The withdraw of Member-states from Human Rights Courts: is the judicialization of mega-politics a necessary condition?

Miguel Mikelli Ribeiro, Ernani Rodrigues de Carvalho Neto

Resumen


Currently, there are about 24 functioning international courts. Within the interdisciplinary field of International Law and International Relations, a new agenda has focused in evaluating the process of the States’ resistance to adhere to decisions by those international institutions. A specific way to resist is the withdrawal by States that are party to regional human rights courts (RHRC). This paper is particularly interested in investigating this phenomenon. Based on the ideas of Ran Hirschl, the work aims to evaluate if the judicialization of mega-politics issues by these courts can be considered a necessary condition for the withdrawal of Member States. The article uses methodological strategies present in the set-theory literature, as well as congruence analysis in its evaluation process. The study maps cases of withdrawal and threats to withdraw the three regional human rights courts in existence, with the central idea to verify if decisions on issues of mega-politics were present were those actions occurred. To supplement this, it also sought to identify whether the decisions from the courts were linked to the justifications for withdrawal or threat to withdraw by the States.

Palabras clave


Judicialization of mega-politics, Regional Human Rights Courts, Backlash, Withdrawal

Texto completo:

PDF (English)

Referencias


ABEBE, Daniel Y; GINSBURG, Tom. The Dejudicialization of International Politics? International Studies Quarterly, v. 63, n. 3, 2019, p. 521-530.

ABBOTT, Kenneth et al. “The concept of legalization”. International Organization, v. 54, n. 3, p. 401–419, 2000.

ADJOLOHOUN, Segnonna. A crisis of design and judicial practice? Curbing state disengagement from the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights, African Human Rights Law Journal, v. 20, n.1, p. 1-40, 2020.

ALTER, Karen J; HAFNER-BURTON, Emilie Marie; HELFER, Laurence. Theorizing the Judicialization of International Relations. International Studies Quarterly, v. 63, n. 3, p. 449-463, 2019.

BERNARDI, Bruno Boti. O sistema interamericano de direitos humanos e a justiça de transição no Peru. Revista de Sociologia e Política, v. 23, n. 54, p. 43-68, 2015.

CONTESSE, Jorge. “Resisting the Inter-American Human Rights System”. Yale J. Int'l L v. 44, n. 2, 180-232, 2019.

DALY, T.; WIEBUSCH, M. The African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights: Mapping resistance against a young court. International Journal of Law in Context, v. 14, n. 2, p. 294-313, 2018.

DONNELLY, Jack. The Social Construction of International Human Rights. In: DUNNE, Tim; WHEELER, Nicholas J., Human Rights in Global Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.

FORSYTHE, David. Human Rights in International Relations, 2. ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006.

FUKUYAMA, Francis. O fim da História e o último homem. Rio de Janeiro: Rocco, 1992.

GLANVILLE, Luke. Sovereignty and the responsibility to protect: a new history. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2014.

GEORGE, Alexander; BENNETT, Andrew. Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Science. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 2005.

HILLEBRECHT, Courtney. Domestic Politics and International Human Rights Tribunals: the problem of compliance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014.

HIRSCHL, Ran. The Judicialization of Mega-Politics and the Rise of Political Courts. Annual Review of Political Science, v. 11, p. 93-118, 2008.

HIRSCHL, Ran. The Judicialization of Politics. Oxford Handbook of Political Science. Oxford: Oxford University Press, p. 93-118, 2011.

HIRSCHL, Ran. A Judicialização da Mega-Política e o surgimento dos Tribunais Políticos. Judicialização da Política, In: MOREIRA, Luis (org.) São Paulo: Editorial 22, 2012.

HURRELL, Andrew. On Global Order: power, values and constitution of international order. New York: Oxford, 2007.

IKENBERRY, John. Liberal internationalism 3.0: America and the dilemmas of liberal world order. Perspectives on Politics, v. 7, n. 1, p. 71-87, 2009.

IKENBERRY, John. The end of the liberal order? International Affairs, v. 94, n. 1, p. 7-23, 2018.

KRASNER, Stephen D. Structural causes and regime consequences: regimes as intervening variables. International Organization, v. 36, n. 2, Spring, p. 185-205, 1982.

MADSEN, Mikael Rask; CEUBLAK, Pola; WEIBUSCH, Micha. Backlash against International Courts: Explaining Resistance to International Courts. International Journal of Law in Context, v. 14, n. SI2, p. 197-220, 2018.

MADSEN, Mikael Rask. From Boom to Backlash? The European Court of Human Rights and the Transformation of Europe. In: AUST, H.; ESRA, D. (eds), The European Court of Human Rights: Current Challenges in Historical and Comparative Perspective. Edward Elgar Publishing, 2021.

MADSEN, Mikael Rask. Resistance to the European Court of Human Rights: The Institutional and Sociological Consequences of Principled Resistance. In: BREUER, M. (ed.) ‘Principled Resistance' to ECtHR Judgments - A New Paradigm?. Springer, p. 35-52, 2019.

MORAVCSIK, Andrew. Taking Preferences Seriously: A liberal theory of international politics. International Organization, v. 51, n. 4, p. 513-553, 1997.

MORAVCSIK, Andrew. “The Origins of Human Rights Regimes: Democratic delegation in Postwar Europe”. International Organization, v. 54, n.2, p. 217-252, 2020.

MUDDE, Cas; KALTWASSER, Cristóbal Rovira. Populism: a very short introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017

MUDDE, Cas. The populist zeitgeist. Government and Opposition, v. 39, n. 4, p. 541-563, 2004.

NORRIS, Pippa; INGLEHART, Ronald. Cultural Backlash: Trump, Brexit, and Authoritarian Populism. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2019.

POSNER, Eric. Liberal Internationalism and the Populist Backlash. University of Chicago Public Law & Legal Theory Paper Series, p. 795-819, 2017.

RIBEIRO, Mikelli; RAMANZINI, Isabela; SANTOS, Alana. A Corte Interamericana De Direitos Humanos E a judicialização Internacional Da política doméstica. Meridiano 47 - Journal of Global Studies, v. 21 (julho), 2020.

SCHNEIDER, Carsten; WAGEMANN, Claudius. Set-Theoretic Methods for the Social Sciences: A Guide to Qualitative Comparative Analysis (Strategies for Social Inquiry). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012.

SOLEY, Ximena; STEININGER, Silvia.Parting ways or lashing back? Withdrawals, backlash and the Inter-American Court of Human Right. International Journal of Law in Context, v. 14, n. 2, p. 237-257, 2018.

TASQUETTO, Lucas; RORIZ, João. “Deus em Davos”: o direito internacional entre reacionários e neoliberais no governo Bolsonaro. Revista de Direito Internacional, v. 17, n. 2, p. 120-137, 2020.

VOETEN, Erik. Populism and Backlashes against International Courts. Perspectives on Politics, p. 01-16, 2019.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.5102/rdi.v18i3.7542

ISSN 2236-997X (impresso) - ISSN 2237-1036 (on-line)

Desenvolvido por:

Logomarca da Lepidus Tecnologia