The scope of supermajority law may cover fundamental rights, institutional matters, and public policy fields; however, the third subcategory is considered a rare one. Regarding fundamental rights, this chapter firstly gives insight into the emergence of fundamental rights protection during the last three centuries and also outlines the latest tendencies in this regard. The chapter argues that although supermajority law might be seen as a major safeguard of fundamental rights protection during transitory moments, this idea may lose its relevance when a complex combination of international mechanisms and national remedies stands at the disposal of those whose fundamental rights are supposed to be violated. International courts and monitoring mechanisms, such as national constitutional courts, ombudspersons, and ordinary courts, devote significant effort to promoting the protection of fundamental rights. This could explain why the proportion of fundamental rights gradually decreases globally among fields of supermajority legislation. Nevertheless, this legal instrument still holds a meaningful role in the protection of fundamental rights through the coverage of the status, organization, and competences of various key institutions responsible for safeguarding fundamental rights (such as the constitutional court, the ombudsperson, or the judiciary). If supermajority law regulates fundamental rights themselves, such as freedom of expression or the right to assembly, one can classify this as contributing directly to the protection of fundamental rights. By contrast, when the key institutions protecting fundamental rights are covered by the supermajority requirement, this means the indirect aspect of fundamental rights protection. This chapter distinguishes between these two aspects and argues that the indirect aspect may be sufficient when the scope of supermajority law is determined.