This PhD thesis offers a critical overview of the instruments used for the attainment of objectives in the realm of the EU external human rights policy through bringing to the surface the implicit theoretical premises on which evaluation of the policy is performed. The analysis is based on the recent review of the whole policy area finalized with the adoption of the Strategic Framework and Action Plan for Human Rights and Democracy (25 June 2012). In the course of this study three hypothesis are explored and given substance on the basis of selected examples from the toolbox: The existence of the assumption as to the required design of the EU external human rights policy is investigated on the basis of the critiques that can be traced in the literature of the subject. The thus identified underlying rule of law paradigm is subsequently used to scrutinize the creation, application, and judicial overview of the instruments used in the EU external human rights policy field. The exercise permits to uncover the features of toolbox's elements that are not given due consideration, should solely rule of law lens be used for the policy evaluation. Finally, the alternative means of analyzing the policy is offered creating the expanded list of benchmarks which build on new modes of governance theory and amount to an alternative framework through which the EU external human rights policy could be evaluated. In general terms, there are two conclusions to be drawn from the exercise performed by this study. Sensu largo, it demonstrates that on borderlines of legal systems, governance practices are reality. Therefore, their characteristic features should (and in recent practice are) be appreciated parallely to those of rule of law - especially at the stage of norm application. Sensu stricte, for the EU external human rights policy, the application of the governance paradigm allows for fuller appraisal of a policy finally paying dues to its unquestionable virtues, and pinpointing in the most solid manner its vices.