Does might make right or fight? Coercive capacity, democracy, and human rights, 1975 to 2010

Abstract

ABSTRACTDemocracy is generally beneficial for human rights whereas coercive capacity increases government repression. Using data for 161 countries between 1975 and 2010, I consider how different aspects of democracy interact with the size and scope of a country's military apparatus to shape respect for bodily-integrity rights. Does democracy ameliorate the negative effects of coercive capacity? Or, does a strong military overpower the positive impact of democracy? Multivariate analyses suggest that high levels of democracy neutralize the effect of coercive capacity on bodily-integrity violations. At the same time, high levels of coercive capacity increase human rights abuses even in the most democratic regimes, at least when different aspects of democracy—executive constraints, competitive elections, and media freedom—are evaluated in isolation. Regimes that combine respect for media freedom with constraints on executive authority or competitive elections are able to harness coercive capacity for protective purposes.