This thesis consists of a study about problems concerned to Human Rights from political philosophy and critique of law. At first, with a critique of the tradition of Human Rights and a brief genealogy of how thought and history of Human Rights took place, both in terms of foundational speeches and social statements. After that, due to open fractures with the philosophy of Jacques Derrida and Michel Foucault, the idea is to distinguish how Human Rights function when related to sovereignty and biopolitics. It is important to highlight the historical and political nature of law, and to question its potential of social transformation, once Human Rights are at the crossroads: If Human Rights are an effort of the history of mobilizations contrary to social injustices and conservative legal models, they also become our era of rights as foundations and part of legitimate law. Even, at times, they turn against their own ends. In this context, the concept of Human Rights is linked to western civilization, global capitalism, international order and state violence, at the same time that Human Rights are made with political struggles, social conquests, institutional protection and defense against rights violation. In this context, is important to investigate how to think about Human Rights once considered the difference of forces of their formation and continuous openness to changes. This work turns to the potential of Human Rights at the crossroads, which is crucial to the crossroads itself, according to its social production and ability to define the political and humanity. Which results from the intersection of sovereign power and biopolitics, as the premises of law are displaced and the Human Rights reaches new domains of life and society. This implies reformulating questions about normativity, enforcement and achievement of Human Rights. At the end, it is consequential to highlight tensions of these rights in the midst of social relations and compositions of power in the current political scenario.