Law Summer School (International & Human Rights Law) - Detailed Outline

This page provides a detailed outline of the Law Summer School Part 3 (International and Human Rights Law), a four-day course for students aged 15–18. The course introduces students to some of the central legal questions that arise when states, individuals, courts and international institutions respond to conflict, human rights abuses, displacement, international crimes and cross-border disputes.

Across the course, students explore how international law works, why it is difficult to enforce, and why it still matters. They consider the legal limits on the use of force, the protection of human rights, the definition of refugee status, the challenges of jurisdiction and immunity, and the role of the International Criminal Court in responding to the gravest crimes.

Prefer to view and download the PDF version of the Law Summer School – Part 3 outline? You can do so here.

Jump to a particular section:

Day One – International Law, Sovereignty and the Use of Force
Day Two – Human Rights, Refugees and Protection
Day Three – Borders, Courts and Immunity
Day Four – The International Criminal Court in Action

Teaching is discussion-based and intellectually demanding. Students are encouraged to question legal principles, test competing arguments, apply legal rules to realistic scenarios, and think critically about the relationship between law, politics and power in the international system.

By the end of the course, students should have a clearer understanding of how international legal problems are analysed, how arguments are built and tested, and how legal rules interact with wider questions of state power, human rights, security, morality and justice. They will also have had the chance to develop confidence in discussion, legal reasoning, structured argument and collaborative problem-solving.

Please note that for some groups, sessions may run in a different order.

10.00 – 12.30 Foundations of International Law

Students begin by asking what makes international law “law”. Unlike domestic law, international law does not usually depend on a single sovereign law-maker, a central police force, or a straightforward system of punishment. Instead, it operates through treaties, custom, consent, international institutions, diplomatic pressure and the willingness of states to treat legal rules as binding.

The session introduces students to the basic structure of international law and the problems it is designed to address. Students consider how international law governs the relationship between states, why sovereignty matters, and why states may follow legal rules even when enforcement is uncertain. They examine the difference between domestic and international law, and explore why international law can feel both powerful and fragile.

Students are introduced to key sources of international law, including treaties and customary international law. They consider how legal obligations can arise between states, how international institutions contribute to the system, and why international law continues to shape state behaviour even when politics, power and national interest remain central.

This opening session gives students the conceptual framework for the rest of the course. It encourages them to think carefully about legal authority, consent, enforcement and legitimacy before moving on to more specific areas of international law.

12.30 – 1.30 Lunch

1.30 – 3.30 War, Force and Self-Defence

The afternoon turns to one of the most important areas of international law: the legal regulation of force. Students examine the general prohibition on the use of force under the UN Charter and consider when, if ever, one state may lawfully use military force against another.

The session introduces the central legal exceptions to the prohibition on force, including self-defence and Security Council authorisation. Students consider what counts as an armed attack, how far a state may go in responding to one, and why any defensive action must be necessary and proportionate. They also examine the difficult problem of non-state actors, asking when the actions of an armed group can be attributed to a state and how international law responds when threats come from militias, terrorist organisations or groups operating across borders.

Students then apply these principles to a structured conflict scenario. Acting as legal representatives, they assess whether a state’s military response can be justified under international law, distinguishing between political sympathy, moral outrage and legal argument. The exercise requires students to analyse facts, interpret legal principles, and respond to opposing submissions.

10.00 – 12.30 Human Rights and State Power

Day Two begins with the foundations of human rights law. Students consider what human rights are, where they come from, and whether they should be understood as universal moral principles, legal protections created by states, or something more complex.

The session introduces different categories of rights, including absolute, limited and qualified rights. Students explore how courts balance rights against one another and against wider public interests, using examples involving privacy, expression, religion, security, detention and family life. They consider why some rights are treated as almost impossible to restrict, while others can be limited where there is a legitimate aim and a proportionate justification.

Students are also encouraged to think critically about human rights as both a legal system and a political language. They consider whether human rights can be genuinely universal, how cultural difference should affect interpretation, and whether human rights systems are always accessible to the people who need them most.

This session combines legal analysis with broader ethical and political discussion. Students are asked not only to identify rights, but to think about how they operate in practice when they come into conflict with one another or with the priorities of the state.

12.30 – 1.30 Lunch

1.30 – 3.30 Refugees, Asylum and Protection from Persecution

The afternoon focuses on refugee and asylum law. Students examine the legal definition of a refugee under the 1951 Refugee Convention and consider how international law responds when the normal relationship between a person and their state has broken down.

Students work through the key elements of refugee status, including well-founded fear, persecution, state protection, non-state actors, internal relocation, and the Convention grounds of race, religion, nationality, political opinion and membership of a particular social group. They consider how courts interpret broad legal concepts, and why apparently simple words such as “fear”, “persecution” and “protection” can become legally complex.

The session also addresses some of the most difficult and contested areas of refugee law, including claims based on gender, sexuality, religion and political opinion. Students consider whether someone should ever be expected to hide part of their identity or beliefs in order to avoid persecution, and how the law should respond when persecution comes not directly from the state, but from groups the state is unwilling or unable to control.

Students apply the legal definition of refugee status to a range of examples, testing how the Convention categories operate in practice. The session shows how refugee law sits at the intersection of human rights, state sovereignty, border control and individual protection.

10.00 – 12.30 Dispute Resolution and Forum Non Conveniens

The third day begins with the question of jurisdiction: which court should hear a dispute when the people, events or consequences cross national borders? Students are introduced to private international law, sometimes known as conflict of laws, and consider why international disputes often raise difficult questions about legal authority.

Students examine how courts decide whether they are the right place to hear a case. They consider what kinds of connection might justify the English courts taking jurisdiction, including the location of the parties, the place where events occurred, the law governing the dispute, and whether justice could realistically be achieved elsewhere.

The session also introduces forum non conveniens, the doctrine which allows English courts to decline jurisdiction where another court is more appropriate. Students consider the balance between access to justice and the risk of forum shopping, and ask whether English courts should be cautious about judging the fairness or adequacy of foreign legal systems.

12.30 – 1.30 Lunch

1.30 – 3.30 Criminal Jurisdiction, Enforcement and Immunity

The afternoon turns to jurisdiction in the criminal context. Students examine how states claim the authority to prosecute crimes with international elements, including cases involving foreign suspects, foreign victims, offences committed abroad, or crimes treated as matters of concern to the international community as a whole.

The session introduces key principles of criminal jurisdiction, including territoriality, nationality, passive personality, protective jurisdiction, universal jurisdiction and treaty-based extensions. Students consider how these principles work in practice, and why legal authority does not always translate into practical enforcement.

The day concludes with immunity from jurisdiction. Students examine why heads of state, diplomats and other officials may sometimes be protected from foreign courts, and why this can create serious tensions between sovereignty, diplomacy and accountability. A final group debate uses diplomatic immunity as a case study, asking when immunity is necessary – and when it risks preventing justice.

10.00 – 12.30 International Criminal Justice and the ICC

The final day brings together the course’s work on international law, human rights, jurisdiction and accountability. Students begin by considering how societies should respond to serious international crimes, and what justice should aim to achieve: punishment, deterrence, rehabilitation, reconciliation, or some combination of these.

The session introduces different ways of responding to mass wrongdoing, including domestic trials, international inquiries, special courts, truth and reconciliation processes, and the International Criminal Court. Students consider the strengths and limits of each approach, asking when justice is best delivered locally, when international involvement is needed, and why these decisions can be politically and ethically difficult.

Students then focus on the ICC itself. They examine its role in prosecuting individuals accused of the gravest international crimes, its relationship with national courts, and the criticisms it faces around sovereignty, selectivity and political influence.

12.30 – 1.30 Lunch

1.30 – 3.30 ICC Advocacy Exercise

In the afternoon, students move into an applied advocacy exercise based on a fictional international criminal law case. Working in prosecution and defence teams, they prepare legal arguments, identify the key issues in the evidence, and decide how best to present their case.

The session introduces core advocacy skills, including opening and closing speeches, examination-in-chief, cross-examination, use of evidence, rebuttal and persuasive structure. Students consider how international criminal lawyers build arguments from complex facts, and how they respond to uncertainty, competing interpretations and gaps in the evidence.

The course concludes with case presentations and feedback. Students present their arguments, respond to the opposing side, and reflect on the legal, practical and moral challenges involved in bringing international crimes before a court.

This outline provides a detailed view of the themes, legal principles and case studies explored during the online Law Summer School – Part 3 (International and Human Rights Law). The course is designed to introduce students to some of the most important and difficult questions in international law, from the regulation of war and the protection of refugees to human rights, jurisdiction, international crimes and the limits of global accountability.

Throughout the course, students are encouraged to think like lawyers: analysing legal definitions, applying rules to complex facts, constructing arguments, responding to opposing viewpoints, and recognising the difference between what the law says, what justice may require, and what states are politically willing to do.

You can also return to the main online Law Summer School page for full details about the course and how to apply.