Since the publication of R. Edward Freeman’s Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach in 1984, applications of the stakeholder terminology, philosophy and methodology outside the context of business management have become commonplace. In this article, the two authors examine the adequacy of stakeholder theory for the purpose of making the leap from the original for-profit paradigm to contemporary international law, as set forth by the United Nations. The accomplishment of this objective is a piecemeal project – through systematic elaborations of complex concepts and issues. One challenge is to distill the essence of the general jurisprudence that matches the premises of, respectively, the narrow and broad stakeholder theory. Another challenge concerns the fact that while only the idealist version of the broad stakeholder theory is consistent with the norms under contemporary international law, the framework for the relevant rights and corresponding duties is not provided – but instead has to be added. This is also true of the values which are co-founders of rights, namely needs (as derived from humanity) and wants (as derived from autonomy). Remedying these deficiencies, the contrast with the narrow paradigm is ultimately through a concept of singular ethics that secures, as a minimum, rights-distributive justice. Given that Freeman lists terrorist groups on a par with all other stakeholder constituencies, the authors also endeavor to sketch the margins for legal and political legitimacy.