This article argues that states should have a limited obligation — and not
only a privilege — to extend diplomatic protection to their nationals when
they are facing violations of their most basic human rights abroad. The
author addresses the current state of international law regarding diplomatic
protection, with a focus on the International Law Commission's failed
attempt to impose a duty on states to exercise protection in cases of jus
cogens violations. A review of domestic case law, particularly in the United
Kingdom, Canada, Germany, and South Africa, shows that while some courts
recognize legitimate expectations to receive diplomatic protection, all are
reluctant to exercise judicial review of a denial of diplomatic protection.
The author nevertheless examines whether adherence to international human
rights treaties could entail a positive obligation for states to exercise
diplomatic protection in order to protect the human rights of their
nationals that are ill-treated abroad.