4
Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT) are commonly
distinguished among treaties as the most successful (Hathaway 2005). Each treaty
articulates an impressive array of obligations for governments to follow, detailed with
substantial precision as to what behaviors are and are not appropriate. Authority to
monitor implementation is modestly delegated to two independent committees whose
jurisdiction governments can choose to recognize or reject, and whose recommendations
governments can choose to implement or ignore.
Promisingly enough, a growing number of “bad” states that employ repression
belong to these treaties. Figure 1 makes the point concrete. It considers, over time, the
percentage of all governments that have ratified the CCPR or the CAT but are repressive.
According to annual accounts published by two different organizations—Amnesty
International and the US State Department—repressive governments have always
represented a substantial percentage of members to the human rights regime and today
make up more than ever before, roughly 50 percent of all states that have ratified. “Bad”
states, it seems, are increasingly doing “good” things, committing themselves more and
more to protect human rights as norms cascade globally. These commitments, in turn,
lead many to expect significant political reforms and hope for the future.
Convention