{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.013530135301353014, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.2615384615384615, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Identifying the norms of the customary international law of human rights

References to customary law by national and international courts tend to be perfunctory, with only summary attempts to analyse the evidence. It is the same for jus cogens or peremptory norms. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is increasingly viewed as a source of legal obligation. The near-universal ratification of human rights treaties facilitates the identification of custom, bearing in mind the phenomenon of reservations. Materials generated by the Universal Periodic Review mechanism of the Human Rights Council provide rich evidence not only of State practice but also of the views taken by States about the content of international legal obligations. Regional custom, jus cogens, and the persistent objector are examined.