The “living instrument” doctrine has emerged as a key vehicle for evolution and innovation within the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD). Originating in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights, the doctrine has been adopted by the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) and, it is argued, all the UN treaty bodies. Yet its origins and meaning under ICERD have not been explored. This article investigates its first invocation in an individual communication, Hagan v Australia. It contrasts regional case law, where individual judgments set key interpretive standards, with an international individual communications system that has evolved asymmetrically across the UN treaties and does not perform the same standard-setting role. The significance of concluding observations and general recommendations in understanding ICERD as a living instrument is detailed. The living instrument approach in recent inter-state complaints before the International Court of Justice and CERD is discussed. In conclusion, the need to map ICERD as a living instrument across the multiplicity of its supervisory mechanisms is emphasised.

中文翻译：

---

将《消除一切形式种族歧视国际公约》作为活的工具绘制地图

“活的工具”学说已成为《消除一切形式种族歧视国际公约》（ICERD）内演变和创新的关键工具。该学说起源于欧洲人权法院的判例法，已被消除种族歧视委员会 (CERD) 以及所有联合国条约机构采纳。然而，它在 ICERD 下的起源和意义尚未得到探索。本文调查了其在个人通信 Hagan 诉澳大利亚案中的首次援引。它将区域判例法与在联合国条约中不对称发展且不发挥相同标准制定作用的国际个人通信系统形成对比，在该判例法中，个人判断设定了关键的解释标准。结论性意见和一般性建议在将 ICERD 理解为活的工具方面的重要性得到了详细说明。讨论了最近向国际法院和消除种族歧视委员会提出的国家间申诉中的活工具方法。总之，强调需要将 ICERD 映射为跨越其多重监管机制的活工具。