Advertisement

The Review of International Organizations

, Volume 11, Issue 4, pp 449–475 | Cite as

Human rights treaties and mobilized dissent against the state

  • Emily Hencken Ritter
  • Courtenay R. Conrad
Article

Abstract

How does state obligation to international human rights treaties (HRTs) affect mobilized dissent? We argue that obligations to protect human rights affect not only state behavior but also the behavior of dissidents. We present a theory in which the effect of HRTs on dissent is conditional on expectations of when it will constrain government behavior. We assume that HRT obligation increases the likelihood that government agents face litigation costs for repression but argue that leaders are only constrained when they would be most likely to repress. The expectation of constraint creates opportunity: citizens are more likely to dissent in HRT-obligated states with secure leaders and weak domestic courts. We find empirical support for the implications of our theory using country-month data on HRT obligation and dissent events from 1990 to 2004.

Keywords

Human rights treaties International law Protest Dissent Repression Domestic conflict 

JEL Classification

K55 F33 

Supplementary material

11558_2015_9238_MOESM1_ESM.zip (698 kb)
(ZIP 697 KB)

References

  1. Acemoglu, D., & Robinson, J.A. (2006). Economic origins of democracy and dictatorship. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Almeida, P.D. (2003). Opportunity organizations and threat-induced contention: protest waves in authoritarian settings. American Journal of Sociology, 109(2), 345–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Banks, A.S. (2010). Cross-national time-series data archive. Jerusalem: Databanks International. See URL: http://www.databanksinternational.com.Google Scholar
  4. Beck, N., Katz, J.N., & Tucker, R. (1998). Taking time seriously: time-series-cross-section analysis with a binary dependent variable. American Journal of Political Science, 42(4), 1260–1288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bell, S.R., Bhasin, T., Clay, K.C., & Murdie, A. (2014). Taking the fight to them: neighborhood human rights organizations and domestic protest. British Journal of Political Science, 44(4), 853–875.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bond, D., Bond, J., Oh, C., Jenkins, J.C., & Taylor, C.L. (2003). Integrated data for events analysis (idea): an event typology for automated events data development. Journal of Peace Research, 40(6), 733–745.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brambor, T., Clark, W.R., & Golder, M. (2006). Understanding interaction models: improving empirical analyses. Political Analysis, 14, 63–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brockett, C.D., McAdam, D., Tarrow, S.G., & Tilly, C. (2005). Political movements and violence in Central America. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bueno de Mesquita, B., Smith, A., Siverson, R., & Morrow, J.D. (2003). The logic of political survival. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  10. Cameron, C.M. (2002). Judicial independence: how can you tell it when you see it? And, who cares? In S.B. Burbank, & B. Friedman (Eds.), Judicial independence at the crossroads: an interdisciplinary approach (pp. 134–47). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Carey, J.M. (2000). Parchment, equilibria, and institutions. Comparative Political Studies, 33(6/7), 735–761.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Carey, S.C. (2006). The dynamic relationship between protest and repression. Political Research Quarterly, 59(1), 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Carrubba, C.J. (2009). A model of the endogenous development of judicial institutions in federal and international systems. Journal of Politics, 71(1), 55–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Carter, D.B., & Signorino, C.S. (2010). Back to the future: modeling temporal dependence in binary data. Political Analysis, 18(3), 271–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cederman, L.-E., Wimmer, A., & Min, B. (2010). Why do ethnic groups rebel? New data and analysis. World Politics, 62(1), 87–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cheibub, J. (1998). Political regimes and the extractive capacity of governments: taxation in democracies and dictatorships. World Politics, 50(3), 349–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cingranelli, D.L., & Filippov, M. (2010). Electoral rules and incentives to protect human rights. Journal of Politics, 72(1), 243–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Conrad, C.R., & Moore, W.H. (2010). What stops the torture? American Journal of Political Science, 54(2), 459–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Conrad, C.R., & Ritter, E.H. (2013). Tenure, treaties, and torture: the conflicting domestic effects of international law. Journal of Politics, 75(2), 397–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Cross, F.B. (1999). The relevance of law in human rights protection. International Review of Law and Economics, 19, 87–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Dai, X. (2005). Why comply? The domestic constitutency mechanism. International Organization, 59(2), 363–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Davenport, C. (1995). Multi-dimensional threat perception and state repression: an inquiry into why states apply negative sanctions. American Journal of Political Science, 39, 683–713.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Davenport, C. (2007a). State repression and political order. Annual Review of Political Science, 10, 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Davenport, C. (2007b). State repression and the domestic democratic peace. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Dugan, L., & Chenoweth, E. (2012). Moving beyond deterrence: the effectiveness of raising the expected utility of abstaining from terrorism in Israel. American Sociological Review, 77(4), 597–624.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Earl, J., Soule, S.A., & McCarthy, J.D. (2003). Policing under fire? Explaining the policing of protest. American Sociological Review, 68(4), 581–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Fariss, C.J. (2014). Respect for human rights has improved over time: modeling the changing standard of accountability. American Political Science Review, 108(2), 297–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Finnemore, M., & Sikkink, K. (1998). International norms dynamics and political change. International Organization, 52(4), 887–917.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Francisco, R.A. (2004). After the massacre: mobilization in the wake of harsh repression. Mobilization: An International Quarterly, 9(2), 107–126.Google Scholar
  30. Gartner, S.S., & Regan, P.M. (1996). Threat and repression: The non-linear relationship between government and opposition violence. Journal of Peace Research, 33(3), 273–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Gates, S. (2002). Recruitment and allegiance: the microfoundations of rebellion. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 46(1), 111–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Goemans, H.E., Gleditsch, K.S., & Chiozza, G. (2009). Introducing Archigos: a data set of political leaders. Journal of Peace Research, 46(2), 269–283. Data available at URL: http://mail.rochester.edu/~hgoemans/data.htm.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Grief, A., & Laitin, D.D. (2004). A theory of endogenous institutional change. American Political Science Review, 98(4), 14–48.Google Scholar
  34. Grossman, H.I. (1991). A general equilibrium model of insurrections. American Economic Review, 81(4), 912–921.Google Scholar
  35. Gurr, T.R. (1970). Why men rebel. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Hafner-Burton, E.M. (2005). Trading human rights: how preferential trade agreements influence government repression. International Organization, 59, 593–629.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Hafner-Burton, E.M., & Tsutsui, K. (2005). Human rights in a globalizing world: the paradox of empty promises. American Journal of Sociology, 110(5), 1373–1411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Hafner-Burton, E.M., & Tsutsui, K. (2007). Justice lost! The failure of international human rights law to matter where needed the most. Journal of Peace Research, 44(4), 207–425.Google Scholar
  39. Hafner-Burton, E.M., Tsutsui, K., & Meyer, J.W. (2008). International human rights law and the politics of legitimation: repressive states and human rights treaties. International Sociology, 23(1), 115–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Hathaway, O.A. (2002). Do human rights treaties make a difference? Yale Law Journal, 111(8), 1935–2042.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Hathaway, O.A. (2003). The cost of commitment. Stanford Law Review, 55, 1821–1862.Google Scholar
  42. Hathaway, O.A. (2007). Why do countries commit to human rights treaties? Journal of Conflict Resolution, 51(4), 588–621.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Heckman, J.J. (1979). Sample selection bias as a specification error. Econometrica, 47(1), 153–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Helfer, L.R., & Voeten, E. (2014). International courts as agents of legal change: evidence from LGBT rights in Europe. International Organization, 68(1), 77–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Helmke, G. (2002). The logic of strategic defection: court-executive relations in argentina under dictatorship and democracy. American Political Science Review, 96 (2), 291–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Helmke, G. (2005). Courts under constraints. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Hilbink, L. (2007). Judges beyond politics in democracy and dictatorship: lessons from Chile. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Hill, D.W. (2010). Estimating the effects of human rights treaties on state behavior. Journal of Politics, 72(4), 1161–1174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Hollyer, J.R., & Rosendorff, B.P. (2011). Why do authoritarian regimes sign the convention against torture? signaling, domestic politics, and non-compliance. Quarterly Journal of Political Science, 6(3–4), 275–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Howard, R.M., & Carey, H.F. (2004). Is an independent judiciary necessary for democracy? Judicature, 87(6), 284.Google Scholar
  51. Keck, M.E., & Sikkink, K. (1998). Activists beyond borders: advocacy networks in international politics. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  52. Keith, L.C. (1999). The united nations international covenant on civil and political rights: does it make a difference in human rights behavior? Journal of Peace Research, 36(1), 95–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Keith, L.C. (2002). Judicial independence and human rights protection around the world. Judicature, 85(4), 195–201.Google Scholar
  54. King, G., & Lowe, W. (2003). 10 million international dyadic events. Updated 2006. Downloaded 3, February 2008.Google Scholar
  55. Klandermans, B. (1984). Mobilization and participation: social-psychological expansisons of resource mobilization theory. American Sociological Review, 49(5), 583–600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Klandermans, B., & Oegema, D. (1987). Potentials, networks, motivations, and barriers: steps towards participation in social movements. American Sociological Review, 52(4), 519–531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Kuran, T. (1991). Now out of never: the element of surprise in the east european revolution of 1989. World Politics, 44(1), 7–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Lichbach, M.I. (1987). Deterrence or escalation? The puzzle of aggregate studies of repression and dissent. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 31, 266–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Lichbach, M.I. (1995). The rebel’s dilemma. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Linzer, D.A., & Staton, J.K. (2015). A global measure of judicial independence, 1948–2012. Journal of Law and Courts, 3(2), 223–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Lohmann, S. (1994). The dynamics of informational cascades: the monday demonstrations in leipzig, east germany, 1989–1991. World Politics, 47(1), 42–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Lupu, Y. (2013a). Best evidence: the role of information in domestic judicial enforcement of international human rights agreements. International Organization, 67(3), 469–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Lupu, Y. (2013b). The informative power of treaty commitment: using the spatial model to address selection effects. American Journal of Political Science, 57(4), 912–925.Google Scholar
  64. Lupu, Y. (2015). Legislative veto players and the effects of international human rights agreements. American Journal of Political Science, 59(3), 578–594.Google Scholar
  65. McAdam, D. (1999). Political process and the development of black insurgency, 2nd edn. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  66. McAdam, D., McCarthy, J.D., & Zald, M.N. (1996). Comparative perspectives on social movements: political opportunities, mobilizing structures, and cultural framings. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. McAdam, D., Tarrow, S., & Tilly, C. (2004). Dynamics of contention. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  68. McCarthy, J.D., & Zald, M.N. (1977). Resource mobilization and social movements. American Journal of Sociology, 82(6), 1212–1241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Merry, S.E. (2006). Human rights and gender violence: translating international law into local justice. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  70. Moore, W.H. (1995). Action-reaction or rational expectations? Reciprocity and the domestic-international conflict nexus during the rhodesia problem. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 39(1), 129–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Moore, W.H. (1998). Repression and dissent: substitution, context, and timing. American Journal of Political Science, 42(3), 851–873.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Moore, W.H. (2000). The repression of dissent: a substitution model of government coercion. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 44(1), 107–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Moustafa, T. (2003). Law versus the state: the judicialization of politics in egypt. Law & Social Inquiry, 28(4), 883–930.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Moustafa, T. (2007). The struggle for constitutional power: law, politics, and economic development in Egypt. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Muller, E. (1985). Income inequality, regime repressiveness, and political violence. American Sociological Review, 50(1), 47–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Murdie, A., & Bhasin, T. (2011). Aiding and abetting: human rights ingos and domestic protest. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 55(2), 163–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Neumayer, E. (2005). Do international treaties improve respect for human rights? Journal of Conflict Resolution, 49(6), 925–953.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Olson, M. (1965). The logic of collective action: public goods and the theory of groups. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  79. Opp, K.-D., & Gern, C. (1993). Dissident groups, personal networks, and spontaneous cooperation: the east german revolution of 1989. American Sociological Review, 58(5), 659–680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Page, S. (2006). Path dependence. Quarterly Journal of Political Science, 1, 87–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Pierskalla, J.H. (2010). Protest, deterrence, and escalation: the strategic calculus of government repression. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 54(1), 117–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Poe, S.C., & Tate, C.N. (1994). Repression of human rights to personal integrity in the 1980s: a global analysis. American Political Science Review, 88(4), 853–872.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Powell, E.J., & Staton, J.K. (2009). Domestic judicial institutions and human rights treaty violations. International Studies Quarterly, 53(1), 149–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Rasler, K. (1996). Concession, repression, and political protest in the iranian revolution. American Sociological Review, 61(1), 132–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Regan, P., & Henderson, E. (2002). Democracy, threats and political repression in developing countries: are democracies internally less violent? Third World Quarterly, 23(1), 119–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Rejali, D. (2007). Torture and democracy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  87. Ríos-Figueroa, J., & Staton, J.K. (2014). An evaluation of cross-national measures of judicial independence. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 30 (1), 104–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Risse, T., Ropp, S.C., & Sikkink, K. (1999). The power of human rights: international norms and domestic change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Ritter, E.H. (2014). Policy disputes, political survival, and the onset and severity of state repression. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 58(1), 143–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Ritter, E.H., & Conrad, C.R. (2016). Preventing and responding to dissent: the observational challenges of explaining strategic repression. Forthcoming at the American Political Science Review. Available at URL: http://faculty.ucmerced.edu/eritter/Ritter/rain.html.
  91. Rosenberg, G.N. (1991). The hollow hope: can courts bring about social change? Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  92. Schelling, T.C. (1978). Micromotives and macrobehavior. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
  93. Schussman, A., & Soule, S.A. (2005). Process and protest: accounting for individual protest participation. Social Forces, 84(2), 1083–1108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Shadmehr, M. (2014). Mobilization, repression, and revolution: grievances and opportunities in contentious politics. Journal of Politics, 76(3), 621–635.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Shadmehr, M., & Bernhardt, D. (2011). Collective action with uncertain payoffs: coordination, public signals, and punishment dilemmas. American Political Science Review, 105(4), 829–851.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Shellman, S.M. (2004). Time series intervals and statistical inference: the effects of temporal aggregation on event data analysis. Political Analysis, 12, 97–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Shellman, S.M. (2006). Leaders’ motivations and actions: explaining government-dissident conflict-cooperation processes. Conflict Management and Peace Science, 23, 73–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Simmons, B.A. (2009). Mobilizing for human rights: international law in domestic politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Smith, J., Pagnucco, R., & Lopez, G.A. (1998). Globalizing human rights: the work of transnational human rights ngos in the 1990s. Human Rights Quarterly, 20(2), 379–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Snow, D.A., Rochford, E. B Jr, Worden, S.K., & Benford, R.D. (1986). Frame alignment processes, micromobilization, and movement participation. American Sociological Review, 51(4), 464–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Staton, J.K. (2006). Constitutional review and the selective promotion of case results. American Journal of Political Science, 50(1), 98–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Staton, J.K. (2010). Judicial power and strategic communication in Mexico. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Staton, J.K., & Moore, W.H. (2011). Judicial power in domestic and international politics. International Organization, 65(3), 553–588.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. Sullivan, C.M. (2015). Undermining resistance: mobilization, repression, and the enforcement of political order. Journal of Conflict Resolution. doi: 10.1177/0022002714567951.
  105. Tarrow, S. (1991). Struggle, politics, and reform: collective action, social movements, and cycles of protest. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  106. Tarrow, S. (1994). Power in movement: social movements, collective action and politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  107. Taylor, C.L., Bond, J., Bond, D., Jenkins, J.C., & Kuzucu, Z.B. (1999). Conflict-cooperation for interstate and intrastate interactions: an expansion of the goldstein scale. In Annual meeting of the international studies association, Washington, DC. Columbia University Press. Conference Paper.Google Scholar
  108. Tilly, C. (1978). From mobilization to revolution. Reading: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  109. Ulfelder (2011). Country memberships in selected intergovernmental organizations and accession to selected regional and global treaty regimes: global, country-year format, 1955–2010, volume ICPSR30541-v1. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], Ann Arbor. doi: 10.3886/ICPSR30541.
  110. Vanberg, G. (2005). The politics of constitutional review in Germany. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  111. Von Stein, J. (2005). Do treaties constrain or screen? Selection bias and treaty compliance. American Political Science Review, 99(4), 611–622.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. von Stein, J. (2015). Making promises, keeping promises: democracy, ratification, and compliance in international human rights law. British Journal of Political Science. doi: 10.1017/S0007123414000489.
  113. Vreeland, J.R. (2008). Political institutions and human rights: why dictatorships enter into the united nations convention against torture. International Organization, 62(1), 65–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. Weede, E. (1987). Some new evidence on the correlates of political violence: income inequality, regime repressiveness, and economic development. European Sociological Review, 3(2), 97–108.Google Scholar
  115. Weingast, B.R. (1997). The political foundations of democracy and the rule of law. American Political Science Review, 91(2), 245–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. Young, J.K. (2009). State capacity, democracy, and the violation of personal integrity rights. Journal of Human Rights, 8(4), 283–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of CaliforniaMercedUSA

Personalised recommendations