Domestic legal traditions and states’ human rights practices

Mitchell, Sara McLaughlin; Ring, Jonathan J.; Spellman, Mary K

doi:10.1177/0022343312466561

Cited by 52 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Specifically, scholars nearly always employ null hypothesis tests of statistical significance to determine if a particular covariate is a meaningful determinant of state repression. Other recent additions to the list include a host of domestic legal institutions such as constitutional provisions for basic rights (Cross 1999;Keith, Tate, and Poe 2009) and common law heritage (Mitchell, Ring, and Spellman 2013). Using this criterion, the literature has uncovered a number of empirical findings with respect to state repression.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Empirical Evaluation of Explanations for State Repression

Hill¹,

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

T he empirical literature that examines cross-national patterns of state repression seeks to discover a set of political, economic, and social conditions that are consistently associated with government violations of human rights. Null hypothesis significance testing is the most common way of examining the relationship between repression and concepts of interest, but we argue that it is inadequate for this goal, and has produced potentially misleading results. To remedy this deficiency in the literature we use cross-validation and random forests to determine the predictive power of measures of concepts the literature identifies as important causes of repression. We find that few of these measures are able to substantially improve the predictive power of statistical models of repression. Further, the most studied concept in the literature, democratic political institutions, predicts certain kinds of repression much more accurately than others. We argue that this is due to conceptual and operational overlap between democracy and certain kinds of state repression. Finally, we argue that the impressive performance of certain features of domestic legal systems, as well as some economic and demographic factors, justifies a stronger focus on these concepts in future studies of repression.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Empirical Evaluation of Explanations for State Repression

Hill¹,

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Ultimately, the success of the CRPD and other international laws related to mental health depends on the extent to which they are domestically implemented and followed by its state parties [108]. Important issues affecting implementation in all state parties remain.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Impacting Mental Health Laws and Policies in High-Income Countries? A Case Study of Implementation in Canada

Hoffman

Sritharan

Tejpar

2016

BMC Int Health Hum Rights

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundPersons with psychosocial disabilities face disparate access to healthcare and social services worldwide, along with systemic discrimination, structural inequalities, and widespread human rights abuses. Accordingly, many people have looked to international human rights law to help address mental health challenges. On December 13, 2006, the United Nations formally adopted the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) – the first human rights treaty of the 21st century and the fastest ever negotiated.MethodsThis study assesses the CRPD’s potential impact on mental health systems and presents a legal and public policy analysis of its implementation in one high-income country: Canada. As part of this analysis, a critical review was undertaken of the CRPD’s implementation in Canadian legislation, public policy, and jurisprudence related to mental health.ResultsWhile the Convention is clearly an important step forward, there remains a divide, even in Canada, between the Convention’s goals and the experiences of Canadians with disabilities. Its implementation is perhaps hindered most by Canada’s reservations to Article 12 of the CRPD on legal capacity for persons with psychosocial disabilities. The overseeing CRPD Committee has stated that Article 12 only permits “supported decision-making” regimes, yet most Canadian jurisdictions maintain their “substitute decision-making” regimes. This means that many Canadians with mental health challenges continue to be denied legal capacity to make decisions related to their healthcare, housing, and finances. But changes are afoot: new legislation has been introduced in different jurisdictions across the country, and recent court decisions have started to push policymakers in this direction.ConclusionDespite the lack of explicit implementation, the CRPD has helped to facilitate a larger shift in social and cultural paradigms of mental health and disability in Canada. But ratification and passive implementation are not enough. Further efforts are needed to implement the CRPD’s provisions and promote the equal enjoyment of human rights by all Canadian citizens – and presumably for all other people too, from the poorest to the wealthiest countries.

show abstract

“…Common law systems have also been argued to promote judicial independence (Mitchell, Ring, and Spellman 2013). As a measure of common law legal systems, I use data from Powell and Mitchell (2007) which contain binary measures for common, civil, Islamic, and mixed legal systems.…”

Section: Data and Measurementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Avoiding Obligation

Hill

2016

Journal of Conflict Resolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines the decisions of governments to enter reservations upon ratification of international human rights treaties. I argue that, in the context of the human rights regime, reservations are simply attempts to avoid international legal obligations where they would be consequential. I develop an explanation for their use that focuses on the following two factors: the legal constraints that already exist in domestic law and the likelihood that international agreements will be enforced by domestic courts. Using an original measure of domestic legal protection of civil, political, and personal integrity rights, I find evidence that governments are more likely to enter reservations when domestic legal standards are lax compared to those in the treaty and when judiciaries are likely to enforce treaty-based obligations. This suggests that full adoption of international human rights treaties is more likely when treaties will not create genuine domestic legal constraints and that explanations for treaty adoption and implementation must take reservations into account. It also suggests that adoption of international human rights law is best explained by the specific legal institutions that relate to domestic enforcement rather than broad distinctions between democratic/autocratic political institutions.

show abstract

Domestic legal traditions and states’ human rights practices

Cited by 52 publications

References 49 publications

An Empirical Evaluation of Explanations for State Repression

An Empirical Evaluation of Explanations for State Repression

Is the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Impacting Mental Health Laws and Policies in High-Income Countries? A Case Study of Implementation in Canada

Avoiding Obligation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About