version of the European Convention of Human Rights but added later.
The seminar 7th March 2025 was financed through seed money from the Human Rights profile area and the theme was The Right to a Fair Trial – Historical Foundations. Besides Maria Alessandra Bilotta’s contribution, Camilla Marangoni (Rome/Torino) presented her research on images from illuminated legal manuscripts, using the ICONCLASS taxonomy of iconography. A recurring motif in medieval manuscripts is that persons have taken off a glove and are holding it in the other hand. The detail is present in marriage scenes but also other contexts. What symbolic rule does such a detail have there? In some cases, it might symbolise oath taking.
As regards oaths, Vojtech Vladár (Bratislava) presented the development of oaths in the medieval romano-canonical procedure and related it to the ordeals, i.e. tests of guilt or innocence through interference by God. Also in oaths, God was invoked as a guarantor for truth-telling. Janko Paunovic (Vienna) presented various 12th-14th century oaths from Kotor in today’s Montenegro, showing that judges there had to swear not to help their friends or harm their enemies and that they should judge in good faith and without deceit. This aligns well with oaths in other jurisdictions and contributes to the understanding of the diffusion of ethical standards for judges in the Middle Ages. Raffaella Bianchi Riva (Milan) discussed the oaths of advocates in the Middle Ages, and how they handled the dual role of the legal profession: advocates want to win the case and have a duty of loyalty to their clients, but on the other hand, they may not promote injustice. Oath of advocates can also have a political function: as means of control which can hamper their independence.
Jørn Øyrehagen Sunde (Oslo) presented the four daughters of God referred to in Norwegian Medieval law as a means to solve the problem of corruption during the transmission from a kindred to a state society in Norway in the 13th century. The four daughters of God were the four virtues mercy, verity, justice and peace, and against them stood the four bastards of the Devil, which were the vices fear, avarice, enmity and friendship. This illustrates – just as the oaths and the imagery in town halls and manuscripts – the ethical standard of judges.
Altogether, the seminar provided us with deepened knowledge about different aspects of the history of the right to a fair trial. It reinforced our view that the ethical standards of judges and advocates have long histories but are complex and difficult to apply, and therefore they are adapted and renegotiated as societies change. The core values, however, as the independence and impartiality in the judge’s mind, remains intact as an ideal over the centuries. This means that history is not only interesting in its own right but also provides us with examples useful here and now.
The seminar also formed a base for continued thinking of ways to develop our common interests centering around oaths and courts. The topic could be widened to analyse how oaths have functioned as means to safeguard good governance, something that could also be connected to historic images. On the other hand, the topic could be widened to comprise times of transitions – what role do oaths to the constitution and other oaths have when a society transitions from one type of regime to another. An ongoing discussion is also how ethical standards for judges and advocates are adapted to the use of AI technology for analysing and presenting evidence and assessing facts and law.
Martin Sunnqvist is a professor of legal history at the Faculty of Law, Lund University and a member of the Human Rights Profile Area. On the 16th of May 2025, Martin will give a presentation on the ASG during Human Rights Lunch Online. You can read more about Martin’s research on the research portal.
During the Human Rights Lunch Online on April 11, 2025 Jessica Almqvist and Alberto Rinaldi, both from Lund University Faculty of Law, focused on the normative foundations of human rights law in the light of modern technological developments that could have a detrimental impact on individuals, society, and humanity as a whole.
In an era of rapid technological transformation, the foundational principles of human rights are being called into question in unprecedented ways. To foster critical interdisciplinary dialogue on this pressing issue, Alberto Rinaldi from the Faculty of Law has received seed funding from Lund University’s Profile Area for a workshop titled “(Re)examining Human Rights Foundations in the Technological Age.”
The workshop brought together scholars from law, philosophy, technology studies, and the social sciences to engage in a deep rethinking of key human rights concepts that risk being sidelined in contemporary debates. While much attention in recent years has justifiably centered on non-discrimination, privacy, and data protection, the workshop sought to broaden the scope of inquiry and revive neglected yet essential rights and concepts. In particular, the focus was placed on:
The Right to Freedom of Thought – a right that gains new significance in the context of neurotechnologies, algorithmic profiling, and affective computing, all of which have the potential to interfere with the inner realm of individuals’ cognitive life.
The Right to Science – an often-overlooked right that includes both access to scientific progress and participation in it, but which also raises thorny questions about responsibility, equitable distribution, and dual-use technologies.
The Concept of Human Dignity – a cornerstone of human rights law whose meaning is increasingly contested in light of developments in artificial intelligence, biotechnology, and human enhancement.
These discussions are not only timely but essential, as technological innovation increasingly challenges the boundaries of the human person, autonomy, and vulnerability. By revisiting these foundational elements, the workshop aimed to stimulate a renewed normative reflection on what human rights mean and should mean in the face of emerging scientific and technological paradigms.
In the same spirit of interdisciplinary inquiry, Jessica Almqvist, Deputy Dean at the Faculty of Law, will present the Pufendorf Institute’s research theme “Greyzone Genomics.” This initiative investigates the ethical, legal, and societal implications of large-scale genetic technologies, particularly focusing on the ambiguous spaces—the “grey zones”—where these innovations test the limits of existing regulatory frameworks.
The theme addresses how advanced genomics and synthetic biology, though often heralded for their medical and scientific promise, can also be weaponized or misused in the context of international conflict and hybrid warfare. The research team explores novel interdisciplinary methods to assess the risks associated with such dual-use biotechnologies, aiming to develop scenario-based analyses and policy-relevant recommendations. This approach opens up a new research frontier at the intersection of medicine, law, and national security, asking difficult but necessary questions about how societies can anticipate, prevent, and respond to emerging biosecurity threats.
Together, these initiatives reflect a broader commitment at Lund University to advance critical, interdisciplinary research that addresses the most pressing human rights challenges of our time. By combining legal expertise with insights from the natural and social sciences, both projects underscore the need for new frameworks and fresh thinking to uphold human rights in an age of complexity and change.
Greyzone Genomics: Navigating the Risks of Genetic Technologies in a Shifting World
Genetic technologies are reshaping human health on an unprecedented scale. But as these breakthroughs unfold, the world is also facing growing geopolitical instability — giving rise to concerns about how advances in DNA sequencing and synthesis could be put to use outside the clinical context and be weaponized in global power struggles. Until now, discussions around the misuse of genetic technology have mainly focused on fear-driven scenarios like the development of “ethnic bioweapons.” Yet, the potential for misuse is broader and more complex, touching on critical issues related to human rights and human security. The international laws and regulations meant to safeguard us from such misusage are often outdated, scarce, and riddled with ambiguity.
Running as a Theme at the Pufendorf Institute during 2024/2025, Greyzone Genomics explores the many ways genetic technologies could be exploited in global conflict — and, importantly, how we can act to prevent it. We examine emerging risks like disinformation campaigns fueled by genetic data, defamation using synthetic DNA, psychological profiling of political leaders based on DNA sequences, weaponizing individuals as carriers of synthetic pathogens, and also mass theft of DNA data to power AI systems.
The project further delves into the human rights implications of these tactics and investigates whether international law and international institutions have the tools to counter them. Spoiler: often, existing treaties and regulations seem insufficient — but that’s part of what we seek to address and respond to in this Theme.
To tackle these challenges, Greyzone Genomics brings together a team of researchers from medicine, data analytics, intelligence studies, strategic communication, war studies, and international law. Together, we’re developing new multidisciplinary approaches to assess and counter the risks of emerging biotechnologies. Through evidence-based scenario building and focused studies of legal frameworks, we are not only analyzing the these risks — we’re aiming to find measures to mitigate these risks.
Beyond the academic world, Greyzone Genomics seeks to raise broader awareness among key stakeholders about the darker sides of gene technology in modern conflict. The Theme is a collaborative initiative with researchers from Lund University, the Swedish Defence University, and the Swedish Defence Research Agency.
Alberto Rinaldi is Postdoctoral Researcher at Lund University Faculty of Law, member of the Profile Area Human Rights and part of the Pufendorf theme Greyzone Genomics. Alberto holds a Master in Human Rights Law from the American University in Cairo (2012) and a PhD in International Law from Sciences Po Paris (2019).
Jessica Almqvist is Professor of International Law and Human Rights and Deputy Dean for Research at the Faculty of Law of Lund University. She is also the Deputy Coordinator of the Human Rights Profile Area and Coordinator of the Pufendorf theme Greyzone Genomics.
Martin Wolgast, Lund University Department of Psychology
On the 28th of March, 2025 at 12:15-13:00 Martin Wolgast presented the report for the Swedish Agency for Work Environment Expertise on special exposure to work-related stress and ill health based on ethnicity, skin color, and religion. Martin shared insights from literature on this relationship in Sweden and internationally, discuss preventive measures, and highlight the knowledge and experience of relevant actors. Finally, he identified knowledge gaps and reflect on how systematic work environment efforts and preventive measures can minimize these risks.
Watch the recording on Youtube:
Sweden has long positioned itself as a champion of equality and social justice — a country with robust legal protections, progressive labor policies, and a self-image grounded in fairness. Yet beneath this image, a different reality persists for many individuals in the Swedish labor market. A new report from the Swedish Agency for Work Environment Expertise (Myndigheten för arbetsmiljökunskap) reveals the extent to which racialized and religious minorities in Sweden are exposed to unequal and often harmful working conditions. Drawing on an extensive review of international and Swedish research, a national survey, and interviews with stakeholders and civil society, the report exposes a pattern of systemic disadvantage that is both widespread and deeply normalized.
At the heart of the report is a concern that goes beyond individual acts of bias: the structures of the labor market themselves reproduce stress and ill-health among marginalized groups. Whether through insecure employment contracts, limited career mobility, or unequal access to workplace support, people who are racialized as non-white or who belong to minority religious communities face elevated levels of stress, anxiety, and exclusion. This is not merely a question of perceived inequality. The report documents clear correlations between perceived discrimination and actual health outcomes — including mental health issues, physical fatigue, burnout, and reduced recovery after work.
The Swedish data aligns with a growing body of international research showing that work-related stress is unequally distributed. In particular, the concept of minority stress — originally developed in the context of LGBTQ+ research — is used here to describe the chronic psychological burden that arises from being part of a stigmatized group. The report also discusses the notion of assimilation stress, highlighting the emotional toll of having to downplay or suppress cultural, religious, or ethnic identity in order to “fit in” at work. These stressors are compounded by workplace norms around emotional expression — what the report refers to as “racialized emotional norms” — where certain ways of being are considered more professional, more acceptable, or more ‘Swedish’ than others.
What emerges is a portrait of the workplace not simply as a site of economic activity, but as a microcosm of broader societal power relations. Access to secure employment, recognition, and psychological safety becomes a marker of inclusion, while others are pushed to the margins through more precarious contracts, overlooked qualifications, or heightened scrutiny. The report underscores that individuals with migrant backgrounds — particularly those from Africa, the Middle East, and parts of Asia — are disproportionately employed in positions below their education level, face slower career progression, and are more often subjected to bullying or harassment. The presence of discriminatory practices is not isolated to hiring, but permeates everyday interactions, evaluations, and power dynamics within organizations.
Importantly, the report also draws attention to invisibility as a form of harm. Many instances of racism or discrimination are not overt, but subtle and cumulative — expressed through microaggressions, exclusion from informal networks, or the silencing of diversity-related concerns. Individuals who attempt to address these issues may find themselves isolated or penalized, especially when support from management or trade unions is lacking. This dynamic — where raising issues of discrimination leads to further marginalization — points to a deeper cultural and structural resistance to confronting racism within Swedish institutions.
The human rights implications are clear. The right to work under fair, just, and safe conditions is enshrined in international human rights law, including instruments such as the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) and the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. These rights are not fulfilled simply by the absence of explicit discrimination; they require positive action to ensure that systemic barriers are dismantled. In this light, the report’s findings challenge us to think critically about how the Swedish labor market — and by extension, Swedish society — lives up to its human rights commitments.
The recommendations offered in the report are both practical and normatively grounded. They include fostering inclusive organizational cultures, implementing systematic and recurring training on anti-discrimination and unconscious bias, promoting leadership that is both active and relationally competent, and providing access to mentorship and support for employees from marginalized backgrounds. These are not only interventions for improved productivity or employee satisfaction, but essential measures to realize the right to dignity, equality, and health at work. Crucially, the report does not stop at identifying individual vulnerabilities, but calls for broader structural reforms to create a more equitable labor market — one grounded in strong protections for workers, regardless of background, and capable of addressing the systemic roots of discrimination and stress.
For scholars and practitioners in the field of human rights, the report offers a bridge between theory and practice. It invites us to reframe occupational health and workplace equity as core human rights concerns, and not merely as questions of policy or management. And it reminds us that rights are not only violated through explicit prohibitions, but also through silence, neglect, and systemic inertia.
Martin Wolgast is Senior lecturer and researcher at the Department of Psychology at Lund University and a member of the Human Rights Profile Area.
By Ming Gao, Department of History, Lund University
China’s marriage rate has plummeted to its lowest level since records began in the 1980s. In 2024, marriage registrations across the country totalled 6.1 million, a decline from 7.7 million the year before. This decline has prompted a Chinese national political adviser to propose lowering the legal marriage age to 18. Currently, the legal marriage age in China is 22 for men and 20 for women, among the highest in the world.
Despite this historic decline, the number of foreign brides, mostly from Southeast Asia – including both trafficked women and those who enter China illegally for marriage – seems quietly rising. About two months ago, China’s top political advisory body, the CPPCC, held a meeting on strengthening the management of cross-border marriages, with a primary focus on the ‘illegal cross-border marriages.’
In addition, last March, China’s Ministry of Public Security launched a nationwide campaign against the transnational trafficking of women and children, calling for stronger international cooperation to eradicate such crimes.
Yet, addressing marriage solely through statistics and border enforcement overlooks deeper social issues. Behind these figures lie significant struggles for those who desire marriage but remain unable to achieve it, raising critical questions about the broader social and ethical consequences for China and the international community.
Understanding China’s marriage crash
This historic low in the marriage rate is driven by a combination of economic pressures, shifting gender expectations, evolving social attitudes toward marriage, and higher levels of education. In particular, urban women are increasingly pushing back against traditional gender roles, including expectations around reproduction, that prioritise domestic responsibilities over career aspirations. Meanwhile, rising living costs, especially soaring housing prices, have made marriage an unaffordable prospect for many young people.
This resistance is further exacerbated by China’s longstanding gender imbalance, a legacy of the sweeping one-child policy and a cultural preference for male children. This is particularly pronounced among those born in the 1980s – a generation I belong to – due to the widespread use of ultrasound technology from the mid-1980s onwards. The ability to determine a foetus’ sex as early as 14 to 16 weeks, combined with the drastic one-child policy and a deep-rooted preference for sons, offered parents the ability to terminate pregnancies if their child was female. This led to a sustained and severe gender imbalance. At its peak, China’s sex ratio at birth reached 121.2 boys for every 100 girls, with some provinces exceeding 130.
To put the number into context, China’s gender imbalance could persist until 2050, with projections suggesting that up to 50 million men may remain unmarried. Reluctantly, they have become part of the ‘Era of Leftover Men’ (shengnan shidai), an internet term loosely referring to the period from 2020 to 2050, when China is expected to have 30 to 50 million unmarried men, primarily from impoverished rural areas, who are unable to find wives. The conundrum is that most ‘leftover’ men want to marry but cannot find or afford a spouse. A widely used phrase in China, “difficulty in getting married” (jiehun nan), encapsulates this struggle.
The surge in ‘purchased’ foreign brides
With more men competing for a comparatively small pool of women, a phenomenon known as ‘marriage squeeze’ has emerged – where those with fewer resources are increasingly pushed out of this fierce competition driven by demographic imbalance.
So, who will these ‘leftover’ men marry? Probably no one knows the exact answer. As members of the generation born in the late 1980s, we came of age in a time when gender-based sex selection was largely unchecked. Personally, I know that some of my peers from primary and secondary school have been desperately searching for a wife but remain ‘leftover’ men.
Unable to find a domestic spouse, many turn to ‘purchasing’ (maihun) foreign brides. For many Chinese men, especially those in rural areas, transnational marriages seemingly offer a viable solution to the domestic spouse shortage. The growing demand for brides has led to a surge in illegal and trafficked marriages – including child brides – particularly involving women from Southeast Asia, such as Vietnam, Myanmar, and Laos.
Determining the extent of illegal cross-border marriages in China is challenging due to the clandestine nature of these activities. But the most recent data from the UK’s Home Office suggests that 75% of Vietnamese human-trafficking victims were smuggled to China, with women and children making up to 90% of cases.
For example, the award-winning documentary The Woman from Myanmarfollows the story of a trafficked Myanmar woman who was sold into marriage in China. The film exposes the harsh realities faced by many trafficked brides. It captures not only the coercion and abuse these women endure but also their struggle for autonomy and survival in a system that treats them as commodities – valued primarily as reproductive tools rather than as individuals.
Often arranged through informal networks or commercial agencies—both illegal according to China’s State Council – these marriages raise ethical concerns about human trafficking, exploitation, and the commodification of women.
While years ago, China and other Southeast Asian countries rescued thousands of victims trafficked into China for marriage, such cases continue to surface today in news reports and police investigations. A few months ago, Chinese authorities prosecuted individuals involved in an illegal cross-border matchmaking scheme, in which men were lured into costly ‘marriage tours’ abroad with promises of affordable foreign wives.
In November 2024, for example, two people were prosecuted over their involvement in an illegal cross-border matchmaking scheme. This incident underscores the continued risks associated with the underground market for foreign brides, where fraudulent schemes and human trafficking remain rampant.
Indeed, illegal marriage networks are exploiting the eagerness of Chinese ‘leftover’ men, driving the rise of a black market. Police authorities constantly warn of scams involving undocumented foreign brides from Southeast Asia, who take advantage of the situation, sometimes disappearing with large sums of money before marriage arrangements are completed.
In one case, a Cambodian woman, Mao Sretpich, fled with a bride price of 180,000 yuan (approximately $25,000) just hours after the payment. She was arrested weeks later, sentenced to one year and eight months in prison, fined, and ordered deported by a Jiangxi court.
Shifting gender dynamics
Ironically, the practice of sex-selective abortion has led to a scarcity of women, increasing the relative value of those who unknowingly escaped this selection mechanism.
The marriage crisis and the rise of transnational marriages reflect deeper shifts in China’s gender dynamics. Traditional family expectations, which emphasize marriage and childbearing as essential life milestones, are increasingly at odds with the realities faced by young Chinese people. Women, in particular, are challenging these norms, seeking greater autonomy and equality in both personal and professional spheres.
At the same time, the growing demand for foreign brides highlights the persistence of patriarchal attitudes in some segments of Chinese society. Many men seeking transnational marriages still expect their wives to conform to traditional gender roles – just as Larry, the trafficked woman in the documentary, said: ‘Birthing babies [giving birth] was her true source of value’.
What China’s marriage crash means for the future The marriage crisis and its associated trends have far-reaching implications for China’s demographic future. A shrinking and aging population, coupled with a growing number of unmarried men, poses significant challenges for the country’s economic growth and social stability.
Economically, a widely known saying is that China is ‘growing old before it gets rich’ due to its low birth rate and aging population. Even so, Beijing is resisting this characterisation, saying that constant technological innovations will continue to drive economic growth. The labour force is undoubtedly important when it comes to economic growth. But, according to Justin Lin Yifu, a member of the CPPCC, what matters more is effective labour, which is the product of both the quantity and quality of labour force. China has increased its investment in education significantly in anticipation of challenges surrounding its ageing population.
However, notwithstanding this, an even greater concern is the large number of ‘leftover’ men, which could pose a serious threat to social stability. Studies have shown a positive relationship between high male-to-female sex ratios and crime rates in both China and India – two of the countries with the highest numbers of ‘leftover’ men. Higher sex ratios are significantly linked to increased crimes, particularly against women.
For example, in China, distorted male sex ratios can account for up to 14% of the rise in crime, while in India, a 5.5% rise in the male sex ratio would increase the odds of unmarried women being harassed by more than 20%.
As the number of ‘leftover’ men continues to rise in China, Beijing faces a demographic time bomb with profound implications for social stability, economic development, and even geopolitical tensions. Ultimately, the question of who these soon-to-be – or already – 30 to 50 million ‘leftover’ men will marry has become a pressing issue for Beijing. The government’s response will likely shape the country’s future for decades to come.
Ming Gao is research scholar of East Asia at Lund University´s Department of History and member of the Profile Area Human Rights. Ming´s research intersects with cross-disciplinary studies of human rights by examining the historical dimensions of justice, accountability, and memory. Through this approach, he seeks to foster a broader dialogue that engages both academic and general audiences, bridging history with fields such as gender studies, international law, and human rights advocacy.
On February 21st 2025, Valentin Jeutner talked during theHuman Rights Lunch Online seminar about the central themes in his book “The Sovereign Human Being: Carl Schmitt, Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Responsible Decision-Making”.
Carl Schmitt was an influential jurist of Nazi Germany. Dietrich Bonhoeffer was a Lutheran priest hanged for his involvement in a plot to assassinate Adolf Hitler. In many ways, the two men could not be more different. But they both struggled with the question of how to maintain order and how to prevent violence at times of crisis. And they both agreed that order is established not by appealing to existing norms or general principles but by an individual’s sovereign decision. Ascribing sovereignty to individuals communicates that they always have a choice and that they are always responsible for these choices. Thus, it is not just powerful individuals who have the choice to bring wars to an end or who can combat climate change.
By making sovereign decisions, ordinary individuals, too, can work towards the peaceful resolution of conflicts or reduce their carbon footprint. Making such sovereign decisions is not easy for individuals who are taught to follow orders and norms. For this reason, the book supplements the comparative analysis of Schmitt and Bonhoeffer with an action-guiding decision-making framework. While the proposed framework departs from Schmitt’s and Bonhoeffer’s theses by recognizing the agency, responsibility, and sovereignty of all individuals, Jeutner argues that the acknowledgement of the universal sovereignty of individuals is the only way to bring about the orderly and peaceful world of which Schmitt and Bonhoeffer dream.
Valentin Jeutner is a researcher at the Faculty of Law at Lund University. He engages mainly in foundational research related to the nature and fundamental principles of (international) law. This includes exploring the relations between law and related fields like the natural sciences, art, philosophy, or theology.
At Lund University, we are embarking on an ambitious journey to create a strong, influential, and globally recognized profile area dedicated to human rights research, education, and outreach. As one of the coordinators of this initiative, I recently had the opportunity to visit the Australian Human Rights Institute (AHRI) at the University of New South Wales (UNSW) in Sydney. Supported by an Erasmus+ grant, this visit provided valuable insights into how a well-established human rights institute achieves excellence and impact on a global scale.
Why Compare Lund and UNSW?
UNSW is both larger and higher-ranked than Lund University and AHRI has had more time to mature than the LU Human Rights profile area. These circumstances, together with the significant similarities that our two institutions—and their national contexts—share, make this into a meaningful benchmarking exercise. Both universities operate in countries with high living standards, robust academic traditions, and a commitment to human rights. By examining AHRI’s approach, we can explore how Lund University might further develop its human rights profile to become a leading force for impactful research and collaboration.
The AHRI Model
AHRI has evolved from a small centre into a fully-fledged interdisciplinary research institute, achieving remarkable success since its formal establishment in 2018. With a mission to address human rights challenges and propose actionable solutions, AHRI combines rigorous research with strategic engagement across sectors.
A few key elements stand out in AHRI’s success story:
Stable Funding and Autonomy: Base funding from UNSW provides financial stability, enabling AHRI to actively participate in and lead human rights discussions in Australia.
Robust Administration: A well-built and efficient administrative team oversees communications, project management, partnerships, and events, ensuring smooth and responsive operations.
Support for Research and Students: AHRI nurtures over 200 affiliated researchers across UNSW, provides seed funding promising projects and offering paid internships for students at human rights organizations across Australasia.
A Trusted Authority: AHRI has established itself as the go-to resource for journalists, policymakers, and funders seeking expert advice on human rights issues.
Lessons for Lund University
While Lund University’s organizational structure differs from UNSW’s, AHRI’s approach offers several lessons that can inspire and guide our efforts:
Impact-oriented Research: AHRI excels in translating research into real-world applications. Lund can strengthen its ability to bridge the gap between academic work and societal challenges.
Strategic Partnerships: AHRI’s strategic engagement with government, business, and civil society amplify its reach and influence. Lund should expand its partnerships to achieve similar outcomes.
Raising Visibility: AHRI has mastered the art of engaging with media and policymakers, significantly enhancing its public profile. Adopting similar strategies could elevate Lund’s presence and reputation.
Empowering Students: AHRI’s internship programs equip students with practical experience in human rights, cultivating future leaders and reinforcing the institute’s mission. Lund could create similar opportunities to benefit students and strengthen its impact.
Charting the Path Forward
Fotograf: Johan Persson
With consistent university support, strategic partnerships, heightened visibility, and a steadfast commitment to real-world impact, AHRI has established itself as a pivotal force in advancing human rights discussion in Australia. With similar foundations in place, Lund University’s human rights profile area has the potential to achieve comparable success in the years ahead.
Martin Andersson is a senior lecturer and associate professor at the Department of Economic History at Lund University. He is also assistant coordinator in the Human Rights Profile Area.
Fattigdom och utanförskap i Sveriges digitala ekonomi
Lena Halldenius och Moa Petersén
Nu finns nummer två av Lund Human Rights Reports and Working Papers: Det är en rapport från forskningsprojektet Cash. Mänskliga rättigheter och social hållbarhet i övergången till ett kontantlöst samhälle. Projektet har genomförts av oss, Lena Halldenius och Moa Petersén, med finansiering av forskningsrådet Formas.
Användningen av kontanta pengar minskar och allt fler betalningar görs digitalt. Detta är en global förändring, men den är ovanligt tydlig just i Sverige. Det blir allt vanligare att kollektivtrafiken, affärer och andra serviceställen inte tar emot kontanter som betalningsmedel. Möjligheten att betala räkningar med kontanter över disk är högst begränsad; i stora delar av Sverige finns den inte alls.
Frågan som har undersökts i det här projektet är hur Sveriges digitaliserade ekonomi påverkar de personer som av olika skäl och i varierande grad är beroende av kontanter för att kunna sköta sina betalningar.
Med fokus på Sverige – som har en i hög grad digitaliserad ekonomi – har denna studie syftat till att utforska och lära av de erfarenheter som kontantberoende personer har. Vårt fokus har varit på personer i ekonomisk och social utsatthet, eftersom internationell forskning har identifierat fattigdom som den främsta anledningen till att personer i utvecklade länder som Sverige inte är en del av den digitala ekonomin. Även faktorer som ålder, funktionsnedsättning och osäker migrationsstatus ökar sannolikheten för att man är beroende av att kunna betala kontant.
Under 2022 och 2023 genomförde vi en intervjustudie i Malmö med personer som av socioekonomiska skäl har behov av att kunna betala med kontanter, samt med volontärer och personal vid organisationer som i sin verksamhet kommer i kontakt med personer som är kontantberoende. Deltagarna i studien har delat med sig av sina erfarenheter av hur deras vardag och upplevelser av samhället påverkas av att betalningsmarknaden digitaliseras. I studien betraktas ofrivilligt kontantberoende som en aspekt av digitalt utanförskap och som en rättighetsfråga. Att samhällets grundläggande funktioner – som betalningsmarknaden – digitaliseras på ett sätt som gör att redan utsatta grupper ställs utanför skapar en ny form av ekonomisk orättvisa.
Ur analysen av vårt intervjumaterial framträder tre teman.
Inlåsningseffekt: Personer i kontantberoende riskerar att bli utelåsta från den officiella digitala ekonomin. Men samtidigt blir de instängda i en krympande bubbla av lågprisbutiker och serviceställen som tar emot kontanter, men där många grundläggande ekonomiska transaktioner inte är möjliga att göra. I denna sfär fungerar kontanter närmast som en lokal valuta, separat från samhällets ekonomiska infrastruktur. Detta skapar beroende och integritetsförluster.
Tid och planering: Digitaliseringen påverkar upplevelsen av tid och normaliserar snabbhet och att göra flera saker samtidigt. Personer i kontantberoende och digitalt utanförskap upplever att de inte är synkroniserade i förhållande till samhällets takt och tempo och att deras behov uppfattas som ineffektiva utifrån sociala normer. Utanförskapet gör också att de kortsiktiga strategier som behövs för att klara sig från dag till dag, motverkar de mer långsiktiga strategier (och det risktagande) som krävs för att försöka ta sig ut ur sin situation och försöka bli en del av den officiella ekonomin.
Maktlöshet och konstruerad inkompetens: Ingen av våra kontantberoende deltagare visade någon förväntan om att saker och ting skulle bli lättare eller bättre för dem. De berättar om ångest och stress, om att känna sig dumma och generade. De uttrycker ilska och vanmakt inför banker, myndigheter och andra ansiktslösa krafter som inte verkar bry sig om dem. Deras erfarenhet är också att värdet av val som är viktiga för dem inte erkänns. De finns också en sorg över vad de ser som en förlust av gemenskap och mänsklig kontakt.
Svårigheterna med att betala digitalt är en del av ett större främlingskap inför det digitaliserade samhället i stort och upplevs som en skamlig och nedbrytande social exkludering. Ett viktigt resultat är att kontantberoende är en socialt påtvingad position och en konstruerad inkompetens, till följd av en politiskt och kommersiellt motiverad infrastrukturomvandling. Människor som är beroende av kontanta pengar hamnar i behov av särskilt stöd, inte för att de har förändrats utan för att samhället har förändrats runt omkring dem utan att deras omständigheter, kunskaper och erfarenheter har beaktats.
Den kontantlösa ekonomin är inte en tekniskt betingad företeelse, utan ett politiskt och kommersiellt val. För att politiken på ekonomin och digitaliseringens område inte ytterligare ska missgynna de som redan är utsatta är erfarenheterna av hur det är att leva i kontantberoende i en digitaliserad ekonomi en avgörande kunskapsbas.
Tack till projektets ovärderliga medhjälpare Nanna Malmborg Rasmussen, Elinn Leo Sandberg, Hedvig Halldenius och Amy Kerplunk Mughames.
On December 6th, 2024 Emelie Rohne Till presented during the Human Rights Lunch Online. Watch the recording of the seminar on Youtube:
The big question that all economic historians engage with at one level or another is “why are some countries rich and others still poor”? In search of this answer, the discipline has developed a lot of knowledge on, and methods for exploring, large-scale, long-term, societal-level change over time. Within the Human Rights Profile area, our research group at the Department of Economic History wishes to bring these research questions and methods to the field of human rights.
There is much fertile ground for research in the intersection of economic development, inequality and poverty, with issues of human rights – questions how to ensure that everyone can live in dignity, on food security, on how fruits of growth and transformation are distributed in a society, and on how to guarantee economic rights, etc. Specifically, we are interested in understanding the relationship between socio-economic inequality and human rights. Key questions that we are interested in are whether there are any trade-offs between equality and respect for human rights in certain cases and certain phases; and if so, what these trade-offs and links look like; and also, what can be learnt from this going forward.
The project is currently at an early stage. Through receiving a Seed money-grant from the Human Rights Profile Area (LU) in the fall of 2023, we have made some initial progress. With the seed money, we were able to hire two Master’s Students from the Department of Economic History to produce reviews on the existing knowledge in the intersection of the fields of socio-economic inequality and human rights: Lisa Lehane and Louis Louw. During the spring of 2024, Lisa and Louis produced two excellent reviews on the subject, one literature review of the field, and one review of existing databases on quantitative elements of human rights.
The literature review sets out to map the existing literature in the intersection of human rights and socio-economic inequality. The literature that applies an interdisciplinary approach is rather small, and generally human rights have been a peripheral concern in economic analysis. Some of the key concerns that are highlighted in the review are that part of the difficulty lies in that indicators of socio-economic inequality and human rights are imperfectly conceptualized; and that economists/economic historians and human rights scholars emphasize different aspects of socio-economic inequality.
The quantitative review maps ten existing databases on human rights and socio-economic inequality. Two of these are selected for more in-depth review of their methodologies: analysis into their respective methodologies: the Human Rights Measurement Initiative and the UNU WIDER World Income Inequality database. Some key points to emerge from the quantitative review are that human rights are measured in different ways depending on the rights being analyzed, that only five countries have ratified all 18 human rights treaties, and that individuals living in low socio-economic conditions often are found to be at greater risk of human rights violations. It also specifies many of the challenges of measuring and assessing human rights.
Together, the preparatory studies show that there is ample scope for more research that builds on and clarifies the existing knowledge on the relationship between human rights and inequality. The aim going forward will be to use these two high-quality reviews as a foundation for a grant application. Our hope is that this will lead to the building up of a large database of quantitative indicators for both inequality and human rights, that can contribute to our understanding of this relationship.
Emelie Rohne Till is a researcher at Lund University. Her main research areas concern development economics, approached from an economic history perspective. Within this she focuses on the role of structural transformations and of the agricultural sector in economic development, primarily in sub-Saharan Africa.
On November 15th, 2024 Mads L. Jensen and Joachim Östlund presented their seed money funded project during the Human Rights Lunch Online. They presented results from their workshop that revisited the discourses and uses of natural and human rights in the decades around 1800 from the perspective of Scandinavia and its global and colonial contexts. Workshop aim was to chart avenues for further research for global histories of Scandinavian legal and political thoughts and its interactions with non-European and indigenous legal and political systems.
Watch the recoding of the seminar:
The workshop “Human rights in global and colonial contexts: Scandinavia and beyond”, funded by the Profile Area Human Rights, took place on 11-12 June 2024. The workshop started from the observation that the last decades of the eighteenth century saw an increasing and explicit use of the concept of “human rights”, theoretically and practically, in Scandinavia. The aim was therefore to chart these still largely unknown waters of the political and theoretical uses of human rights discourses in Scandinavia in its global and colonial contexts. Accordingly, the contributions ranged widely chronologically, geographically and thematically. Together they made it clear that that the history of natural and human rights in Scandinavia has a significant potential for changing the historical narrative of human rights, and much more work needs to be done on this topic.
Recent years have seen significant revisionist work on the history of human rights with substantial implications for our understanding of the foundations (philosophical as well as historical) and the practical and political uses of human rights. Perhaps the most prominent revision has come from Samuel Moyn, who has argued for the distinctive political and legal nature of human rights in the, especially later, twentieth century.[1] This has not only served to sever twentieth century human rights from earlier modern and pre-modern traditions, but like the best genealogical work in modern intellectual history also to bring to the fore alternative political and philosophical human rights conceptions revealing, the limits and weaknesses of current regimes and uses of human rights.[2]
In response, Dan Edelstein has reinscribed the modern history of human rights, from the French Revolution to the UDHR, in the larger tradition of natural law and natural rights in early modern Europe. For Edelstein, the decisive development in the eighteenth century was the physiocrats’ establishment of the “preservationist regime” of natural rights. For Edelstein, this helps explain the enduring significance of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen as a formulation of the “preservationist regime” into the twentieth century.[3] But also reveals that our conceptions of human rights carry with them “metaphysical foundations [that have] only been brushed over, and never fully dealt with”, not least the “theological vision of God as Creator.”[4]
However, Edelstein and much of the recent scholarship on the intellectual history of rights in early modernity, is predominantly anglo- and francocentric focus. Moving beyond this by focusing on Scandinavia, the workshop “Human rights in global and colonial contexts: Scandinavia and beyond” brought out discourses and uses of human rights that developed outside of Britain (including America) and France and, significantly, before the French declaration. In so far as political and intellectual developments in the French revolution were received in Scandinavia, this was against this preexisting intellectual background. Neither Denmark nor Sweden was subject to revolutions, and the workshop contributions outlined some of the distinctive practical concerns and uses of human rights discourse in Scandinavia. This was not least in the context of the global and colonial connections of both Scandinavian monarchies.
One distinctive feature of Scandinavian human rights discourse was that it emerged not out of physiocratic discourse, but out of natural jurisprudence. So, the Copenhagen political propagandist and professor of law and economics, Christian Ulrich Ditlev von Eggers argued in 1796, that “the most recent times” (meaning the last 20 years) had seen the development of a “genuine doctrine” of natural jurisprudence. Moreover, this had informed the great changes and upheavals of his time, such as the American and French revolutions, the great legal reforms, and the abolitions of the slave trade. The intellectual and political changes were global, concerning “the entire race of humankind”.[5]
As formulated in late eighteenth century global and colonial Scandinavia, the discourse of human rights thus entailed universal and global claims. In other words, human rights were seen as pertaining to all human beings, even if the formulation of the concrete contents of human rights, their retention, abrogation, or violation, differed across time and space. Considering the universal import of human rights also in the eighteenth century, it becomes a methodological and historiographical imperative to investigate whether also non-European individuals, groups, and societies laid claim to what amounted to human rights in the long eighteenth century.
To help address these imperatives, we had invited Saliha Belmessous, British Academy Global Professor at Oxford University and a leading expert the political and legal agency of indigenous people in the history of European colonialism, to give the opening lecture. Belmessous outlined a programme for what she termed “indigenous intellectual history”. In particular, she subjected to critique several conceptual and methodological preconceptions that prevent scholars from taking indigenous legalities serious as objects of study. These included eurocentrism and notions of cultural incommensurability, as well as the denigration of indigenous legal orders as mere “customs” on account of their orality.
Drawing on scholars such as Katherine A. Hermes and Tamar Herzog, Belmessous suggested the reconstruction of indigenous legal ideas, including rights, from their political and legal practice, not least in their contestation of European colonialism.[6] Proceeding from the analysis of oral, written, and material forms of indigenous law within the colonial archive, this programme eschews essentialising preconceptions of indigenous legal cultures as incommensurable with European legal ideas, including those of human rights. For our purpose here, the focus must be empirical investigations of whether non-European actors made claims that corresponded to human rights as conceptualised at the time, and whether they were recognised as such.
Much of the workshop accordingly concerned the uses of natural and human rights discourse in the context of Scandinavian connections with the rest of the world. Sessions included papers dealing with both Scandinavian and non-Scandinavian discussions of rights. The first session focused on the issue of slavery and slave trade in the Atlantic. Johan Olsthoorn (Amsterdam) discussed the writings of the antislavery theorist Quobna Ottobah Cugoano (c.1757–c.1791), born in what is today’s Ghana. Olsthoorn argued that natural rights played a key role in Cugoano’s construal of slavery and the slave trade as robbing the enslaved of their “natural rights as men”. On a similar theme and geography, Mads L. Jensen (Lund) argued that notions of natural rights, and particularly human rights, informed the moral and political criticism of the slave trade that led to the 1792 decree abolishing the Danish slave trade. At the same time, however, a discourse of human rights came to justify increasing Danish colonialism in West Africa.
The second session turned to the uses of human rights in political and economic reforms in Denmark in the decades around 1800. Markus Hansen (Lund) discussed how early proponents of agrarian reform, notably the abolition of peasant servitude, saw the manorial system as depriving the peasants of their natural, human rights. The restitution of these rights required thoroughgoing reforms, as effected in the Danish agrarian laws of 1788. Simen Hegdalstrand (KCL/Oslo) discussed the “Literary Jewish Feud”, a debate that ushered in the decision to emancipate Danish Jews in March 1814. Hegdalstrand argued that Jewish authors invoked a discourse of rights, and that discourses of patriotism remained current in both sides of the debate.
Session three turned to Swedish connections to the Mediterranean and the far north. Joachim Östlund (Lund) discussed a proposal for the regulation of the Mediterranean slave trade, which the Moroccan Sultan Sidi Mohammed ben Abdallah al-Khatib presented to the Scandinavian monarchies in 1777. Situating this against the background of earlier uses of natural rights to conceptualise Scandinavian-Moroccan relations and treaties, Östlund highlighted a North African perspective on contemporary discussions of slave trade. In a very different geographical context, Andreas Hellerstedt (Sundsvall) discussed how notions of natural law and natural rights informed Swedish thinking about the colonisation of Sápmi in Northern Scandinavia. This concerned not least the status of the natural rights of the Sámi under the Swedish Crown.
Session four turned to the Swedish and the French Caribbean. Romain Cuttat (Geneve) discussed how the Swiss natural jurist Jean-Jacques Burlamaqui influenced the Swedish King Gustav III, and particularly the purchase and annexation of Saint-Barthélemy in 1784 as a hub for slave trade and plantation slavery. Carl Wilén (Lund) presented the concept of “movement text” as central in the investigation of the uses of human rights discourse in the Haitian revolution. This reveals not just a hitherto largely disregarded group of actors as formulators and claimants of human rights in the revolution, but also the importance of social rights claims.
The workshop highlighted several directions for research on the history of human rights in global Scandinavia. One concerns the theoretical (philosophical and theological) foundations for thinking about human rights, which differed greatly within Scandinavia. This was also the case for thinkers drawing on natural jurisprudence. One key influence was Kantianism, but another equally influential was cameralism. In other words, there were different, rival philosophical and metaphysical foundations for human rights, tending either to secularisation or resacralisation. This had consequences not just for which natural rights were reconceptualised as human rights, but also for their political and legal significance.[7]
Another direction concerns precisely what human rights were invoked, by whom, and for what purpose. This concerns the practical codification and contestation of human rights in treaties, proclamations and declarations. As both the Haitian movement texts and the Scandinavian discussions of slavery and agrarian reform illustrate, social, rather than constitutional, issues were often at the fore in claims to human rights, notably by less privileged actors, including women. Following Saliha Belmessous’ proposal, this should also investigate how rights claims were made by and for colonial subjects in the Scandinavian colonies in Greenland, India, Africa, West Indies, and by other actors contesting Scandinavian colonialism.
These directions will be pursued in a special issue planned for Global Intellectual History, and in workshops organised in 2025 with Nicolai von Eggers (Copenhagen) and funded by Einar Hansen’s Foundation.
[1] Especially Samuel Moyn, The Last Utopia: Human Rights in History (Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2010); Samuel Moyn, Human Rights and the Uses of History: Expanded Second Edition (London: Verso, 2017); Samuel Moyn, Not Enough: Human Rights in an Unequal World (Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2018).
[2] For an influential formulation of the use of genealogy within modern intellectual history, see Quentin Skinner, Liberty before Liberalism (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012). This is revisited in Hannah Dawson and Annelien de Dijn, eds., Rethinking Liberty before Liberalism (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2022).
[3] Dan Edelstein, On the Spirit of Rights (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2019).
[4] Dan Edelstein, ‘Spirit of Rights. Response to Comments’, Opera Historica 21, no. 1 (30 March 2020): 112, https://doi.org/10.32725/oph.2020.008.
[5] Christian Ulrich Detlev von Eggers, Institutiones juris civitatis publici et gentium universalis (Copenhagen: Proft & Storch, 1796), 40–42.
[6] See e.g. Katherine A. Hermes, ‘“‘Justice Will Be Done Us’: Alqonquian Demands for Reciprocity in the Courts of European Settlers”’, in The Many Legalities of Early America, ed. C. L. Tomlins and B. H. Mann (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2001), 123–49; Tamar Herzog, Frontiers of Possession: Spain and Portugal in Europe and the Americas (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2015), https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt1287grm.
[7] For cameralist thinking on human rights in Germany before the French Revolution, see Diethelm Klippel, ‘Die Diskussion der Menschenrechte am Ende des 18. Jahrhunderts in Deutschland’, Gießener Universitätsblätter 2 (1990): 29–40.
The Human Rights Lunch Online on the 25th of October 2024 was a special collaboration between the two Lund University profile areas Human Rights and Proactive Ageing, together with The Swedish Institute for Human Rights.
Brittis Edman, project leader, presented the latest report of The Swedish Institute for Human Rights ”Home is somewhere else – a study on the human rights of older persons in long-term care”.
Watch the recording on Vimeo:
About the report:
Older persons living in residential care homes have shared their experiences with the Swedish Institute for Human Rights. They describe the move into long-term care in terms of a major change and as a loss of the life they led before. For many of them, it has taken time to adjust to their new situation.
In the report ‘Hemma är någon annanstans’ (Home is somewhere else), older persons living in residential care homes share their experiences and perceptions of how a selection of human rights are protected and respected in their everyday lives. Based on their observations, the Swedish Institute for Human Rights have analysed how these rights are realised in both law and practice. The human rights the report focuses on are the right to dignity, the right to participation and social inclusion, the right to privacy and family life, and the right to equality and non-discrimination. This report, which is the Institute for Human Rights’ first in-depth thematic study, reveals a disparate situation. The staff the Institute met within the residential care system were committed and knowledgeable, and many older persons in residential care homes were satisfied with the care and service they receive. Despite this, however, the Institute have been able to identify clear inadequacies from a human rights perspective:
Ageism normalises shortcomings in the care of older persons.
The human rights perspective within the care of older persons is weak.
Knowledge of human rights and what they mean in practice is low.
Opportunities for older persons’ participation, self-determination and empowerment are limited.
Based on the report´s conclusions, the Swedish Institute for Human Rights has drawn up a series of recommendations to the government and municipalities which would strengthen the safe-guarding of older persons’ human rights in care settings.
The report is based on information gathered through desk research, a legal analysis and field work within which the Swedish Institute for Human Rights interviewed around 50 people: older persons, managers and care staff in eight specialised care homes for older persons in Sweden. This included two municipalities in the north, two in central parts of the country and two in the south.
About the The Swedish Institute for Human Rights
The purpose of the Swedish Institute for Human Rights is to promote and protect human rights in Sweden. Included in this task is also the promotion, protection, and monitoring of the implementation of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
Tasks and responsibilities
The Swedish Institute for Human Rights is a Swedish national agency which was formally established in January 2022 in accordance with the Swedish Act on the Institute for Human Rights (2021:642). The purpose of the Institute is, according to the legislative act, to promote the safeguarding of human rights in Sweden, based on
the Swedish Instrument of Government, the Freedom of the Press Act, and the Fundamental Law on Freedom of Expression,
the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR),
the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, and
other obligations in the field of human rights binding on Sweden under public international law.
The Institute’s tasks and responsibilities are to:
monitor, investigate, and report on how human rights are respected and implemented in Sweden,
present proposals to the Government on the measures needed to ensure human rights;
liaise with international organisations and otherwise engage in international cooperation; and
promote education, research, development of expertise, dissemination of information and consciousness raising in the field of human rights.
One of the responsibilities of the Institute is, as required of the States acceding to the Convention, to fulfil the role of an independent national mechanism as set out in Article 33 (2) of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities to promote, protect and monitor the implementation of the Convention.
The Institute may propose to the Government of Sweden that Sweden’s obligations under international law within the field of human rights be expanded.
The Institute will not review complaints from individuals concerning violations of human rights.
By studying different stages of ageing and focusing on people in midlife, researchers at Lund University are developing proactive approaches for health care, social services and community planning. This will contribute to improved health and quality of life for future generations of older people.
Dementia and arthritis are examples of diseases that become more common as we get older, and to some extent depend on our lifestyle in younger years. Loneliness and problematic alcohol consumption are some of the factors that affect the risk of illness in old age. Moreover, attitudes to ageing, our standard of living and the environment have effects on activity and participation in later life.
Research targeting younger people
Preventive measures to promote healthy ageing from midlife – or even earlier – are therefore needed. Here, transdisciplinary research targeting younger people, such as today’s 50- and 60-year-olds, has a crucial role to play.
Researchers in this profile area:
study diseases associated with brain ageing
examine the relationship between the environment and older people’s activity, participation, mobility and health
consider the needs, wishes and abilities of older people in the development of new technologies for future generations
develop interdisciplinary and cross-boundary strategies and methodologies for proactive ageing research
place particular focus on cognitive and musculoskeletal health as prerequisites for activity and participation
include ethical, social, cultural, and societal perspectives
develop methods for identifying people at risk of disease or who are vulnerable in other ways, using economic, social, and biological markers.
This profile area brings together world-leading researchers in medicine, health sciences, social and behavioural sciences, economics, law, science and technology.
Comments