This Article Full Text (PDF) Datasets References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Web of Science (3) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Hafner-Burton, E. M. Articles by Tsutsui, K. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Justice Lost! The Failure of International Human Rights Law To Matter Where Needed Most

Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs and Department of Politics, Princeton University, ehafner{at}princeton.edu

Kiyoteru Tsutsui, PhD

University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, tsutsui{at}umich.edu

International human rights treaties have been ratified by many nation-states, including those ruled by repressive governments, raising hopes for better practices in many corners of the world. Evidence increasingly suggests, however, that human rights laws are most effective in stable or consolidating democracies or in states with strong civil society activism. If so, treaties may be failing to make a difference in those states most in need of reform — the world's worst abusers — even though they have been the targets of the human rights regime from the very beginning. The authors address this question of compliance by focusing on the behavior of repressive states in particular. Through a series of cross-national analyses on the impact of two key human rights treaties, the article demonstrates that (1) governments, including repressive ones, frequently make legal commitments to human rights treaties, subscribing to recognized norms of protection and creating opportunities for socialization and capacity-building necessary for lasting reforms; (2) these commitments mostly have no effects on the world's most terrible repressors even long into the future; (3) recent findings that treaty effectiveness is conditional on democracy and civil society do not explain the behavior of the world's most abusive governments; and (4) realistic institutional reforms will probably not help to solve this problem.

Journal of Peace Research, Vol. 44, No. 4, 407-425 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/0022343307078942


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				Y. Ergas Human Rights Impact: Developing an Agenda for Interdisciplinary, International Research J Human Rights Practice, November 1, 2009; 1(3): 459 - 468. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				N. A. Englehart State Capacity, State Failure, and Human Rights Journal of Peace Research, March 1, 2009; 46(2): 163 - 180. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. H. Lebovic and E. Voeten The Cost of Shame: International Organizations and Foreign Aid in the Punishing of Human Rights Violators Journal of Peace Research, January 1, 2009; 46(1): 79 - 97. [Abstract] [PDF]

				E. M. Hafner-Burton, K. Tsutsui, and J. W. Meyer International Human Rights Law and the Politics of Legitimation: Repressive States and Human Rights Treaties International Sociology, January 1, 2008; 23(1): 115 - 141. [Abstract] [PDF]

				E. M. Hafner-Burton and J. Ron Human Rights Institutions: Rhetoric and Efficacy Journal of Peace Research, July 1, 2007; 44(4): 379 - 384. [Abstract] [PDF]