It will be argued that Human Rights violations in Argentinean, Chilean and Venezuelan prisons represent a non-resolved challenge for the civil rights coalition. This is related to the fact that the civil rights coalition (1) has had serious problems to adapt to the present institutional framework characterised by the democratization and the anomie of the state. (2) Furthermore, the civil rights coalition has lost the battle for the dominant public security concept, whereas the law and order coalitions has established its repressive oriented strategy as the dominant perspective to increase public security. (3) For this reasons, the accusation presented by the civil rights coalition before both the Interamerican Human Rights (IHR) Commission and Court, as also the sentences and recommendations pronounced by them, can be seen as a first step to revert the current situation but certainly not as a definite victory of the civil rights coalition.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. The struggle for the rights of the imprisoned people
2.1. Some considerations about the boomerang effect
2.2. The public security issue in a democratic and anomic state
2.2. The situation inside Argentinean, Venezuelan, and Chilean prisons
2.4. The discourse on public security concept
The Manhattan Institute: diffuser of repressive strategies
The civil rights coalition: a defeated coalition?
3. The Interamerican System for the Protection of Human Rights: An essential ally of the civil rights coalition
4. Concluding Remarks
5. Bibliography
Objectives & Research Focus
This study examines the persistent human rights violations within the prison systems of Argentina, Chile, and Venezuela, investigating why democratic regimes continue to fail in protecting the imprisoned population. The primary research goal is to analyze the effectiveness of the civil rights coalition in challenging repressive state practices, utilizing the "boomerang effect" model to determine if international intervention can successfully push these states toward norm-compliant behavior.
- Analysis of the institutional "anomie" and democratic frameworks in Latin American states.
- Evaluation of the "law and order" coalition and its transnational influence via the Manhattan Institute.
- Assessment of the role of the Interamerican System for the Protection of Human Rights.
- Comparative study of prison conditions and state responses in Argentina, Chile, and Venezuela.
- Critique of the applicability of the boomerang effect model in contemporary democratic contexts.
Excerpt from the Book
The Manhattan Institute: diffuser of repressive strategies
The debate on public security is dominated by the law and order coalition, which has imposed its repressive views. Ironically, not the civil rights coalition, but the law and order coalition has built-up an international network whereby different ideas diffuse. In other words, the law and order coalition has developed a sort of boomerang, not to protect the human rights, but to promote repressive public security policies. The modus operandi and the intentions of this conservative boomerang are very similar to the human rights boomerang: by contacting foreign organisations the law and order coalition imports ideas and strategies that strengthen its position increasing the chances to influence the governmental policy-making process. This, of course, does not mean that the law and order coalition can directly pressure national states from the exterior (as for example the Interamerican Human Rights system could eventually do) but it clearly reveals that the law and order coalition has done exactly what the civil rights coalition would be expected to do: to strengthen its position by cooperating with organisations located beyond the national borders.
The Manhattan Institute for Policy Research (shortly MI), located in New York, is probably the most important international ally of the law and order coalition. The slogan of this institute, “turning intellect into influence” (certainly inside and beyond the national borders) reveals its goal. The nine investigation centres of the MI– there under a public security centre – develop ideas for almost every policy-field. They also created in 2002 the Interamerican Center for Public Policy Exchange (IAPE), which has established valuable ties to many Latin American countries. The IM has advised the mayors of Caracas (Venezuela) and of districts of Santiago (Chile), and Juan Carlos Blumberg, the most known figure of the Argentinean law and order coalition.
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: Outlines the paradox of human rights violations in democratic Latin American states and introduces the theoretical framework of the "boomerang effect" used to analyze the conflict between civil rights and law-and-order coalitions.
2. The struggle for the rights of the imprisoned people: Examines the theoretical challenges of the boomerang model, the impact of state anomie on human rights, and the proliferation of repressive discourse through transnational networks like the Manhattan Institute.
3. The Interamerican System for the Protection of Human Rights: An essential ally of the civil rights coalition: Analyzes specific case studies, such as the Retén de Catia in Venezuela, to evaluate the effectiveness of the Interamerican System in holding states accountable for prison conditions.
4. Concluding Remarks: Summarizes the findings, noting the failure of the civil rights coalition in the 1990s and the tentative, yet non-structural, progress made since the mid-2000s under international pressure.
5. Bibliography: Lists the academic sources, legal documents, and news reports consulted for the research.
Keywords
Human Rights, Prison System, Argentina, Chile, Venezuela, Boomerang Effect, Law and Order Coalition, Civil Rights Coalition, Public Security, Manhattan Institute, Interamerican Court, Anomie, State Violence, Democracy, Institutional Reform.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the central focus of this research?
The research focuses on the systematic human rights violations within prisons in Argentina, Chile, and Venezuela and investigates why these democratic nations struggle to implement protective standards for their imprisoned populations.
What are the core thematic areas discussed?
The work covers the institutional instability (anomie) of the Latin American state, the competition between "civil rights" and "law and order" coalitions, and the influence of international think tanks on local policy-making.
What is the primary research question?
The study asks whether the "boomerang effect" model is sufficient to explain how international human rights actors can influence democratic states that systematically violate the rights of the imprisoned population.
Which scientific methodology is applied?
The study utilizes a comparative case study approach, analyzing institutional structures, historical development since the 1990s, and the impact of transnational advocacy and repressive networks on policy implementation.
What topics are covered in the main section?
The main section details the prison conditions, discusses the ideological victory of repressive public security strategies, and tracks the legal interventions of the Interamerican Commission and Court.
Which keywords best characterize this work?
Key terms include human rights, prison systems, the boomerang effect, state anomie, transnational networks, and the Interamerican System for the Protection of Human Rights.
How does the "law and order" coalition differ from the "civil rights" coalition?
The law and order coalition advocates for repressive policies and has successfully imported strategies from the Manhattan Institute, while the civil rights coalition focuses on human rights protection but has historically struggled with organizational and political barriers.
What does the author conclude about the impact of the Interamerican Court?
The author concludes that while the Court provides a necessary first step for international pressure, its impact is severely limited by the "anomic" nature of the states involved, which often lack the institutional capacity or political will to implement the Court's rulings.
- Quote paper
- Lautaro Adrian Vilches (Author), 2009, Confronting Human Rights violations in Argentinean, Chilean and Venezuelan prisons, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/131647
