Explaining the Deterrence Effect of Human Rights Prosecutions for Transitional Countries

255Citations
Citations of this article
176Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Human rights prosecutions have been the major policy innovation of the late twentieth century designed to address human rights violations. The main justification for such prosecutions is that sanctions are necessary to deter future violations. In this article, we use our new data set on domestic and international human rights prosecutions in 100 transitional countries to explore whether prosecuting human rights violations can decrease repression. We find that human rights prosecutions after transition lead to improvements in human rights protection, and that human rights prosecutions have a deterrence impact beyond the confines of the single country. We also explore the mechanisms through which prosecutions lead to improvements in human rights. We argue that impact of prosecutions is the result of both normative pressures and material punishment and provide support for this argument with a comparison of the impact of prosecutions and truth commissions, which do not involve material punishment. © 2010 International Studies Association.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Kim, H., & Sikkink, K. (2010). Explaining the Deterrence Effect of Human Rights Prosecutions for Transitional Countries. International Studies Quarterly, 54(4), 939–963. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2478.2010.00621.x

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free