In this essay I have argued that the added-value of the HRCSP lies in the special rapporteurs’ (SR) role as facilitators for norm compliance. Doing so, I have focusd on the post-9/11 debate on the use of armed drones for targeted killings in military and counter-terrorism operations. Its main point of contention surrounds the achievement of consistency in legal standards, as well as of coherent policy responses with view to the “war on terror”, which has led some states to prioritize security concerns over human rights (HR) and humanitarian standards. In presenting my argument I have made reference to actor behavior theory to show the nexus between HRCSP and strategic agency. Thereby, I have concentrated on mechanisms of social influence such as coercion, persuasion, incentives, and capacity building as identified by Risse and Popp (R&P). (2013, 12-22) Also, I have addressd the element of acculturation, found as a major force for compliance by Goodmann and Jinks (G&J) (2004), and touch on domestic mechanisms, such as executive power, litigation, and group demands (Simmons, 2009), and the power of domestic constituencies (Dai, 2004). During the analysis, I have been mindful of a possible crowding-out effect as suggested by G&J, where one social mechanism could negatively affect the operation of another. (2013, 105) In this sense I have elaborated on the opportunities and challenges of the HRCSP regarding compliance with the right to life in human rights law (HRL) and humanitarian law (IHL) with view to targeted killings. I have focused on the HRCSP because they embody the permanent tools of the Human Rights Council (HRC) composed of independent experts, compared to the Universal Periodic Review (UPR), which, due to its politicized nature, is rather silent on the subject matter. The analysis has shown how the Special Rapporteur for Extrajudicial, Summary and Arbitrary Executions (SRESAE) and the Special Rapporteur on Terrorism and Human Rights (SRTHR), in concerted action and by application of various elements of socialization, facilitate the compliance process. I have concluded that the SR are not an end but a means for achieving compliance. There is also no one solution regarding the socialization process, which seems to strongly depend on the right sequencing of elements sensitive to certain scope conditions and the level, or “continuum of commitment” (Dai, 2013, 86-87), states prescribe themselves to depending often on domestic mechanisms of influence
Table of Contents
1. Achieving Human Rights Compliance in Drone Operations: A Case for the Human Rights Council’s Special Procedures (HRCSP)
2. HRCSP: Facilitators for Norm Compliance
3. Conclusion
Research Objectives and Themes
This essay explores the efficacy of the Human Rights Council’s Special Procedures (HRCSP) in fostering state compliance regarding the use of armed drones for targeted killings in the post-9/11 context, arguing that special rapporteurs act as essential facilitators for norm adherence through various socialization mechanisms.
- Analysis of social influence mechanisms (coercion, persuasion, incentives, capacity building) in the context of drone operations.
- Evaluation of the "crowding-out effect" and the challenge of conflicting legal interpretations between states and human rights bodies.
- Examination of the interplay between international human rights law (HRL) and international humanitarian law (IHL) in targeted killing debates.
- Assessment of the role of domestic mechanisms and civil society organizations in pressuring states toward compliance.
- Discussion on the necessity of independent expert mandates within the HRCSP framework.
Excerpt from the Book
HRCSP: Facilitators for Norm Compliance
Targeted killings reached their peak in 2010, and by 2013 more than fifty countries were already reported to have drone capabilities. (ICRJ, 2013) This makes the need for compliance with the provisions on the right to life in the ICCPR and Geneva Conventions apparent. However, states’ policy responses reflect the “war on terror” and diverge widely. In this respect actor behavior theory helps to explain states’ conduct and sheds light on mechanisms of social influence the SR can employ to facilitate compliance with these conflicting norms. Here it is to mention that international relations theories acknowledge all these mechanisms. Variation lies merely in the ontological emphasis they put on them (G&J, 2004, 630-632). Such discussion is though beyond the scope of this paper.
Various approaches have been developed to explain the paradox of state compliance with non-reciprocal HR treaties lacking enforcement power. (G&J, 2004, 628-629) Amongst the scholarly literature, R&P identified four socialization mechanisms to direct states towards compliance: coercion, persuasion, incentives, and capacity building, each featuring various “modes of social action” such as i.e. sanctions & rewards, naming & shaming, discursive power, and institution-building. These mechanisms dependent on scope conditions such as regime type, consolidated/limited statehood, centralized/decentralized rule implementation, and material and social vulnerability. (2013, 12-22) Compliance is said to be higher i.e. in democratic than authoritarian countries suggesting that mechanisms like persuasion and naming & shaming will be more successful with the former and incentives with the latter.
Summary of Chapters
Achieving Human Rights Compliance in Drone Operations: A Case for the Human Rights Council’s Special Procedures (HRCSP): This introductory section outlines the thesis that special rapporteurs function as facilitators for norm compliance and sets the theoretical framework based on actor behavior and socialization mechanisms.
HRCSP: Facilitators for Norm Compliance: This chapter analyzes the specific mechanisms of social influence, the challenges posed by conflicting legal interpretations regarding drone use, and the potential of the HRCSP to drive compliance despite state resistance.
Conclusion: This final section synthesizes the findings, confirming that while states rarely demonstrate perfect compliance, the ongoing engagement of mandated experts remains vital for maintaining normative pressure in the post-9/11 security climate.
Keywords
HRCSP, Targeted Killings, Armed Drones, Norm Compliance, Socialization, Actor Behavior, Human Rights Law, Humanitarian Law, War on Terror, Special Rapporteur, Discursive Socialization, Soft Law, Naming and Shaming, Strategic Agency, Compliance Gap.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the fundamental focus of this research?
The research examines the effectiveness of the Human Rights Council’s Special Procedures (HRCSP) in encouraging states to comply with human rights standards during drone-based counter-terrorism and military operations.
What are the primary thematic areas covered in the work?
The main themes include the theory of actor behavior, mechanisms of social influence, the conflict between international human rights law and international humanitarian law, and the role of domestic pressures.
What is the central research goal?
The goal is to determine how special rapporteurs can utilize specific mandates to facilitate state compliance with the right to life despite the geopolitical complexities of the post-9/11 "war on terror."
Which scientific methodology is applied?
The work employs an analytical approach based on international relations and actor behavior theory, drawing on secondary literature to evaluate the impact of various socialization mechanisms.
What topics are discussed in the main body?
The main body addresses the role of rapporteurs in standard-setting, the discursive socialization process through monitoring and dialogue, and the influence of civil society and domestic mechanisms.
Which key terms characterize the document?
Key terms include HRCSP, social influence, norm compliance, targeted killings, strategic agency, and socialization mechanisms.
How does the "crowding-out effect" influence compliance?
The author discusses that scrutinizing countries can lead them to interpret legal obligations defensively, potentially creating a "crowding-out effect" where social mechanisms of influence become less effective.
Why are special rapporteurs considered essential in the post-9/11 era?
The author concludes that because states often lack the willingness to cooperate, independent experts with strong mandates are necessary to maintain normative pressure and facilitate ongoing dialogue.
What role do domestic mechanisms play in the author's analysis?
Domestic mechanisms, such as litigation, elite agenda-setting, and public scrutiny, are analyzed as factors that, when combined with international normative pressure, can influence state behavior.
How does the document address the "false positives" in treaty commitment?
The author references the concept of "false positives"—states that commit to treaties in principle but fail to implement them—to highlight the complexities of measuring genuine state commitment.
- Quote paper
- Anna Scheithauer (Author), 2015, Achieving Human Rights Compliance in Drone Operations, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.hausarbeiten.de/document/350574
