IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/poango/v11y2023i2p17-28.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does the EU Benefit From Increased Complexity? Capital Punishment in the Human Rights Regime

Author

Listed:
  • Robert Kissack

    (Institut Barcelona d’Estudis Internacionals (IBEI), Spain)

Abstract

This article questions how the EU has acted to increase the complexity of the human rights regime through the process of incorporating a new issue area into its scope and to what extent has it benefitted from that process. By examining the breadth of the regime complex, between 1991–2021, this research shows how UN bodies, regional organisations, and civil society associations increasingly consider the death penalty a human rights issue instead of an exclusively domestic legal one. The article draws on a comprehensive archival review tracing the process of reframing capital punishment, the actions undertaken by the EU contributing to this process, and the benefits it receives from increased regime complexity. This leads to an affirmative answer to the previous questions, arguing that the EU’s actions in its foreign policy, anti-death penalty stance, and promotion of civil society, facilitated a reconfiguration of the human rights regime complex towards the rejection of capital punishment. It also provides important insights into the limitations of the literature on EU actorness in the UN system, which trains its eye primarily on legal representation and member-state cooperation. While this applies to formal international organisations, characterising the post-1945 multilateral order, utilising the study of regime complexity provides a more precise assessment of EU action in the fragmented and increasingly informal institutions constituting global governance today.

Suggested Citation

  • Robert Kissack, 2023. "Does the EU Benefit From Increased Complexity? Capital Punishment in the Human Rights Regime," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 11(2), pages 17-28.
  • Handle: RePEc:cog:poango:v11:y:2023:i:2:p:17-28
    DOI: 10.17645/pag.v11i2.6304
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/6304
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17645/pag.v11i2.6304?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cog:poango:v11:y:2023:i:2:p:17-28. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: António Vieira or IT Department (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cogitatiopress.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.