Democracy and Human Rights: Concepts, Measures, and Relationships

Abstract

The empirical literature on democracy and human rights has made great strides over the last 30 years in explaining (1) the variation in the transition to, consolidation of, and quality of democracy; (2) the proliferation and effectiveness of human rights law; and (3) the causes and consequences of human rights across many of their categories and dimensions. This work has in many ways overcome the 'essentially contested' nature of the concepts of democracy and human rights conceptually, established different measures of both empirically, and developed increasingly sophisticated statistical and other analytical techniques to provide stronger inferences for the academic and policy community. This article argues that despite these many achievements, there remain tensions between conceptualisations of democracy and human rights over the degree to which one includes the other, the temporal and spatial empirical relationships between them, and the measures that have been developed to operationalize them. These tensions, in turn, affect the kinds of analyses that are carried out, including model specification, methods of estimation, and findings. Drawing on extant theories and measures of both, the article argues that there must be greater specificity in the conceptualisation and operationalization of democracy and human rights, greater care in the development and use of measures, and greater attention to the kinds of inferences that are made possible by them.

Heritage and Sustainability: Regulating Participation

“…On the other hand, the predominance of participation at an information level, when considered as an expression of democratic values and processes, evokes a one-way communication, excluding completely any form of decision and partnership, which does not fully correspond to the ideal of a democratic participation based on inclusion, equal representation, integrity and accountability, individual liberty, and non-violent conflict resolution [134] (p. 49). However, when the ICOMOS Valletta Principles promotes the distribution of information and awareness-raising activities in relation to democratic processes, it also recommends training initiatives (intervention) aimed to foster the participation of residents in urban governance systems and facilitate the transition towards new democratic institutions (The Valletta Principles, 2011, par.3.g).…”

Membangun Paradigma Hukum HAM Indonesia Berbasis Kewajiban Asasi Manusia

“…39 Lebih lanjut, dari sisi peluang, perembangan teknologi dalam era digital saat ini akan sangat membantu pengumpulan data mengenai implementasi HAM. 40 Saat ini fokus pemberlakuan HAM di Indonesia terkesan terfokus pada pelanggaran yang dilakukan oleh pemerintah terhadap masyarakat. Bahkan, dalam penegakan HAM di Indonesia banyak permasalahan HAM yang dipengaruhi oleh dukungan atau bahkan bermuatan politik.…”

Kontrak Sosial menurut Immanuel Kant: Kontekstualisasinya dengan Penegakan HAM di Indonesia

“…Pengkajian atas penegakan HAM dari kacamata filsafat politik otomatis akan beririsan dengan pembahasan demokrasi. HAM dan demokrasi memiliki keterkaitan erat sehingga terkadang keduanya dianggap sebagai konsep kembar (Landman, 2018). Demokrasi dan HAM secara historis memiliki persamaan pokok yakni perjuangan kebebasan, kesetaraan dan hak-hak warga negara.…”

“…Pemahaman akan HAM juga menyaratkan pemahaman tentang kepentingan warganegara dalam konteks negara hukum demokratis. HAM dan demokrasi bekerja di atas prinsip yang sama yakni inklusivitas, partisipasi, akuntabilitas, integritas individu, representasi yang setara dan berkeadilan, serta solusi sosial tanpa kekerasan (non-violent) (Landman, 2013(Landman, , 2018. Demokrasi mengandaikan HAM, dan HAM terkait erat dengan demokrasi karena partisipasi rakyat dan kendali rakyat atas kehidupan politik menentukan hak sipil dan hak politik.…”