Divided governmental structure and state compliance with international human rights law: A reputation-based approach

Human Rights Law ◽

State Compliance ◽

National Leaders ◽

International Human

Abstract Previous research has analysed a range of domestic stakeholders that make national governments’ commitments to international human rights law credible, including an independent judiciary, legislative veto players, political opposition groups, and non-governmental organizations. But how do the power dynamics within the government affect state compliance with international human rights law? Building on the basic understanding that international human rights law needs to pass through domestic political and administrative processes before it can be implemented on the ground, this article articulates a reputation-based theoretical framework to explain how the lack of reputational mechanisms at the local level and national leaders’ shifting of blame for non-compliance to sub-national officials and the internal governance structure – two salient characteristics in a decentralized political system – make international human rights law less effective. A case study of US compliance with Article 36 of the 1963 Vienna Convention on Consular Relations sheds light on how international reputational concerns interact with divided authority structure to shape national leaders’ and subnational authorities’ policy responses to the enforcement of international human rights standards.

Part IV Normative Evolution, Ch.23 Jus Cogens and Obligations Erga Omnes

The Oxford Handbook of International Human Rights Law ◽

10.1093/law/9780199640133.003.0024 ◽

2013 ◽

Author(s):

de Wet Erika

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Legal Order ◽

Vienna Convention ◽

Human Rights Law ◽

State Practice ◽

International Human ◽

Jus Cogens ◽

Formal Recognition

This article examines the relation between jus cogens and erga omnes obligations in the context of international human rights law. It discusses the content of jus cogens and its relevance within the domestic legal order and explains the relevant provisions of Article 53 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties of 1969 (VCLT). This article highlights the increasing formal recognition in state practice and doctrine of a hierarchy of norms in international law in the form of jus cogens which indicates increased recognition of core values throughout the international community of states.

International Human Rights Law and Practice in Latin America

International Organization ◽

10.1162/002081800551235 ◽

2000 ◽

Vol 54 (3) ◽

pp. 633-659 ◽

Cited By ~ 134

Author(s):

Ellen L. Lutz ◽

Kathryn Sikkink

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Latin America ◽

Human Rights Law ◽

International Consensus ◽

State Compliance ◽

International Human ◽

Human Rights Norms ◽

The Right

Human rights practices have improved significantly throughout Latin America during the 1990s, but different degrees of legalization are not the main explanation for these changes. We examine state compliance with three primary norms of international human rights law: the prohibition against torture, the prohibition against disappearance, and the right to democratic governance. Although these norms vary in their degree of obligation, precision, and delegation, states have improved their practices in all three issue-areas. The least amount of change has occurred in the most highly legalized issue-area—the prohibition against torture. We argue that a broad regional norm shift—a “norms cascade”—has led to increased regional and international consensus with respect to an interconnected bundle of human rights norms, including the three discussed in this article. These norms are reinforced by diverse legal and political enforcement mechanisms that help to implement and ensure compliance with them.

Navigating Human Rights in a ‘Post-Human Rights’ Era

Asia Pacific Journal on Human Rights and the Law ◽

10.1163/15718158-21020001 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 21 (2) ◽

pp. 139-194

Author(s):

Rhona Smith ◽

Sean Molloy

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

United Nations ◽

Southeast Asian ◽

Human Rights Law ◽

State Compliance ◽

International Human ◽

Human Rights Norms ◽

The Relationship

Abstract International human rights law and mechanisms tasked with promoting state compliance with it are being increasingly challenged. Opposition is originating from, amongst others, countries that have historically supported the global human rights project. These new trends and sites of contestation bolster opposition from other countries and regions that have consistently diverged from international human rights norms. Examining the relationship between the United Nations human rights system and states of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations in this broader context of opposition to human rights, this article argues that existing theories on why states do, or ought to, comply with international human rights law are often inadequate to either explain or inspire state adherence to human rights norms. What is required, this article will argue, is not another theory but rather more targeted and incremental efforts to address the gap between rhetoric and compliance.

Breaking Imaginary Barriers

Journal of International Humanitarian Legal Studies ◽

10.1163/18781527-00501008 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 5 (1-2) ◽

pp. 213-257 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Seira Yun

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

International Humanitarian Law ◽

Vienna Convention ◽

Humanitarian Law ◽

Human Rights Law ◽

Rights Of The Child ◽

International Human ◽

State Actors

This paper seeks to clarify the confusions regarding the relationships between international human rights law and international humanitarian law, the principle of equality of belligerents, and the use of the term “should” in treaties. For this purpose, it examines, as a case study, the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict, on which doctrine is divided whether Article 4(1) thereof is binding on armed non-State actors. First, this paper reconceptualizes international humanitarian law as a subset of international human rights law, which share the same purpose, mutually reinforce, and depend on each other. Second, drawing on the customary rules of treaty interpretation under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties and through a comprehensive analysis of the authentic texts in other languages and the travaux préparatoires, it argues that the term “should” in the operative part of treaties always creates legally binding obligations and that the equality principle does not strictly apply to norms applicable during peacetime. As such, despite its use of “should” and differential treatment between States and armed non-State actors, Article 4(1) of the Protocol creates a direct human rights obligation on armed non-State actors.

Part IV Normative Evolution, Ch.24 Positive and Negative Obligations

The Oxford Handbook of International Human Rights Law ◽

10.1093/law/9780199640133.003.0025 ◽

2013 ◽

Author(s):

Shelton Dinah ◽

Gould Ariel

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Standard Of Care ◽

Human Rights Violations ◽

Due Diligence ◽

Human Rights Law ◽

Legal Standards ◽

State Compliance ◽

International Human

This article examines the development of positive and negative obligations in international human rights law. It analyses the textual bases and jurisprudence regarding these obligations and considers the issue of due diligence standard of care. It discusses how due diligence emerged alongside and as the standard for judging state compliance with positive obligations to ensure or secure guaranteed human rights and predicts that positive obligations, negative obligations and due diligence may further develop into effective and detailed legal standards that protect individuals from human rights violations, whether committed by state or non-state actors.