Intersectionality is essential for effective human rights protection and to combat structural oppression. However, the practice of intersectionality in international human rights law is very inconsistent and context-dependent, varying strongly between IHRMB and depending on the relevant intersection. This study aims to analyse and compare those approaches and to uncover the reasons behind them. Research on intersectionality in international human rights law is scarce and has so far focused mainly on the practice of the CmEDAW, CRPD and ECtHR and on the specific intersection of gender and race. This project will instead systematically study and compare intersectionality in the decisions of the eight UN human rights treaty with individual complaint mechanisms, the Court and Commission of the African and Inter-American regional human rights systems, and the ECtHR and ESC. Furthermore, this research will focus on intersectionality in the broad sense of the term, i.e. the intersections of as many identities and lived realities as possible, including a range of intersections involving marginalisations that have, until now, largely been left by the wayside. In addition, existing research has mainly taken stock of how IHRMB approach intersectionality. This project aims to take the analysis a step further, with its ambition to propose new approaches that could improve intersectional practice in IHRMB. These suggestions will take contextual factors into account.