Existence of international human Rights and International law are made through agreements. This research survey intense determination of International Human Treaties on Domestic Law. It traverse how these International Human Rights treaties consist Universal Declaration along with International agreements which includes countries economic and social affairs along with cultural and customary Essentials.

This research and study conclude that there are both negative and positive consequences of International Human rights treaties on domestic law. If treaties apply positively with prior implications and searching effect of that treaties on that Countries local law. But there are some positive effect also these are formed for protecting human rights and preventing peoples Rights like freedom of life, personal liberty, speech etc. The main motive behind this Research is to examine the significance of Human dignity and Justice globally.

Introduction:
International human rights law specifies the duties which the states have to respect. Some of the main requirements accepted by states are: to treat their citizens well, to protect them, and also to provide them with desirable human rights. Human rights, as rights belonging to human beings just because they are human beings, exist without concerning oneself with race, sex, nationality, ethnic background, language, religion, and many other issues. Human rights include the right to life and liberty, freedom from slavery and torture, freedom of opinion and expression, the right to work and education, and many other things. All people are given these rights when they are born, without any kind of favor to a certain person or group.

The aims of the international documents are: First and foremost, international human rights instruments serve as the vehicles by which the concepts of human rights and freedoms which are universal apply and which take precedence over all. Still, despite being a great set of tools to neutralize the discriminations against people because of their sexual activities, skin colour, culture, age etc. International human rights law lays down obligations which states are bound to respect. By becoming parties to international treaties, states assume obligations and duties under international law to respect, to protect and to fulfil human rights. Human rights are rights inherent to all human beings, regardless of race, sex, nationality, ethnicity, language, religion, or any other status. Human rights are standards that allow individuals to live with dignity and develop to their full potential, and those from which no one should be excluded. The enjoyment of rights is the same for all people without discrimination.

The objectives of international human rights treaties include:
International human rights treaties are the building bricks for the legal platform worldwide and they are playing a significant role in various areas. Firstly, they set the standards and safety of fundamental rights and freedoms that are universally accepted, such as the right to life and freedom, security, and freedom from torture and discrimination.

Moreover, these pacts are dedicated to combating all types of discrimination - be it on the basis of race, gender, ethnicity, religion, and even nationality- while also attempting to assure equality before the law and equal protection of rights for every Individual. The treaties also establish mechanisms of accountability that are oriented towards bringing justice. They serve as a skeleton on which the states are put on the list and held accountable for framing human rights violation cases and victims seek remedies.

One of the foremost assigns of the treaties on international human rights in the world legal scale lies in the fact that they lay down and safeguard the fundamental rights and freedoms that have been universally accepted, such as the right to life, liberty, security, as well as freedom from torture and discrimination. In addition, the treaties aim to remove discrimination on the basis of different grounds, such as race, gender, ethnicity, religion, and nationality, thus promoting the equal treatment of all before the law and thus ensuring that each is equally protected. Besides the international human treaties are the source of the normative framework which is guide to the legislation, internal policies which as sure that are according to international treaties.

International human rights treaties serve multiple crucial purposes in the global legal landscape. Firstly, they define and safeguard fundamental rights and freedoms universally recognized, such as the right to life, liberty, security, and freedom from torture and discrimination. These treaties aim to eradicate discrimination based on various grounds like race, gender, ethnicity, religion, and nationality, promoting equality before the law and ensuring equal protection of rights for all individuals.

The relationship between international law and domestic law is crucial in ensuring the lastly, non-compliance with international human rights treaties can subject a nation to international scrutiny and diplomatic pressure. This can include sanctions and other measures aimed at encouraging adherence to treaty obligations, thereby promoting stronger domestic legal protections and accountability mechanisms.

Literature Review
The impact of international human rights treaties on domestic laws is a subject of various theories and perspectives in legal and academic discourse.

Here are several theories and perspectives that contribute to understanding this complex relationship

Dualist vs. Monist approaches in the realistic approach international and domestic law considered separate legal system according to this approach international law does not automatically become part of domestic legal system unless it is especially domestic law through a specific process such as ratification by the legislature of incorporation into domestic legislation. Therefore in countries following the dualist approach international treaties or agreements are not directly enforceable in domestic courts unless they have been translated into domestic law.

The monist approaches on the other hand views international law and domestic law as part of a single legal system.in this approach, international law is automatically considered part of the domestic legal system upon ratification or adoption without the need for transformation into domestic law

When international human rights duties are turning to domestic have a big impact on a country legal system by mistake international human rights obligation part of domestic level third protect human rights better with the country people can actually use these write in local course leading to stronger enforcements and protection of human rights other national level the standard formation is also standard making the government more account table and ensuring order is to human rights principle it all local auto inducted and apply these rights in specific cases giving individual away to see justice also write an obligation promoting education and understanding human rights under society

When a country decides to ratify international human right treaties, it sets the stage for significant changes within its domestic legal system. The act of ratification signifies a commitment to upholding global human rights standards and can have profound efforts on the country's legal landscape.

Ratification enhances international cooperation on human rights matters. It enables collaboration with other countries, international organizations and human rights bodies to share best practice, expertise, and resources in advancing human rights protection globally.

Methodology
When a country ratifies international human rights treaties, it can have a significant impact on its domestic legal system. The methodology for assessing the impact of these on domestic law involves several key steps. The enactments of international Juman rights Treaties by a county is one of their potential tools that could result in remarkable changes of the domestic legal system. The methodology to be used for assessing the impact of these on domestic law is a multifaceted process.

In the first case, the legal analysis is the most vital. In order to do this through inspection of the international human rights treaties that the country has ratified needs to be done. By so doing, the specific provisions and obligations outlined in the treaty that are relevant to domestic law would have been identified or extracted.

Secondly, a comparison needs to be made between the provisions of the international treaties and the prevailing domestic laws. This is important to find the areas in domestic legislation that might require amending or alignment with international standards to ensure the compliance with treaties obligations.

Impact Of International Human Treaties On Domestic Law

The impact of international human rights treaties on domestic legal systems encompasses various dimensions that shape legal frameworks, judicial practices, policy development, civil society engagement, and challenges faced in implementation. Firstly, incorporation into domestic legal systems involves legislative reforms where countries amend or introduce laws to align with treaty obligations, ensuring compliance with international human rights standards.

Some nations go further by amending their constitutions to elevate international human rights norms as supreme law, strengthening their enforceability domestically. Judicial application of these treaties influences court decisions, providing guidance on interpreting and applying human rights principles within national legal contexts, thereby shaping legal precedents and judicial interpretations.

Judicial interpretation plays a critical role in expanding the scope of rights and protections afforded to individuals under international treaties, fostering more protective legal outcomes. Concurrently, landmark cases that directly reference treaty provisions establish precedents that guide future judicial rulings and legislative reforms.

Policy and institutional reforms are also catalyzed by treaty ratification, prompting governments to review and revise policies across sectors such as education, healthcare, criminal justice, and minority rights to meet international standards. Institutions responsible for monitoring human rights compliance may be bolstered or newly established to meet reporting requirements and adhere to treaty recommendations.

Furthermore, civil society organizations, advocacy groups, and grassroots movements are mobilized by treaty ratification, advocating for legal reforms and robust enforcement of human rights protections. Increased public awareness of international human rights norms through treaty ratification fosters a culture of human rights consciousness among citizens, heightening demands for governmental accountability and transparency in human rights practices.

However, challenges persist, including gaps in treaty implementation due to resource constraints, political resistance, and conflicting domestic priorities. Weak enforcement mechanisms and inadequate compliance monitoring further undermine the effectiveness of international human rights treaties in protecting rights on the ground.

Debates over sovereignty and concerns about the balance between international obligations and domestic autonomy also shape the landscape of treaty implementation, with some states cautious about fully adopting provisions perceived as infringing on national sovereignty. Thus, while international human rights treaties provide a framework for advancing rights globally, their impact on domestic legal systems is nuanced and contingent on various contextual factors and challenges.

In conclusion, while international human rights treaties provide a framework for universal standards and protections, their impact on domestic law depends on factors such as ratification, implementation efforts, judicial interpretation, and societal mobilization. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for assessing how effectively international human rights norms translate into tangible legal protections and societal changes at the national level.

Case Study:
Suo Moto case on missing persons (2010 - present)[1] :(Pakistan) the Supreme Court of Pakistan has "taken Suo motu notice" of a number of cases, including extrajudicial murders and enforced disappearances. The court's analysis of the legality of the defendants' detentions has relied on international human rights standards. Such international human rights legislation includes the convention against torture (cat) and the international covenant on civil and political rights (ICCPR). The court has issued orders for the repatriation of some missing people and investigations into claims of human rights abuses by government personnel.

Salman Taseer Assassination Case (2011) Mumtaz Qadri V. The State[2]:
Lahore High Court has ruled that Mumtaz Qadri is accountable for the assassination of Salman Taseer, the governor of Punjab. Qadri assassinated Taseer as a result of the latter's opposition to Pakistan's blasphemy laws. The court's decision to find Qadri guilty was influenced by international human rights standards, which include the prohibition of hate crimes and the recognition of the right to life.

The Maneka Gandhi Case (India)[3]:
Article 21 of the Indian Constitution guarantees the protection of personal liberty, a fundamental right whose scope has been expansively interpreted by the Indian Supreme Court in alignment with established international human rights standards. In the case of Maneka Gandhi, her passport was seized without the provision of due process. The Court held that the right to international travel falls within the ambit of constitutionally protected freedoms, and any restrictions on this right must conform to the principles of fairness and reasonableness. The Court's decision underscored its reliance on international human rights norms, as demonstrated by its reference to instruments such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, in shaping domestic jurisprudence.

The case of Tawanda Chandiwana (Zimbabwe)[4]:
In the case of Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights v. Mugabe (2008), the Supreme Court of Zimbabwe ruled that the government's land reform policies violated both the SADC Treaty and the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights. The Court acknowledged the importance of international human rights agreements and their relevance in domestic legal proceedings.

Similarly, in the case of Atala Riffo and Daughters v. Chile (2012), the Inter-American Court of Human Rights issued a landmark decision concluding that Chile had engaged in discriminatory practices against Karen Atala Riffo, a lesbian mother. The ruling underscored Chile's obligation to uphold the rights protected by the American Convention on Human Rights. As a result of this decision, Chilean legislation and policies were revised to better align with international human rights standards.

Conclusion:
The international human rights treaties play decisive role in promotive human rights for protections and preservation of all citizens universally. These treaties institute basic principle for guarding human rights all over world. There are basically two theory Monism and Dualism countries according to their convenience applies these approaches when there is rise of any disputes within countries affair related to implementation of these treatises. Debate is still not over related to supremacy of laws between international human treaties and domestic laws. Whenever dispute arises on contradiction of power the decision of supremacy based on the approaches and complexity adopted by countries.

In conclusion, International Human Rights Treatises provide the complexity and legal framework which shaped countries judicial interpretation and domestic legal system.

End Notes:

1. Constitutional Petition No. 12007
2. Mumtaz Qadri v The State PLD 2016 SC 17
3. 1978 AIR 597, 1978 SCR (2) 621
4. Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights v. Minister of State, National Security (2019) HC 261/19

Written By: Rishu Verma