Document Type
Article
Publication Date
2019
Abstract
International regulatory agreements depend largely on self-reporting for implementation, yet we know almost nothing about whether or how such mechanisms work. We theorize that self-reporting processes provide information for domestic constituencies, with the potential to create pressure for better compliance. Using original data on state reports submitted to the Committee Against Torture, we demonstrate the influence of this process on the pervasiveness of torture and inhumane treatment. We illustrate the power of self-reporting regimes to mobilize domestic politics through evidence of civil society participation in shadow reporting, media attention, and legislative activity around anti-torture law and practice. This is the first study to evaluate systematically the effects of self-reporting in the context of a treaty regime on human rights outcomes. Since many international agreements rely predominantly on self-reporting, the results have broad significance for compliance with international regulatory regimes globally.
Keywords
International law, international politics, international legal norms, treaties, conventions, international agreements, international human rights, treaty implementation, treaty compliance, states parties, periodic review, international community
Publication Title
International Studies Quarterly
Repository Citation
Simmons, Beth A. and Creamer, Cosette D., "Do Self-Reporting Regimes Matter? Evidence From the Convention Against Torture" (2019). All Faculty Scholarship. 2057.
https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/faculty_scholarship/2057
Included in
Human Rights Law Commons, International Law Commons, International Relations Commons, Law and Politics Commons, Law and Society Commons, Transnational Law Commons
Publication Citation
International Studies Quarterly (forthcoming 2019).