Elitist Remedies? Complaint Resources and Representation in International Human Rights Bodies

Abstract

Abstract This article investigates determinants of representation in international human rights bodies. It is argued that socioeconomic factors shape whether human rights abuses translate into complaints to international human rights mechanisms. To seek international remedy, victims of human rights abuse must be aware of remedies, and they require complaint literacy to file complaints. Alternatively, they need ties to skilled networks that might represent their cases. Such complaint resources are systematically shaped by socioeconomic factors, implying that international human rights remedies tend to represent a self-selection of economic elites. The theoretical claims are tested both on the national and individual levels with novel data on the human rights complaint mechanisms operated by the UN Special Procedures (UNSP). While this mechanism is universally open, the follow-up statements of the UNSP reflect socioeconomic disparities both on the national and individual levels. On the national level, human rights abuses translate into more UNSP statements directed at richer countries. On the individual level, lawyers and professors tend to be more likely to be covered by the UNSP. The findings contribute to our understanding of representation in international human rights remedies, suggesting that these mechanisms struggle to reach marginalized groups in low-income countries.