The founding of the United Nations in 1945, with the promotion of universal observance of human rights as a principle objective under its Charter, launched an era of international human rights institution-building and standard-setting. Despite the existence of a considerable number of human rights treaties elaborated on the international and regional level, one of the main challenges is the large implementation gap between the “high aspirations and the sobering realities on the ground”. On the one hand, many national systems do not provide access to effective domestic protection systems for human rights; on the other hand, the UN system still lacks an effective judicial mechanism responsible for the implementation of these rights. Even where States have given their consent to be bound by a human rights treaty, there are failures in compliance. Non-enforcement is a major failure of the United Nations human rights treaty system. However, the promise of universal human rights protection is not likely to be fulfilled unless and until victims of human rights violations are able to have access to effective remedies at both the national and international levels. The World Court of Human Rights should be a permanent court established by a multilateral treaty under the auspices of the United Nations. The Court would exercise jurisdiction not only in respect of States but also in respect of a wide range of other actors, jointly referred to as 'Entities' in the Draft Statute. They would include intergovernmental organizations, transnational corporations, and other non-state actors. The article will try to answer three questions. First, whether a World Court for Human Rights would be desirable. Second, whether there is a need for such a court and third, whether there is a reasonable chance of actually realizing the plan, taking into account the most important challenges of the 21st century.