Warum missachten etablierte Demokratien das Recht auf körperliche Unversehrtheit?

Chapter

Zusammenfassung

Im Oktober 2001 verabschiedete der US-Kongress den Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act. Mit der Unterschrift des damaligen Präsidenten George W. Bush wurde er unter dem weniger sperrigen Akronym USA PATRIOT Act gesetzeswirksam. Er sah Maßnahmen vor, welche die amerikanischen Bundesbehörden im damals jüngst begonnenen ‚Krieg gegen den Terror‘ einsetzen sollten. Hierzu zählt beispielsweise eine richterliche Generalvollmacht des FBI zum Abhören jeglicher Kommunikation eines Terrorverdächtigen. Weniger bekannt, aber vielleicht noch bedeutsamer, ist die Resolution Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) vom 14. September 2001.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literatur

  1. Acemoglu, Daron und James A. Robinson. 2000. Democratization or Repression? Inequality, Growth and Development. European Economic Review 44: 683–693.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Acemoglu, Daron und James A. Robinson. 2006. Economic Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Alvarez, Michael, Jose Antonio Cheibub, Adam Przeworski und Fernando Limongi. 1996. Classifying Political Regimes. Studies in Comparative International Development 31 (2): 3–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Amnesty International. 2006. Amnesty International Report 2006. The State of the World’s Human Rights. London: Amnesty International Publications.Google Scholar
  5. Amnesty International. 2007. Amnesty International Report 2007. The State of the World’s Human Rights. Witney: The Alden Press.Google Scholar
  6. Amnesty International. 2008. Amnesty International Report 2008. The State of the World’s Human Rights. London: Amnesty International Publications.Google Scholar
  7. Amnesty International. 2011. Amnesty International Report 2011. The State of the World’s Human Rights. London: Amnesty International Publications.Google Scholar
  8. Barsh, Russel Lawrence. 1993. Measuring Human Rights. Problems of Methodology and Purpose. Human Rights Quarterly 15 (1): 87–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bates, Douglas, Martin Maechler und Ben Bolker. 2013. lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=lme4. Zugegriffen: 13. April 2014.
  10. Bauer, Daniel J. und Patrick J. Curran. 2005. Probing Interactions in Fixed and Multilevel Regression. Inferential and Graphical Techniques. Multivariate Behavioral Research 40 (3): 373–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Beck, Nathaniel und Jonathan N. Katz. 1995. What to do (and not to do) with Time-Series Cross-Section Data. The American Political Science Review 89 (3): 634–647.Google Scholar
  12. Bühlmann, Marc, Wolfgang Merkel, Lisa Müller, Heiko Giebler, und Bernhard Weßels. 2011. Democracy Barometer: Methodology. Aarau: Zentrum für Demokratie. www.democracybarometer.org. Zugegriffen: 15. September 2013.
  13. Bühlmann Marc Wolfgang Merkel Lisa Müller Heiko Giebler, Bernhard Weßels. 2012. Demokratiebarometer. Ein neues Instrument zur Messung von Demokratiequalität. Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Politikwissenschaft 6: 115‐159. doi: 10.1007/s12286-012-0129-2.Google Scholar
  14. Bühlmann, Marc, Wolfgang Merkel, Lisa Müller, und Bernhard Weßels. 2012. The Democracy Barometer. A New Instrument to Measure the Quality of Democracy and its Potential for Comparative Research. European Political Science 11: 519–536. doi: 10.1057/eps.2011.46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Carey, Sabine C. 2010. The Use of Repression as a Response to Domestic Dissent. Political Studies 58 (1): 167–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cingranelli, David L. und David L. Richards. 1999. Measuring the Level, Pattern, and Sequence of Government Respect for Physical Integrity Rights. International Studies Quarterly 43: 407–417.Google Scholar
  17. Cingranelli, David L. und David L. Richards. 2008. The Cingranelli-Richards (CIRI) Human Rights Data Project Coding Manual. http://www.humanrightsdata.org/documentation/ciri_coding_guide.pdf. Zugegriffen: 10. Mai 2013.
  18. Cingranelli, David L. und David L. Richards. 2010. The Cingranelli and Richards (CIRI) Human Rights Data Project. Human Rights Quarterly 32: 395–418. doi: 10.1353/hrq.0.0141.Google Scholar
  19. Cingranelli, David L. und David L. Richards. 2013. The Cingranelli-Richards (CIRI) Human Rights Dataset. http://www.humanrightsdata.org. Zugegriffen: 10. Mai 2013.Google Scholar
  20. Collier, David und Steven Levitsky. 1997. Democracy with Adjectives. Conceptual Innovation in Comparative Research. World Politics 49 (3): 430–451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Dahl, Robert A. 1971. Polyarchy: Participation and Opposition. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Dahl, Robert A. 1989. Democracy and Its Critics. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Davenport, Christian. 1995. Multi-Dimensional Threat Perception and State Repression. An Inquiry into Why States Apply Negative Sanctions. American Journal of Political Science 39 (3): 683–713.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Davenport, Christian. 1999. Human Rights and the Democratic Proposition. Journal of Conflict Resolution 43 (1): 92–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Davenport, Christian. Hrsg. 2000a. Paths to State Repression. Human Rights Violations and Contentious Politics. Lanham/Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.Google Scholar
  26. Davenport, Christian. 2000b. Introduction. In Paths to State Repression. Human Rights Violations and Contentious Politics, hrsg. Christian Davenport, 1-24. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.Google Scholar
  27. Davenport, Christian. 2007a. State Repression and Political Order. Annual Review of Political Science 10: 1–23. doi: 10.1146/annurev.polisci.10.101405.143216.Google Scholar
  28. Davenport, Christian. 2007b. State Repression and the Domestic Democratic Peace. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Davenport, Christian und David Alan Armstrong. 2004. Democracy and the Violation Human Rights. A Statistical Analysis from 1976 to 1996. American Journal of Political Science 48 (3): 538–554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Davenport, Christian und Molly Inman. 2012. The State of Repression Research Since the 1990s. Terrorism and Political Violence 24 (4): 619–634. doi: 10.1080/09546553.2012.700619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Downs, Anthony. 1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper. Fox, John und Sanford Weisberg. 2011. An R Companion to Applied Regression. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  32. Francisco, Ronald A. 1995. The Relationship between Coercion and Protest. An Empirical Evaluation in Three Coercive States. Journal of Conflict Resolution 39 (2): 263–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Francisco, Ronald A. 1996. Coercion and Protest. An Empirical Test in Two Democratic States. American Journal of Political Science 40 (4): 1179–1204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Gartner, Scott Sigmund und Patrick M. Regan. 1996. Threat and Repression. The Non-Linear Relationship between Government and Opposition Violence. Journal of Peace Research 33 (3): 273–287. doi: 10.1177/0022343396033003003.Google Scholar
  35. Gelman, Andrew und Jennifer Hill. 2006. Data Analysis Using Regression and Multilevel/ Hierarchical Models. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Gurr, Ted R. 1986. The Political Origins of State Violence and Terror. A Theoretical Analysis. In Government Violence and Repression. An Agenda for Research, hrsg. Michael Stohl und George A. Lopez, 45-72. New York: Greenwood Press.Google Scholar
  37. Habermas, Jürgen. 1992. Faktizität und Geltung. Beiträge zur Diskurstheorie des Rechts und des demokratischen Rechtsstaats. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  38. Hamilton, Alexander, John Jay und James Madison. 2000[1788]. The Federalist. A Commentary on the Constitution of the United States. Edited, with an Introduction, by Robert Scigliano. New York: Modern Library.Google Scholar
  39. Henderson, Conway W. 1993. Population Pressures and Political Repression. Social Science Quarterly 74 (2): 322–333.Google Scholar
  40. Heston, Alan, Robert Summers und Bettina Aten. 2012. PWT 7.1: Penn World Table Version 7.1. Center for International Comparisons of Production and Income and Prices at the University of Pennsylvania. http://pwt.econ.upenn.edu/php_site/pwt_index.php. Zugegriffen: 21. September 2012.
  41. Hobbes, Thomas. 1984. Leviathan, oder Stoff, Form und Gewalt eines kirchlichen und bürgerlichen Staates. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  42. Hox, Joop J. 2010. Multilevel Analysis. Techniques and Applications. London: Routledge Academic.Google Scholar
  43. Karl, Terry Lynn. 1986. Imposing Consent? Electoralism vs. Democratization in El Salvador. In Elections and Democratization in Latin America, hrsg. Paul Drake und Eduardo Silva, 9‐36. San Diego: Center for Iberian and Latin American Studies, Center for US/ Mexican Studies, University of California.Google Scholar
  44. Keesing’s. Mai 2013. United States. Presidential revision of anti-terrorism strategy. Keesing’s Record of World Events 59: 52655–52656.Google Scholar
  45. Keesing’s. Juni 2013. Turkey. Anti-government protests. Keesing’s Record of World Events 59: 52740.Google Scholar
  46. Keith, Linda Camp. 2002. Constitutional Provisions for Individual Human Rights (1977- 1996). Are They More Than Mere “Window Dressing?” Political Research Quarterly 55 (1): 111–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Kersting, Wolfgang. 2007. Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan (1651). In Geschichte des politischen Denkens. Ein Handbuch, hrsg. Manfred Brocker, 212-225. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  48. King, John C. 2000. Exploring the Ameliorating Effects of Democracy on Political Repression. Cross-National Evidence. In Paths to State Repression. Human Rights Violations and Contentious Politics, hrsg. Christian Davenport, 217-239. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.Google Scholar
  49. Leetaru, Kalev und Philip Schrodt. 2013. GDELT. Global Data on Events, Language, and Tone, 1979-2012. Paper presented at the International Studies Association Annual Conference, San Diego, CA, April 2013.Google Scholar
  50. Lichbach, Mark Irving. 1987. Deterrence or Escalation? The Puzzle of Aggregate Studies of Repression and Dissent. The Journal of Conflict Resolution 31 (2): 266–297. doi: 10.2307/174013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Locke, John. 2007. Zweite Abhandlung über die Regierung. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  52. Mainwaring, Scott, Daniel Brinks und Aníbal Pérez-Linán. 2001. Classifying Political Regimes in Latin America, 1945-1999. Studies in Comparative International Development 36 (1): 37–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Merkel, Wolfgang. 2004. Embedded and Defective Democracies. Democratization 11 (5): 33–58.Google Scholar
  54. Merkel, Wolfgang. 2010. Systemtransformation. Eine Einführung in die Theorie und Empirie der Transformationsforschung. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, 2. überarb. u. erw. Aufl.Google Scholar
  55. Merkel Wolfgang Hans-Jürgen Puhle Aurel Croissant, Claudia Eicher und Peter Thiery. 2003. Defekte Demokratien. Bd. 1 Theorie. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.Google Scholar
  56. Mesquita Bruce Bueno de George W. Downs und Alastair Smith. 2005. Thinking Inside the Box. A Closer Look at Democracy and Human Rights. International Studies Quarterly 49 (3): 439–458.Google Scholar
  57. Montesquieu, Charles Louis de Secondat de. 1994. Vom Geist der Gesetze. Stuttgart: Reclam.Google Scholar
  58. Moore, Will H. 2000. The Repression of Dissent. A Substitution Model of Government Coercion. Journal of Conflict Resolution 44 (1): 107–127. doi: 10.1177/0022002700044001006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Pierskalla, Jan Henryk. 2010. Protest, Deterrence, and Escalation. The Strategic Calculus of Government Repression. Journal of Conflict Resolution 54 (1): 117–145. doi: 10.1177/0022002709352 462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Pinheiro, Jose, Douglas Bates, Saikat DebRoy, Deepayan Sarkar und R Core Team. 2013. nlme. Linear and Nonlinear Mixed Effects Models. http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/nlme/nlme.pdf. Zugegriffen: 17. Juni 2014.
  61. Poe, Steven C. und C. Neal Tate. 1994. Repression of the Human Right to Personal Integrity in 1980s. A Global Analysis. American Political Science Review 88 (4): 853–872.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Poe, Steven C., C. Neal Tate und 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. doi: 10.1111/0020-8833.00121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Poe, Steven C., C. Neal Tate, Linda Camp Keith und Drew Lanier. 2000. Domestic Threats. The Abuse of Personal Integrity. In Paths to State Repression. Human Rights Violations and Contentious Politics, hrsg. Christian Davenport, 27-70. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.Google Scholar
  64. Preacher, Kristopher J., Patrick J. Curran und Daniel J. Bauer. 2006. Computational Tools for Probing Interactions in Multiple Linear Regression, Multilevel Modeling, and Latent Curve Analysis. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics 31 (4): 437–448.Google Scholar
  65. Przeworski, Adam, Michael Alvarez, Jose Antonio Cheibub und Fernando Limongi. 2000. Democracy and Development: Material Well-Being in the World, 1950-1990. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. R Core Team. 2013. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna/ Austria. http://www.R-project.org/. Zugegriffen: 1. Juli 2013.
  67. Rabe-Hesketh, Sophia und Anders Skrondal. 2008. Multilevel and Longitudinal Modeling Using STATA. College Station: Stata Press Publication.Google Scholar
  68. Regan, Patrick M. und Errol A. Henderson. 2002. Democracy, threats and political repression in developing countries: are democracies internally less violent? Third World Quarterly 23 (1): 119–136. doi: 10.1080/01436590220108207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Sarkees, Meredith Reid und Frank Wayman. 2010. Resort to War: 1816-2007. Washington: CQ Press.Google Scholar
  70. Schmitter, Philippe C. und Terry Lynn Karl. 1996. What Democracy Is … and Is Not. In The Global Resurgence of Democracy, hrsg. Larry Diamond und Marc F. Plattner, 49‐62. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  71. Schrodt, Philip A. 2012. CAMEO. Conflict and Mediation Event Observations Event and Actor Codebook. University Park: Event Data Project, Department of Political Science, Pennsylvania State University, Pond Laboratory. http://data.gdeltproject.org/documentation/CAMEO.Manual.1.1b3.pdf. Zugegriffen: 17. Juni 2014.
  72. Schumpeter, Joseph A. 1942. Capitalism, Socialism & Democracy. New York: Harper & Brothers.Google Scholar
  73. Solt, Frederick. 2013. The Standardized World Income Inequality Database. http://hdl.handle.net/1902.1/11992. Zugegriffen: 27. November 2013.
  74. START. 2012. Global Terrorism Database. gtd_91to11_1012dist. http://www.start.umd.edu/gtd. Zugegriffen: 27. November 2013.
  75. Teorell, Jan, Nicholas Charron, Stefan Dahlberg, Sören Holmberg, Bo Rothstein, Petrus Sundin und Richard Svensson. 2013. The Quality of Government Dataset. Version 15. Mai 2013. Göteborg. http://www.qog.pol.gu.se. Zugegriffen: 27.11.2013.
  76. Tocqueville, Alexis de. 2000[1835]. Democracy in America, hrsg. Henry Reeve. New York: Bantam Books.Google Scholar
  77. Tsebelis, George und John Sprague. 1989. Coercion and revolution. Variations on a predator- prey model. Mathematical and Computer Modeling 12 (4–5): 547–559.Google Scholar
  78. U.S. Department of State. 2004. Country Reports on Human Rights Practices. France. February 25, 2004. http://www.state.gov/j/drl/rls/hrrpt/2003/27837.htm. Zugegriffen: 24. November 2013.
  79. Ware, John. 2013. Undercover soldiers ‘killed unarmed civilians in Belfast’. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24987465. Zugegriffen: 21. November 2013.
  80. Wickham, Hadley. 2009. ggplot2. Elegant graphics for data analysis. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  81. Zanger, Sabine C. 2000. A Global Analysis of the Effect of Political Regime Changes on Life Integrity Violations, 1977-93. Journal of Peace Research 37 (2): 213–233. doi: 10.1177/00223433000 37002006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Abt. Demokratie und DemokratisierungWissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung (WZB)BerlinDeutschland

Personalised recommendations