Human Rights: Theories of Compliance and the Universal Periodic Review

This seminar is hosted by the Centre for Human Rights and the School of Law Research Seminar Series. Our series offers exciting insights into ongoing research projects within the law school and conducted by our external research partners. We often feature work from our research centres (the Centre for American Legal Studies, the Centre for Human Rights, the Centre for Science, Law and Policy, and the International Business Law Research Group). Our work is often transdisciplinary, dealing with law's relationship with broadly defined social justice, policy-making, science and much more. Join us for invigorating discussion!

In this session, we hear from Michael Lane. Michael is a Midlands4Cities-funded PhD student researching the impact of the United Nations’ human rights review mechanism – the Universal Periodic Review – on the UK’s human rights situation.He currently teaches Medical Law and Ethics and has previously taught Constitutional and Administrative Law and Contract Law.

Michael has previously completed a Law LLB, and an LLM in International Human Rights. 

In this session, Michael will give the following presentation, followed by an interactive Q&A:

Theories of Compliance and the Universal Periodic Review: Emphasising the Role of Domestic Politics

At the United Nations (UN) Universal Periodic Review (UPR), states receive recommendations on their human rights commitments. Building on my research on the impact of the UPR in the UK, my seminar will analyse various theories on state compliance with international law in order to determine which best explains why states do (or do not) implement their recommendations. It initially highlights those perspectives that do not adequately account for the UPR’s success – for instance, realist perspectives that typically view States (wrongly) as unitary, self-interested actors. Instead, it is illustrated how liberalist theories, particularly more recent perspectives that emphasise the role of domestic politics and actors (e.g. Simmons, 2009; Hillebrecht, 2014), are better suited to explain why States implement recommendations. This is done by revealing the complex nature of implementation and the importance of coordination, communication, and collaboration between various domestic players – typically government, parliament, and civil society organisations.

If you have any questions, contact Iyan Offor, the Research Seminar Series leader, at iyan.offor@bcu.ac.uk.

This seminar has now concluded but it is available on demand here. If you find that you do not have access, you can email the research seminar series leader at iyan.offor@bcu.ac.uk in order to gain access.