Aravind Ganesh is Postdoctoral Researcher in International and Comparative Law at Maastricht University, the Netherlands.

The book is very well-written, and the arguments flow interestingly, creating a novel narrative through which to discuss the legal role of the EU in the contemporary world … Dr Ganesh’s book offers a much welcome refreshing view and analysis.

• 1. Introduction I. Force, Freedom and Formality: Kant’s Philosophy of Right II. Methodology: Immanent Critique and Private Law Analogies III. Outline of the Book IV. Conclusion 2. Territorial Extension: Power and Authority in the Wider World I. The Post-Lisbon Articles A. Between Multilateralism and Evangelism II. Bartels and the ‘Compliance’ Interpretation A. Human Rights Jurisdiction B. Jurisdiction under General International Law C. Standing III. Legal Effects and the Spatial Scope of EU Law A. Defending Air Transport: Emerging Explanations and Forgotten Precedents B. Fluctuat nec mergitur: The Lotus Case in CJEU Jurisprudence IV. Power and Authority: A Subtle Difference A. The Nature of Territorial Extension V. Conclusion 3. The ‘Missionary’ Principle: A False Start I. The Sovereign Trusteeship of Humanity II. Harms and Wrongs A. Public Actors and Human Rights Jurisdiction B. The Failure of the Argument from Well-Being III. Blurred Frontiers: Values and Constitutional Objectives A. Policy Consistency/Coherence in the Light of EU Constitutional Objectives B. The Missionary Principle and Territorial Extension IV. Conclusion: Dignity as Independence 4. Kant’s International Legal Order and the Forms of Private Law I. Private Right: The Building Blocks of Kant’s General Theory of Law A. The Division of Torts: Damage and InjuryB. The Three Defects in the State of Nature C. Legislating on Property and Personality II. Public Right: The Fiduciary State A. The Separate, Public Person of the State B. Human Rights and the Fiduciary State III. International Law: Property and Personality A. Territory: Property or Body? B. No Property, Only Personality IV. Conclusion 5. Extraterritorial Jurisdiction to Provide Global Public Goods I. Ripstein’s Roads A. Expanding the Concept: Other Public Goods B. Limitations upon the Right to Provide Public Goods II. Global Public Goods A. The Right to Regulate Global Public Goods B. The Irrelevance of Harm C. Public Purpose and Necessity III. Appraising the EU IV. Conclusion 6. Extraterritorial Human Rights Obligations I. Human Rights as Public Fiduciary Rights A. ‘Moral’ Theories of Human Rights Law 6B. Human Rights as Legal and Directed all the Way Down C. Human Rights as Rights and as Philanthropy II. Authority and Human Rights Jurisdiction A. Capability B. Control C. Arendt’s Loophole III. Territorial Extension and Human Rights Jurisdiction IV. Conclusion 7. Closing the Courthouse Door: The Standing of Distant Strangers I. Standing in EU Law A. The Requirement of Legal Effects B. Direct and Individual Concern under Article 263 TFEU II. The EU-Morocco Agreements: Trustees de son tort of Humanity III. Polisario and Western Sahara Campaign A. Case T-512/12 Front Polisario v Council – The General Court DecisionB. Case C-104/16 Council v Front Polisario – Before the ECJ C. Case C-266/16 Western Sahara Campaign – The Preliminary Reference IV. Conclusion 8. General Conclusion I. Are the EU’s Unilateral Assertions of Authority over Distant Strangers Defensible? II. Does the EU Owe Obligations towards Distant Strangers over whom it Claims Authority? III. If So, does the EU Fulfil them?

Aravind Ganesh is Postdoctoral Researcher in International and Comparative Law at Maastricht University, the Netherlands.

The book is very well-written, and the arguments flow interestingly, creating a novel narrative through which to discuss the legal role of the EU in the contemporary world … Dr Ganesh’s book offers a much welcome refreshing view and analysis.

• 1. Introduction I. Force, Freedom and Formality: Kant’s Philosophy of Right II. Methodology: Immanent Critique and Private Law Analogies III. Outline of the Book IV. Conclusion 2. Territorial Extension: Power and Authority in the Wider World I. The Post-Lisbon Articles A. Between Multilateralism and Evangelism II. Bartels and the ‘Compliance’ Interpretation A. Human Rights Jurisdiction B. Jurisdiction under General International Law C. Standing III. Legal Effects and the Spatial Scope of EU Law A. Defending Air Transport: Emerging Explanations and Forgotten Precedents B. Fluctuat nec mergitur: The Lotus Case in CJEU Jurisprudence IV. Power and Authority: A Subtle Difference A. The Nature of Territorial Extension V. Conclusion 3. The ‘Missionary’ Principle: A False Start I. The Sovereign Trusteeship of Humanity II. Harms and Wrongs A. Public Actors and Human Rights Jurisdiction B. The Failure of the Argument from Well-Being III. Blurred Frontiers: Values and Constitutional Objectives A. Policy Consistency/Coherence in the Light of EU Constitutional Objectives B. The Missionary Principle and Territorial Extension IV. Conclusion: Dignity as Independence 4. Kant’s International Legal Order and the Forms of Private Law I. Private Right: The Building Blocks of Kant’s General Theory of Law A. The Division of Torts: Damage and InjuryB. The Three Defects in the State of Nature C. Legislating on Property and Personality II. Public Right: The Fiduciary State A. The Separate, Public Person of the State B. Human Rights and the Fiduciary State III. International Law: Property and Personality A. Territory: Property or Body? B. No Property, Only Personality IV. Conclusion 5. Extraterritorial Jurisdiction to Provide Global Public Goods I. Ripstein’s Roads A. Expanding the Concept: Other Public Goods B. Limitations upon the Right to Provide Public Goods II. Global Public Goods A. The Right to Regulate Global Public Goods B. The Irrelevance of Harm C. Public Purpose and Necessity III. Appraising the EU IV. Conclusion 6. Extraterritorial Human Rights Obligations I. Human Rights as Public Fiduciary Rights A. ‘Moral’ Theories of Human Rights Law 6B. Human Rights as Legal and Directed all the Way Down C. Human Rights as Rights and as Philanthropy II. Authority and Human Rights Jurisdiction A. Capability B. Control C. Arendt’s Loophole III. Territorial Extension and Human Rights Jurisdiction IV. Conclusion 7. Closing the Courthouse Door: The Standing of Distant Strangers I. Standing in EU Law A. The Requirement of Legal Effects B. Direct and Individual Concern under Article 263 TFEU II. The EU-Morocco Agreements: Trustees de son tort of Humanity III. Polisario and Western Sahara Campaign A. Case T-512/12 Front Polisario v Council – The General Court DecisionB. Case C-104/16 Council v Front Polisario – Before the ECJ C. Case C-266/16 Western Sahara Campaign – The Preliminary Reference IV. Conclusion 8. General Conclusion I. Are the EU’s Unilateral Assertions of Authority over Distant Strangers Defensible? II. Does the EU Owe Obligations towards Distant Strangers over whom it Claims Authority? III. If So, does the EU Fulfil them?

Aravind Ganesh is Postdoctoral Researcher in International and Comparative Law at Maastricht University, the Netherlands.

The book is very well-written, and the arguments flow interestingly, creating a novel narrative through which to discuss the legal role of the EU in the contemporary world … Dr Ganesh’s book offers a much welcome refreshing view and analysis.

• 1. Introduction I. Force, Freedom and Formality: Kant’s Philosophy of Right II. Methodology: Immanent Critique and Private Law Analogies III. Outline of the Book IV. Conclusion 2. Territorial Extension: Power and Authority in the Wider World I. The Post-Lisbon Articles A. Between Multilateralism and Evangelism II. Bartels and the ‘Compliance’ Interpretation A. Human Rights Jurisdiction B. Jurisdiction under General International Law C. Standing III. Legal Effects and the Spatial Scope of EU Law A. Defending Air Transport: Emerging Explanations and Forgotten Precedents B. Fluctuat nec mergitur: The Lotus Case in CJEU Jurisprudence IV. Power and Authority: A Subtle Difference A. The Nature of Territorial Extension V. Conclusion 3. The ‘Missionary’ Principle: A False Start I. The Sovereign Trusteeship of Humanity II. Harms and Wrongs A. Public Actors and Human Rights Jurisdiction B. The Failure of the Argument from Well-Being III. Blurred Frontiers: Values and Constitutional Objectives A. Policy Consistency/Coherence in the Light of EU Constitutional Objectives B. The Missionary Principle and Territorial Extension IV. Conclusion: Dignity as Independence 4. Kant’s International Legal Order and the Forms of Private Law I. Private Right: The Building Blocks of Kant’s General Theory of Law A. The Division of Torts: Damage and InjuryB. The Three Defects in the State of Nature C. Legislating on Property and Personality II. Public Right: The Fiduciary State A. The Separate, Public Person of the State B. Human Rights and the Fiduciary State III. International Law: Property and Personality A. Territory: Property or Body? B. No Property, Only Personality IV. Conclusion 5. Extraterritorial Jurisdiction to Provide Global Public Goods I. Ripstein’s Roads A. Expanding the Concept: Other Public Goods B. Limitations upon the Right to Provide Public Goods II. Global Public Goods A. The Right to Regulate Global Public Goods B. The Irrelevance of Harm C. Public Purpose and Necessity III. Appraising the EU IV. Conclusion 6. Extraterritorial Human Rights Obligations I. Human Rights as Public Fiduciary Rights A. ‘Moral’ Theories of Human Rights Law 6B. Human Rights as Legal and Directed all the Way Down C. Human Rights as Rights and as Philanthropy II. Authority and Human Rights Jurisdiction A. Capability B. Control C. Arendt’s Loophole III. Territorial Extension and Human Rights Jurisdiction IV. Conclusion 7. Closing the Courthouse Door: The Standing of Distant Strangers I. Standing in EU Law A. The Requirement of Legal Effects B. Direct and Individual Concern under Article 263 TFEU II. The EU-Morocco Agreements: Trustees de son tort of Humanity III. Polisario and Western Sahara Campaign A. Case T-512/12 Front Polisario v Council – The General Court DecisionB. Case C-104/16 Council v Front Polisario – Before the ECJ C. Case C-266/16 Western Sahara Campaign – The Preliminary Reference IV. Conclusion 8. General Conclusion I. Are the EU’s Unilateral Assertions of Authority over Distant Strangers Defensible? II. Does the EU Owe Obligations towards Distant Strangers over whom it Claims Authority? III. If So, does the EU Fulfil them?