Human Rights Review

, Volume 17, Issue 2, pp 143–164 | Cite as

The Power of the Pen: Human Rights Ombudsmen and Personal Integrity Violations in Latin America, 1982-2006.

Article

Abstract

Recent scholarship has focused on the effects of institutional design and constitutional provisions on human rights protections. Democratic institutions, like other manifestations of credible commitment to human rights, seem to play a role in human rights provisions across the world. Yet, there is still a great deal that we do not know about domestic institutions like the human rights ombudsman, an institution created specifically to protect human rights, on human rights provisions. We conduct an examination of the effects of the human rights ombudsman (which may go by the name Defensor del Pueblo, Procurador de Derechos Humanos, or Comisionado Nacional de Derechos Humanos), on personal integrity violations across Latin America, 1982–2006. We find evidence that this understudied institution had significant and positive impacts on reducing such violations.

Keywords

Human rights Ombudsman Latin America 

References

  1. Ayeni, Victor, Linda Reif, and Hayden Thomas, eds. 2000. Strengthening ombudsman and human rights institutions in commonwealth, small, and island states. Alberta, Canada: Commonwealth Secretariat.Google Scholar
  2. Bueno de Mesquita et. al. 2005. “Thinking Inside the Box: A Closer Look at Democracy and Human Rights.” International Studies Quarterly. 49:439–57.Google Scholar
  3. Camp Keith, Linda. 2002. “Constitutional Provisions for Individual Human Rights (1976-1996): Are they More than Mere Window Dressing?” Political Research Quarterly 55 :111-43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Camp Keith, Linda. 2011. Political Repression: Courts and Law. Human rights series, ed. Bert Lockwood. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
  5. Cardenas, Sonia. 2005. “Constructing Rights? Human Rights Education and the State.” International Political Science Review 26 (4):363-79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cingranelli, David and Mikhail Filippov. 2010. “Electoral Rules and Incentives to Protect Human Rights.” Journal of Politics. 72(1): 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cuellar Martinez, R. 2002. Estandares Minimos para el Establecimiento y Funcionamiento del Ombudsman. San Jose, Costa Rica: IIDH.Google Scholar
  8. Davenport, Christian. 1995. “Mutlidimensional Threat Perception and State Perception: An Inquiry into Why States Apply Negative Sanctions.”American Journal of Political Science. 39 (3):683–713.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Davenport, Christian 1996. “Constitutional Promises” and Repressive reality: A Cross-National Times-Series Investigation of Why Political and Civil Liberties are Suppressed.” Journal of Politics. 58 (3):627–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Davenport, Christian. 1999. “Human Rights and the Democratic Proposition.” The Journal of Conflict Resolution. 43 (1):92–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Defensoria del Pueblo. 2011. Informe anual de la defensoria del pueblo. Bogota, Colombia: Estado de Colombia.Google Scholar
  12. Defensoria del Pueblo Boliviano. 2001. Informe anual de la defensoria del pueblo. La Paz, Bolivia: Bolivia.Google Scholar
  13. Defensoria del Pueblo Boliviano. 2004. Informe anual de la defensoria del pueblo. La Paz, Bolivia: Bolivia.Google Scholar
  14. Dodson, Michael. 2006. “The Human Rights Ombudsman in Central America: Honduras and El Salvador Case Studies.” Essex Human Rights Review 3 (1):29-45.Google Scholar
  15. Dodson, Michael, and Donald W. Jackson. 2004. “Horizontal Accountability in Transitional Democracies: The Human Rights Ombudsman in El Salvador and Guatemala.” 46(4): 1-27.” Latin American Politics and Society 46 (4):1-27.Google Scholar
  16. Domingo, Pilar. 2000. “Judicial Independence: The Politics of the Supreme Court in Mexico.” Journal of Latin American Studies. 32(3): 705–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dull, Mathew, and Patrick Roberts. “Continuity, Competence, and the Succession of Senate-Confirmed Agency Appointees, 1989-2009.” Presidential Studies Quarterly 39 (3):432-53.Google Scholar
  18. ELLA (Evidence and Lessons from Latin America). 2012. LATIN AMERICA’S NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS INSTITUTIONS: FOSTERING DEMOCRATIC TRANSITIONS AND GUARANTEEING HUMAN RIGHTS.ELLA Area: Governance. FUNDAR: Centro de Analisis e Investigacion. http://tinyurl.com/97tarxj#sthash.wgsATaa7.dpuf. (May 9, 2014).
  19. Escobar, Guillermo. 2011. VIII INforme sobre derechos humanos: Seguridad cuidadana. Madrid, Spain: CICODE, 8.Google Scholar
  20. Fariss, Christopher. 2014. “Respect for Human Rights has Improved Over Time: Modeling the Standard of Accountability.” American Political Science Review 109 (3):1-22.Google Scholar
  21. Finkel, Evgeny. 2012a. “The Authoritarian Advantage of Horizontal Accountability: Ombudsman in Poland and Russia.” Comparative Politics 44 (3):291-310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Finkel, Jodi. 2012b. “Explaining the Failure of Mexico’s National Commission of Human Rights (Ombudsman’s Office) After Democratization: Elections, Incentives, and Unaccountability in the Mexican Senate.” Human Rights Review 13:473-95.Google Scholar
  23. Gonzalez Volio, Lorena. 2003. “The Institution of the Ombudsman: The Latin American Experience.” Revista IIDH 37 :219-248.Google Scholar
  24. Gleditsch, Kristian S., and Michael D. Ward. 1997. “Double Take: A Reexamination of Democracy and Autocracy in Modern Polities.” The Journal of Conflict Resolution. 41 (3):361–383.Google Scholar
  25. Henderson, Conway W. 1991. “Conditions Affecting the Use of Political Repression.” The Journal of Conflict Resolution. 35 (1):120–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hill, Larry. 1974. “Institutionalization, the Ombudsman, and Bureaucracy.” American Political Science Review 68 (3):1075-85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hill, Larry. 2002. “The Ombudsman Revisited: Thirty Years of Hawaiian Experience.” Public Administration Review 62 (1):24-41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. International Council on Human Rights Policy. 2005. Assessing the Effectiveness of Human Rights Institutions. Versoix: UN International Council on Human Rights Policy. http://www.ichrp.org/files/reports/18/125_report.pdf. (May 9, 2014).
  29. Koo, Jeon-Woo, and Francisco O. Ramirez. 2009. “National Incorporation of Global Human Rights: Worldwide Expansion of National Human Rights Institutions, 1966-2004.” Social Forces 87 (3):1321-54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Long. J. Scott. 1997. Regression Models for Categorical and Limited Dependent Variables. Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA.Google Scholar
  31. Maddex, Robert L. 2011. Constitutions of the world: Third edition. Washington DC: CQ Press.Google Scholar
  32. McCarty, Nolan. 2004. “The Appointments Dilemma.” American Journal of Political Science 48 (3):413-28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Means, Ingunn. 1968. “The Norwegian Ombudsman.” Western Political Quarterly 21 (4):624-50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. O'Donnell, Guillermo. 2003. “Horizontal Accountability: The Legal Institutionalization of Mistrust.” In Democratic Accountability in Latin America, ed. S. Mainwaring, Christopher Welna. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Pegram, Thomas. 2008. “Accountability in Hostile Times: The Role of the Peruvian Human Rights Ombudsman 1996–2001.” Journal of Latin American Studies 40 (2):51-82.Google Scholar
  36. Pegram, Thomas. 2011a. “Human Rights as Vocation: A Portrait of Ana Maria de Campero .” Revista: Harvard Review of Latin America. 11: 15-16Google Scholar
  37. Pegram, Thomas. 2011b. “National Human Rights Institutions in Latin America: Politics and Institutionalization.” In Pegram, Thomas and Ryan Goodman, eds. 2011. Human Rights, State Compliance, and Social Change: Assessing National human Rights Institutions. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge , MA.Google Scholar
  38. Pegram, Thomas. 2011c. “Weak Institutions, Rights Claims and Pathways to Compliance: The Transformative Role of the Peruvian Human Rights Ombudsman.” Oxford Development Studies 39 (2):229-50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Peruzzotti, Enrique. 2011. “The Societalization of Horizontal Accountability: Rights Advocacy and the Defensor del Pueblo de la Nacion in Argentina.” In Pegram, Thomas and Ryan Goodman, eds. 2011. Human Rights, State Compliance, and Social Change: Assessing National human Rights Institutions. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge , MA.Google Scholar
  40. Peruzzotti, Enrique. 2012. “Broadening the Notion of Democratic Accountability: Participatory Innovation in Latin America.” Polity 44 (4):625-42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Poe, Steven C., C. Neal Tate, and Linda Camp Keith. 1999. “Repression of the Human Right to Personal Integrity Revisited: A Global Cross-National Study Covering the Years 1976–1993.” International Studies Quarterly 43 (2):291–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Powell, Emilia J., and Jeffrey K. Staton. 2009. “Domestic Judicial Institutions and Human Rights Treaty Violation.” International Studies Quarterly 53:149-174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Reif, Linda. 2004. The Ombudsman, Good Governance and the International Human Rights System. Leiden, Germany & Boston, MA: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Taylor, Matthew and Buranelli, Vinacius C. 2007. “Ending up in Pizza: Accountability as a Problem of Institutional Arrangement in Brazil.” Latin American Politics and Society. 49 (1): 59–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Taylor, Matthew. 2009. “Institutional Development through Policymaking: A Case Study of the Brazilian Central Bank.” World Politics 61 (3):487-515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Taylor, Matthew. 2014. “The Limits of Judicial Indepnedence: A Model with Illustration from Venezuela under Chavez.” Journal of Latin American Studies. 46(2): 229–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Uggla, Fredrik. 2004. “The Ombudsman in Latin America.” Journal of Latin American Studies 36 (3):423-50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Uggla, Frederik. 2011. “Through Pressure or Persuasion” Explaining Compliance with the Resolutions of the Bolivian Defensor del Pueblo.” In Pegram, Thomas and Ryan Goodman, eds. 2011. Human Rights, State Compliance, and Social Change: Assessing National human Rights Institutions. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge , MA.Google Scholar
  49. Ungar, Mark. 2002. Elusive Reform and the Rule of Law in Latin America. Boulder, CO: Lynne Reinner.Google Scholar
  50. UNHCR. 2002. El desarollo de la red de instituciones nacionales de promocion y proteccion de los derechos humanos del continente americano. Cartagena de Indias, Colombia: UNHCR.Google Scholar
  51. UNHCR. 2009. Survey on National Human Rights Institutions: Report on the findings and recommendations of a questionnaire addressed to NHRIs worldwide. United Nations: Geneva Switzerland.Google Scholar
  52. Unidad de Paz. August 3, 2002. “Defensoria, en el ojo del huracan.” El Tiempo. Bogota, Colombia. http://www.eltiempo.com/archivo/documento/MAM-1350012. Accessed 14 Aug 2014.
  53. United Nations Development Programme. 2010. UNDP-OHCHR Toolkit: For collaboration with national human rights institutions. New York, NY: United Nations Development Programme.Google Scholar
  54. Zanger, Sabine. 2000. “A Global Analysis of the Effect of Political Regime Changes on Life Integrity Violations, 1977–1993.” Journal of Peace Research. 37:213–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Political ScienceOmahaUSA

Personalised recommendations