Beyond compliance: Rethinking the Effectiveness of Regional Human Rights Regimes

Introduction

The European, African and inter-American human rights regimes seem not to be effective vis-à-vis non-democratic states. Besides undermining the international rule-based order, this situation has dire implications for human rights victims.

Limitations of Conventional Theories

Conventional theories, based on the experience of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), equate the effectiveness of regional courts with compliance. This perspective is inadequate to explain the status quo, where illiberal states may execute individual rulings while violating the underpinning norms.

Insights from the Global South

Scholarship on the Global South suggests that the experiences of the inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR) and the African Court of Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACtHPR) offer an underexplored potential to increase our understanding. There is a great potential to draw lessons for the European context, which is increasingly dealing with illiberal regimes.

Compliance Perspective

From a compliance perspective, the IACtHR and the ACtHPR have been hardly effective. Yet, if we take broader societal impact as an indicator, their experiences might indeed provide us with important insights.

Research Question

The project asks: What are the limitations and possibilities for human rights regimes to be effective in non-democratic contexts? It starts from the working assumption that regimes can only be effective if they make full use of their oversight powers (exhaustiveness) and empower domestic activists in their mobilization (responsiveness).

Methodology

It tests this view by analyzing how the three regimes have enforced their norms against states engaging in:

1. Violence
2. Legal repression
3. Rule of law violations

Development of Theory

Based on case law analysis and interviews, it will develop an empirically based theory on effectiveness in three steps:

1. A historical analysis to identify the three regimes’ founding goals
2. An empirical analysis of the extent to which they have adhered to these goals vis-à-vis illiberal states
3. A normative framework on how they can enhance their effectiveness.