1 / 17

HUMAN RIGHTS THEIR VIABILITY IN A CHANGING SOCIAL AND POLITICAL SETTING

HUMAN RIGHTS THEIR VIABILITY IN A CHANGING SOCIAL AND POLITICAL SETTING. Professor Todd Landman Director Institute for Democracy and Conflict Resolution University of Essex.

palti
Download Presentation

HUMAN RIGHTS THEIR VIABILITY IN A CHANGING SOCIAL AND POLITICAL SETTING

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. HUMAN RIGHTSTHEIR VIABILITY IN A CHANGING SOCIAL AND POLITICAL SETTING Professor Todd Landman Director Institute for Democracy and Conflict Resolution University of Essex Paper prepared for “Afghanistan after 2014: Ask and Task” organized by the NATO Defense College Foundation, in cooperation with the NATO Defense College and the Istituto Affari Internazionali of Rome Palazzo de Carolis, Via Lata 3, Rome, 7-8 February 2013

  2. Outline • Introduction and background • Human rights trends in Afghanistan 1981-2011 • Explanations for human rights protection • Further qualifications • Prospects for human rights in Afghanistan

  3. Introduction • Longstanding problems with violations of human rights • Widespread violence • Extrajudicial killings • Torture • Violence against women and girls • Discrimination against women and girls • Low levels of development and well-being • Occupation and conflict (Soviet period: 1979-1989) • Authoritarianism and conflict (Taliban period: 1996-2001) • Conflict and nascent democratization (ISAF period: 2001-2012) • Draw down of ISAF, 2014 onwards

  4. Human rights trends 1981-2011 Treaty Ratification* *Source: www.bayefsky.com

  5. Human rights trends 1981-2011 Political Terror Scale Source: Political Terror Scale (www.politicalterrorscale.org)

  6. Human rights trends1981-2011 Physical Integrity Rights Source: Cingranelli and Richards (www.humanrightsdata.com)

  7. Human rights trends1981-2011 Empowerment, Association, Assembly, & Movement Source: Cingranelli and Richards (www.humanrightsdata.com)

  8. Human rights trends1981-2011 Speech, Elections, Religion & Worker Rights Source: Cingranelli and Richards (www.humanrightsdata.com)

  9. Human rights trends1981-2011 Women’s economic, political & social rights Source: Cingranelli and Richards (www.humanrightsdata.com)

  10. Human rights trends1981-2011 Civilian Casualties by perpetrator Source: Brookings Institution (2012) Afghanistan Index, Washington DC: Brookings Institution, 15..

  11. Human rights trends 1981-2011: IDPs Source: Brookings Institution (2012) Afghanistan Index, Washington DC: Brookings Institution, 16.

  12. Existing human rights research findings Large-N statistical analysis* • Democracy • Economic development • Level • Distribution • Treaty ratification • Neighbourhood effects + Human Rights Protection - Authoritarianism Conflict Ethnic fractionalisation Population *Sources: Landman , Todd (2005) ‘The Political Science of Human Rights’, British Journal of Political Science, 35 (3): 549-572. Landman, Todd and Larizza (2009) ‘Inequality and Human Rights: Who Gets What When and How,’ International Studies Quarterly, 53 (3): 715-736. Landman, Todd, Kernohan, David and Gohdes, Anita (2012) ‘Relavitising Human Rights,’ Journal of Human Rights, 11 (4): 460-485.

  13. Development and Human Rights (HDI and PTS 2010)* Scenarios No rights improvement or development Rights improvement without development Development without rights improvement Development with rights improvement *Source: Human Rights Atlas (www.humanrightsatlas.org) .

  14. Qualifications I: ‘More murder in the middle’* High Anocracy Autocracy Democracy Life integrity violations Low Low Level of democracy High *Source: Fein, Helen (1995) ‘Life Integrity Violations and Democracy in the World, 1987,’ Human Rights Quarterly, 17 (1): 170-191.

  15. Qualifications II: Philosophy, Culture and Institutions • Conception of the individual • Consensus on the nation • Weberian ‘legal rationalism’ • Rule of law • Governance • Inclusion • Participation • Accountability • Transparency • Integrity • Responsiveness

  16. Prospects for Human Rights Post 2014 • Nascent democratic institutions • Continued violence, discrimination, and instability • State and non-state actors as perpetrators • Weak governance institutions • Regional insecurity (Pakistan) • Tribal identification and rivalry • Poverty, exclusion and inequality

  17. Thank you! www.idcr.org.uk info@idcr.org.uk

More Related