Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T04:30:40.121Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Contributions of the Ombudsman to Human Rights in Latin America, 1982–2011

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

Erika Moreno
Erika Moreno*
Affiliation:
Creighton University. [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Democratic institutions, ranging from constitutional provisions and electoral rules to judiciaries, have been important in improving the rights of citizens across the world. If institutions matter for human rights, then it stands to reason that institutions built specifically to protect human rights, like the human rights ombudsman, should matter too. Using a comparative case study approach, this article examines the effect of the human rights ombudsman at the regional level on several human rights measures in Latin America between 1982 and 2011. The results suggest that the presence of an ombudsman, and some of its design features, have had effects on some social and economic rights, in keeping with the broad mandate given to this office.

Type
Research
Information
Latin American Politics and Society , Volume 58 , Issue 1 , Spring 2016 , pp. 98 - 120
Copyright
Copyright © University of Miami 2016

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Andrews, Josephine T., and Montinola, Gabriella R.. 2004. Veto Players and the Rule of Law in Emerging Democracies. Comparative Political Studies 37, 1: 55–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beck, Thorsten, et al. 2001. New Tools and New Tests in Comparative Political Economy: the Database of Political Institutions. World Bank Economic Review 15 (September): 165–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bormann, Nils-Christian, and Golder, Matt. 2013. Democratic Electoral Systems around the World, 1946–2011. Electoral Studies 32: 360–69.Google Scholar
Bueno de Mesquita, Bruce, Marie Cherif, Feryal, Downs, George W., and Smith, Alastair. 2005. Thinking inside the Box: a Closer Look at Democracy and Human Rights. International Studies Quarterly 49, 3: 439–58.Google Scholar
Cingranelli, David, and Filippov, Mikhail. 2010. Electoral Incentives to Protect Human Rights. Journal of Politics 72, 1: 1–15.Google Scholar
Davenport, Christian. 1995. Multidimensional Threat Perception and State Repression: an Inquiry into Why States Apply Negative Sanctions. American Journal of Political Science 39, 3 (August): 683–713.Google Scholar
Dodson, Michael. 2006. The Human Rights Ombudsman in Central America: Honduras and El Salvador Case Studies. Essex Human Rights Review 3, 1: 29–45.Google Scholar
Dull, Mathew, and Roberts, Patrick. 2009. Continuity, Competence, and the Succession of Senate-Confirmed Agency Appointees, 1989–2009. Presidential Studies Quarterly 39, 3: 432–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Escobar, Guillermo. 2011. VIII Informe sobre derechos humanos: seguridad cuidadana. Madrid: Federación Iberoamericana de Ombudsman.Google Scholar
Fariss, Christopher. 2014. Respect for Human Rights Has Improved over Time: Modeling the Standard of Accountability. American Political Science Review 109, 3: 1–22.Google Scholar
Finkel, Jodi. 2012. Explaining the Failure of Mexico's National Commission of Human Rights (Ombudsman's Office) after Democratization: Elections, Incentives, and Unaccountability in the Mexican Senate. Human Rights Review 13: 473–95.Google Scholar
Fukuda-Parr, Sakiko, Lawson-Remer, Terra, and Randolph, Susan. 2009. International SERF Index. Economic and Social Rights Empowerment Initiative, Social Science Research Council. www.serfindex.org/data.Google Scholar
Gale Research Co. 2010. Encyclopedia of Associations: International Organizations. Detroit: Gale Research.Google Scholar
Ginsburg, Tom, and Moustafa, Tamir. 2008. Rule by Law: The Politics of Courts in Authoritarian Regimes. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
González Volio, Lorena. 2003. The Institution of the Ombudsman: the Latin American Experience. Revista IIDH 37: 219–48.Google Scholar
Hafner-Burton, Eilie, and Ron, James. 2007. Human Rights Institutions: Rhetoric and Efficacy, Introduction. Journal of Peace Research 44, 4: 379–83.Google Scholar
Hill, Larry. 2002. The Ombudsman Revisited: Thirty Years of Hawaiian Experience. Public Administration Review 62, 1: 24–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huber, John D., and Shipan, Charles R.. 2002. Deliberate Discretion: The Institutional Foundations of Bureaucratic Autonomy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, Donald W., Michael Dodson, J., and Nuzzi O'Shaughnessy, Laura. 1999. Protecting Human Rights: the Legitimacy of Judicial System Reforms in El Salvador. Bulletin of Latin American Research 18, 4: 403–21.Google Scholar
Keefer, Philip. 2010. Database of Political Institutions: Changes and Variable Definitions. DPI2010. Washington, DC: Development Research Group, World Bank.Google Scholar
Keith, Linda Camp. 2002. Constitutional Provisions for Individual Human Rights, 1976–1996: Are They More than Mere Window Dressing? Political Research Quarterly 55: 111–43.Google Scholar
Keith, Linda Camp. 2011. Political Repression: Courts and Law. Human Rights series, ed. Lockwood, Bert. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Keith, Linda Camp, Neal Tate, C., and Poe, Steven C.. 2009. Is the Law a Mere Parchment Barrier to Human Rights Abuse? Journal of Politics 71, 2: 644–60.Google Scholar
Koo, Jeon-Woo, and Ramírez, Francisco O.. 2009. National Incorporation of Global Human Rights: Worldwide Expansion of National Human Rights Institutions, 1966–2004. Social Forces 87, 3: 1321–54.Google Scholar
Lake, David A., and Baum, M. A.. 2001. The Invisible Hand of Democracy: Political Control and the Provision of Public Services. Comparative Political Studies 34, 6: 587–621.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leblang, David., Milner, W. T., and Poe, Stephen. 1999. Security Rights, Subsistence Rights and Liberties: a Theoretical Survey of the Empirical Landscape. Human Rights Quarterly 21, 2: 403–43.Google Scholar
Lebovic, James H., and Voeten, Erik. 2009. The Cost of Shame: International Organizations and Foreign Aid in the Punishing of Human Rights Violators. Journal of Peace Research 46, 1: 79–97.Google Scholar
Longhofer, Wesley, and Schofer, Evan. 2010. National and Global Origins of Environmental Association. American Sociological Review 75: 505–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maddex, Robert L. 2011. Constitutions of the World. 3rd ed. Washington, DC: CQ Press.Google Scholar
Marshall, Monty G., and Jaggers, Keith. 2002. Polity IV Project: Political Regime Characteristics and Transitions, 1800–2002. Version p4v2002e (computer file). College Park: Center for International Development and Conflict Management, University of Maryland. http://www.cidcm.umd.edu/inscr/polity/index.htm.Google Scholar
McCarty, Nolan. 2004. The Appointments Dilemma. American Journal of Political Science 48, 3: 413–28.Google Scholar
O'Donnell, Guillermo. 2003. Horizontal Accountability: The Legal Institutionalization of Mistrust. In Democratic Accountability in Latin America, ed. Welna, Chris and Mainwaring, Scott. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Pegram, Thomas. 2008. Accountability in Hostile times: the Role of the Peruvian Human Rights Ombudsman, 1996–2001. Journal of Latin American Studies 40, 2: 51–82.Google Scholar
Pegram, Thomas. 2011. Weak Institutions, Rights Claims and Pathways to Compliance: the Transformative Role of the Peruvian Human Rights Ombudsman. Oxford Development Studies 39, 2: 229–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Powell, Emilia J., and Staton, Jeffrey K.. 2009. Domestic Judicial Institutions and Human Rights Treaty Violation. International Studies Quarterly 53: 149–74.Google Scholar
Przeworski, Adam, and Álvarez, M. M.. 2000. Democracy and Development: Political Institutions and Well-Being in the World, 1950–1990. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reif, Linda. 2004. The Ombudsman, Good Governance and the International Human Rights System. Boston: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
Renshaw, Catherine Shanahan. 2012. National Human Rights Institutions and Civil Society Organizations: New Dynamics of Engagement at Domestic, Regional and International Levels. Global Governance 18: 299–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simmons, Beth. 2009. Mobilizing for Human Rights: International Law in Domestic Politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Small, Melvin, and Singer, J. David. 1982. Resort to Arms: International and Civil Wars, 1816–1980. Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
Taylor, Matthew M., and Buranelli, Vinicius C.. 2007. Ending up in Pizza: Accountability as a Problem of Institutional Arrangement in Brazil. Latin American Politics and Society 49, 1 (Spring): 59–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsebelis, George. 1995. Decision Making in Political Systems: Veto Players in Presidentialism, Parliamentarism, Multicameralism and Multipartyism. British Journal of Political Science 25, 3: 289–325.Google Scholar
Uggla, Fredrik. 2004. The Ombudsman in Latin America. Journal of Latin American Studies 36, 3: 423–50.Google Scholar
Ungar, Mark. 2002. Elusive Reform and the Rule of Law in Latin America. Boulder: Lynne Reinner.Google Scholar
Wood, B. Dan, and Waterman, Richard. 1993. The Dynamics of Political-Bureaucratic Adaptation. American Journal of Political Science 37: 497–528.Google Scholar
World Bank. 2014. World Development Indicators. Washington, DC: World Bank.Google Scholar