justice lost! the failure of international human rights law to.pptVIP

A Lesson in Commitment? Is seeing believing? Policy Implications: Why should we care? Is the bare minimum the litmus test we are going for? Are we teaching governments they can get their cake and eat it too? Why are so many Northern governments, concerned with ratification? Strengths Provides a comprehensive overview of literature that supports the pros and the cons of the HR regime. Addresses real world applicability Provides robust statistical evidence Realism vs. Constructivism “Constructivism fails” Treaties do not reform the countries Socialization is how people claim reform takes place only there is no evidence to show socialization works! Repression pays so leaders continue doing it! Why does the North push for the “legal regime”? Norms or Power? This is an open ended question that the authors do not answer (perhaps to entice us to read their next article!) ? * * “Justice Lost! The Failure of International Human Rights Law to Matter Where Needed Most”(Hafner-Burton, Emilie Marie, and Kiyo Tsutsui. 2007 ) Radhika Ganesh Prabhu February 24, 2009 International Organizations Professor James Vreeland Source: /newscartoons/cartoonists/mba/lowres/mban935l.jpg Source: http://www.miketodd.ca/web/archives/000816.html REPRESSOR STATES: WHAT YOU SEE IS NOT ALWAYS WHAT YOU GET! Key Findings of Authors Governments, including repressive ones, frequently make legal commitments to human rights treaties Commitments mostly have no effects on the world’s most terrible repressors even long into the future Change does not happen on the margins Realistic institutional reforms will probably not help solve this problem. (Hafner-Burton, Emilie Marie, and Kiyo Tsutsui. 2007 ) Hafner-Burton, Emilie Marie, and Kiyo Tsutsui. 2007 Treaties they consider: International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (CCPR) International Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT) Two Models of the Paper M