Vertical v. Horizontal Persuasion - A comparison of the IACHR and the ICC

• In Event: Poster Session: African Politics Conference Group; Middle East and North Africa Politics & Human Rights
  In Poster Session: Poster Session: Human Rights

Abstract

International courts play an important role in the diffusion of norms. Their role is not limited to the interpretation and implementation of norms but they also promote new norms. This paper explores the variation in international courts entrepreneurial strategies, identifying the causes and consequences of relying on vertical strategies of persuasion, such as education and shaming, and horizontal strategies, such as communicative entrepreneurship. Specifically, we compare the strategies the InterAmerican Court of Human Rights (IAcHR) and the International Criminal Court (ICC) implemented in the construction of the anti-impunity norm and we find that the IAcHR favored communicative entrepreneurship, which increased its legitimacy, whereas the ICC preferred vertical strategies of persuasion, to the detriment of the Court’s standing and to that of the anti-impunity norm. These findings empirically validate Wiener’s claim that access to contestation for all stakeholders (contestedness) fosters fairer and more successful global governance.

Authors

• Lucrecia Garcia Iommi, Fairfield University

• Ezequiel Alejo Gonzalez Ocantos, University of Oxford