Dependence upon litigation suggests to me that those who want "human rights 'without a border'" are trapped in TINA, that is, political conditions that make us all supplicants who petition those already in power, rather than aspirants for our own powers of law-making (= self-government).
Hardt & Negri do not think of Empire-building as a project imposed from above by the ruling class & the imperial elite. In a typical Autonomist & post-modern fashion, they see Empire rising from below: "In our time this desire [for the internationalization and globalization of relationships, beyond national boundaries] that was set in motion by the multitude has been addressed (in a strange and perverted but nonetheless real way) by the construction of Empire. One might even say that the construction of Empire and its global networks is a _response_ to the various struggles against the modern machines of power, and specifically to class struggle driven by the multitude's desire for liberation" (_Empire_, p.43). I beg to differ. The multitude's desire for liberation has become estranged & perverted into the construction of Empire, because we have been beaten back in class struggle, unable to step beyond a multitude of micro-political antagonisms (e.g., Serbs & Albanians seeing one another as enemies, instead of fighting together against the regime of competitive austerity imposed by the global ruling class & imperial elite via the Bretton Woods institutions).
Yoshie