Human rights, sovereign debt and why states should not keep their promises

Are there situations in which the state should not pay a legitimately acquired sovereign debt? This article argues that when the payment of non-odious debt violates the human rights of citizens, this constitutes an important normative reason for prioritizing human rights over the payment of sovereign debt. Given that there are specific, not casual, reasons to fear that high indebtedness of states may result in the undermining of socioeconomic and collective human rights of citizens, this article defends the following: when debt payment undermines human rights , the states have an important normative reason to prioritize the fulfillment of the latter over the fulfillment of their contractual obligations to pay debt to their creditors.