Course Syllabus (Revised June 2, 2009)

Course Information

Linda Camp Keith, Ph.D.

Human Rights and International Law
PSCI-7381-09M (Summer II 2009)
Tues. and Thurs. 1-6 pm (Green 4.208)

Professor Contact Information

972-883-6481
linda.keith@utdallas.edu
Green 3.232

Course Pre-requisites, Co-requisites, and/or Other Restrictions

This is a graduate course. Students should be enrolled in a graduate program or have appropriate
permissions.

Course Description

This course explores the development of international human rights norms and the international
human rights regimes. We will examine the competing dominant theoretical perspectives
concerning the legitimacy and or effectiveness of international law and its treaty-based
organizations. We will examine the efforts of political scientists to understand what factors
influence the protection or provision of key human rights and we will examine the growing body of
empirical work that seeks to understand the gap between the promises of international law and
actual state practice.

The course will be taught as a graduate seminar, meaning that directed discussion will be the
primary teaching methodology. The course will also have a lab component in which we examine
some of the core human rights documents and measurements and which we examine at least one
documentary as text.

Student Learning Objectives/Outcomes

Upon completing this course, students will be able to fulfill the following objectives:

Will understand the development of international human rights regimes and will be able to
understand and critique the dominant theories concerning the effectiveness of the regimes and the
legitimacy international human rights norms.

Will be able to discuss and assess critically the major works in the empirical human rights literature
(including the broader literature as well as the specific literature on human rights agreements) and
will be able to discuss the implications of the work and to suggest future improvement and direction
in this subfield of political science.
 Required Textbooks

Abouharb, Rodwan and David Cingranelli. 2008. Human Rights and Structural Adjustment.
Cambridge.

Carey, Sabine and Steven C. Poe. 2004. The Systematic Study of Human Rights. Ashgate Publishing.

Donnelly, Jack. 2007. International Human Rights, 3rd Edition. Boulder: Westview.

Totten, Samuel and Paul R. Bartrop. 2009. The Genocide Studies Reader. New York: Routledge.

Recommended Textbooks

Bohmer, Carol and Amy Shuman. 2008. Rejecting Refugees: Political Asylum in the 21st Century. New
York: Routledge Press.

Landman, Todd. 2005. Protecting Human Rights: A Comparative Study. Washington, D.C.:
Georgetown University Press.

The bulk of our reading will come from scholarly journals. They are listed in the weekly reading
schedule and may be accessed through the UTD journal databases. I will also attempt to have the
reference librarians put on e-reserve as many as possible. The course password will be sent out
when available.

GRADING POLICY

GRADING SCALE:

90-100% = A
80-89% = B
70-79% = C
Below 70% = F

UTD now does a variation of the plus/minus system for its graduate classes. It does not have plusses
but has minuses available. I will only give a student a minus if their course grade is at or within one
point of the cut-off point (80 or 81, 90 or 91, and so forth).

GRADING COMPONENTS:

Participation, Questions, and Lab Exercises (20%)

Short papers (30%-15% each)
Final Exam (50%)

PARTICIPATION: In a graduate course, participation in the class seminar is the core learning
methodology. Students are expected to read all of the assigned readings and to come to class prepared
to contribute significantly to the discussion of these materials. Additionally, I may on occasion ask
students to write an in-class response to one of the discussion questions (see below). Students will be
graded on the consistency and quality of their contribution to class discussion.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS: For each class period students are responsible for writing TWO discussion
questions for the readings, including the first day of class. The questions should be thought-provoking
and written to stimulate scholarly conversation. The questions should be emailed to me as a Word
document (do not imbed into the email) by 10 am sharp on the day of the assigned readings. I will
compile a list that includes a selection of student questions plus additional questions that will be used
for class discussion. I will email out copies of the list of questions one hour prior to class. Students will
be graded on the quality and timely submission of questions for the class. Late questions will not
receive credit. The class is too large this summer to make such accommodations.

It should go without saying, but students are expected to read all of the assigned readings and to come
to class prepared to contribute significantly to the discussion of these materials. You will be graded on
the content of your participation on all class periods, not just those for which you are writing a paper.

LAB EXERCISES: We will have a lab component to the class every day. We will meet in the political
science computer lab for the last one to one and a half hours of each period. We will use this time to
explore key human rights reports and documents. We will also examine and critique some of the
dominant measures used in the human rights literature. Students will explore the process of actually
creating measures and coding and will participate in some trial runs as well. Students do not need to
have a statistical background for these exercises. There will not be a requirement for lab time outside of
the regular class period. Students will be graded on the consistency and quality of their contribution to
these exercises.

TWO SHORT CRITICAL ESSAYS: A core component of any graduate class is demonstrating that you are
conversant in the literature and able to critically assess the key works in the field. Students will sign up
to write critical essays on two particular class periods’ sets of readings (one Wed. class and one Mon.
class). Students who are the critical essays for a particular class should expect to be called upon
somewhat to facilitate the discussion.

The essays should be approximately three pages, single space in length. Each class’ readings will
examine a core question or set of related questions in the human rights sub-field of political science.
For first-time graduate students and our few undergraduate students, as you read each assigned reading
you are expected to identify the key questions that authors seek to address, the theory that informs
their explorations, the resulting hypotheses, means the authors employ to test the hypothesis
(methodology, measurement), the key findings of the study and their implications, the limitations of the
study, and ultimately what the study suggest for future research. The critical essays cannot report all of
this information but rather should be a synthesis of that analysis.

Rather, your essay should identify the key questions that this literature addresses and the dominant
theory and hypotheses that emerge in this literature (this particular set of readings). Then I would like
for you to assess the contributions of each of the required reading in regard to the theoretical
development of that particular area and in regard to the appropriateness of the measures and
methodology employed to test the emerging theoretical questions. Finally, I would like to make an
assessment of the implications of this research thus far and to make suggestions for ways in which the
research could be improved or expanded upon in future work. Papers are due at the beginning of class.
No late papers will be accepted.

A note on statistical methodology: I expect you to be able to discuss the methodology at a level
appropriate to your particular status. Even as an undergraduate, you should be able to critique the
standards and measurements of human rights without any statistical knowledge at this point.

FINAL EXAM: The final exam will be an open-notes and open-book take-home exam. It will be a
selection of questions from which students will have constrained choice. Students will email their
exams to me by 1 pm on Mon. August 10th at the latest.

NO incompletes will be given for this course.

TOPICS AND READING ASSIGNMENTS:

Keep in mind that this is traditionally a 15 to 16 week course that is compressed into nine five-hour class
periods, which equates to two weeks of class every class session so within one week you and I will
reading the equivalent of FOUR WEEKS of reading. I have trimmed the reading from what you would be
expected to read during a traditional semester to keep the readings as reasonable as possible for a
summer session while still maintaining the academic standards we expect at the University of Texas at
Dallas. On average for each class you will be reading seven articles or chapters. You absolutely must
read and write ahead of the schedule, especially for Wed. classes.

Week One: Mon. July 6th

Development of International Human Rights Law

(Note: some of these readings will overlap each other in parts and elsewhere they will provide differing
or additional perspectives.)

Donnelly, Chapter One: “Human Rights as an Issue in World Politics”

Totten and Bartrop, Chapter Ten: “Setting a Precedent: The Nuremberg Trials”

Donnelly, Chapter Five: “The Multilateral Politics of Human Rights”

Major Theoretical Debates

Donnelly, Chapter Two: “Theories of Human Rights”

Donnelly, Chapter Three: “The Relative Universality of Human Rights”

 Totten and Bartrop, Chapter Seven: “The Issues of Sovereignty and Political Will”

Doing Human Rights Research

Carey and Poe, Chapter One: “Human Rights Research and the Quest for Human Dignity”

Week Two: Wed. July 8th

Empirical Models and Studies of Political Repression and Personal Integrity Rights Abuse (Largely
Domestic/Internal Influences)

Poe, Steven C., C. Neal Tate and Linda Camp Keith, 1999. “Repression of Human Rights to Personal
Integrity Revisited: A Global Cross-National Study Covering the Years 1976-1993." International Studies
Quarterly 43: 291-313.

Cingranelli, David L., and David L. Richards. 1999b. "Measuring the Pattern, Level, and Sequence of
Government Respect for Human Rights” International Studies Quarterly 43: 407-417.

Richards, David L. 1999. “Perilous Proxy: Human Rights and the Presence of National Elections” Social
Science Quarterly 80.4: 648-665.

Bueno de Mesquita, George W. Downs, Alistar Smith and Feryal Marie Cherif. 2005. “Thinking Inside the
Box: A Closer Look at Democracy and Human Rights.” International Studies Quarterly 49(3): 439-57.

Carey and Poe, Chapter 11: Sabine Carey’s “Domestic Threat and Repression: An Analysis of State
Responses to Different Forms of Dissent”

Methods and Measurement Issues

Hafner-Burton, Emilie M. and James Ron. 2009. “Seeing Double: Human Rights Impact through
Qualitative and Quantitative Eyes.” World Politics 61(2): 360–401

Poe, Steven C., Tanya Vazquez, and Sabine Carey. 2001. “How Are These Pictures Different: Assessing
the Biases in the U.S. State Department’s Country Reports on Human Rights Practices.” Human Rights
Quarterly, 2001, 23:650-677.

Week Two: Monday July 13th

Domestic Legal Institutions: Constitutions and the Judiciary

Davenport, Christian. 1996. “‘Constitutional Promises’ and Repressive Reality: A Cross-National Time-Series
Investigation of Why Political and Civil Liberties are Suppressed,” Journal of Politics 58:627-54.

Keith, Linda Camp. 2002a. "Constitutional Provisions for Individual Human Rights (1976-1996): Are They
More than Mere 'Window Dressing?'" Political Research Quarterly 55: 111-143.
Keith, Linda Camp. 2002b. "International Principles for Formal Judicial Independence: Trends in National
Constitutions and Their Impact (1976 to 1996)."Judicature 85: 194-200.

Carey and Poe, Chapter Nine: Linda Camp Keith’s "National Constitutions and Human Rights Protection:
Regional Differences and Colonial Influences”

Howard, Robert M. and Henry F. Carey. 2004. “Is an Independent Judiciary Necessary for Democracy?”
Judicature 87(6): 284-290.

Apodaca, Clair. 2004. The Rule of Law and Human Rights,” Judicature 87:292-299.

Keith, Linda Camp and Steven C. Poe. 2004. "Are Constitutional State of Emergency Clauses Effective?
An Empirical Exploration" Human Rights Quarterly 26(4): 1071-1097.

Week Two: Wed. July 15th

Transnational Influences and a Broader Set of Human Rights

Carey and Poe, Chapter Five: Callaway and Harrellson-Stephens’ “The Path from Trade to Human Rights:
The Democracy and Development Detour”

Carey and Poe, Chapter Six: Milner et al.’s “Providing Subsistence Rights”

Apodaca, Clair. 2001. “Global Economic Patterns and Personal Integrity Rights after the Cold War.”
International Studies Quarterly 45: 587-602.

Krueger, Eric and Steven C. Poe. 1998. "Testing Models of United States Foreign Policy: Foreign Aid During
and After the Cold War.” Journal of Politics 60:63-85.

Abouharb, Rodwan and David Cingranelli. 2008. Human Rights and Structural Adjustment. Cambridge.
(All students will read theory chapters and I will assign one of the 5 quantitative chapters to each
student.)

Week Three: Mon. July 20th

International Human Rights Treaties: Commitment and Compliance

Keith, Linda Camp. 1999. "The United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights: Does
It Make a Difference in Human Rights Behavior?" Journal of Peace Research 36 (1): 95–118.

Hafner-Burton, Emilie, and Kiyoteru Tsutsui. 2005. "Human Rights in a Globalizing World: The Paradox of
Empty Promises." The American Journal of Sociology 110 (5): 1373–1411.
Neumayer, Eric. 2005. "Do International Human Rights Treaties Improve Respect for Human Rights?"
Journal of Conflict Resolution 49 (6): 925–953.

Hathaway, Oona. 2007. "Why Do Countries Commit to Human Rights Treaties?" Journal of Conflict
Resolution 8 (51): 588–621.

Hafner-Burton, Emilie M. 2008. “Sticks and Stones: The Efficacy of Human Rights ‘Naming and
Shaming.’” International Organization 62(4): 689-716.

Goodliffe, Jay, and Darren G. Hawkins. 2006. "Explaining Commitment: States and the Convention
Against Torture." The Journal of Politics 68 (2): 358–371.

Heyns, Christof, and Frans Viljoen. 2001. The impact of the United Nations human rights treaties on the
domestic level. Human Rights Quarterly 23:483-535.

Selections from Todd Landman tba. 2005. Protecting Human Rights: A Comparative Study

Week Three: Wed. July 22nd

International Women’s Human Rights

Poe, Steven C., Karl Ho, and Dierdre Wendel-Blunt. 1997. “Global Patterns in the Achievement of
Women’s Rights to Equality.” Human Rights Quarterly 19(4): 813-835.

Sadasivam, B. 1997. “The Impact of Structural Adjustment on Women: A Governance and Human Rights
Agenda.” Human Rights Quarterly 19(3): 630-55.

Henderson, Conway W. 2004. “The Political Repression of Women.” Human Rights Quarterly 26: 1028-
1049.

Butler, Christopher K., Tali Gluch, and Neil J. Mitchell. 2007. “Security Forces and Sexual Violence: A
Cross-National Analysis of a Principal-Agent Argument.” Journal of Peace Research 44(6): 669-687.

Wotipka, Christine Min, and Francisco O. Ramirez. 2007. "World Society and Human Rights: An Event
History Analysis of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women." In
The Global Diffusion of Markets and Democracy, ed Beth A. , Geoffrey Garrett, and Frank Dobbin.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (I will distribute copies of this book chapter.)

Avdeyna, Olga. 2007. “When Do States Comply with International Treaties? Policies on Violence against
Women in Post-Communist Countries.” International Studies Quarterly 51: 877-900.

Richards, David L. and Ronald Gelleny. 2007. “Women’s Status and Economic Globalization.”
International Studies Quarterly 51: 855-876.

Week Four: Mon. July 27th

International Human Rights: Asylum and Refugee

Gibney, Mark. 1988. “A Well-Founded Fear of Persecution.” Human Rights Quarterly 10 (1): 109-121.

Schuster, Liza. 2000. “A Comparative Analysis of the Asylum Policy of Seven European Governments.”
Journal of Refugee Studies 13(1): 118-132.

Rosenblum, Mark R., and Idean Salehyan. 2004. “Norms and Interests in US Asylum Enforcement.”
Journal of Peace Research 41(6): 677-697.

Neumayer, Eric. 2005. ‘Asylum Recognition Rates in Western Europe-Their Determinants, Variation and
Lack of Convergence.’ Journal of Conflict Resolution 49(1): 43-66.

Bohmer, Carol and Amy Shuman. 2008. Rejecting Refugees: Political Asylum in the 21st Century. New
York: Routledge Press, Chapter Four: “Did This Really Happen to You? The Problem of Credibility”.

Rottman, Alan. J., Fariss, Chris J. and Poe, Steven C. 2009. “The Path to Asylum in the U.S. and the
Determinants for Who Gets in and Why.” International Migration Review 43(1): 3–34.

Keith, Linda Camp and Jennifer S. Holmes. 2009. “Determinants of Asylum Grants: A Rare Examination
of Factors Typically Unobservable in U.S. Asylum Decisions.” Journal of Refugee Studies June 2009: tba.

Week Four Wed. July 29th

International Law on Genocide

Totten and Bartrop, Chapter One: “The Origin of the Term Genocide and the Definition Used in the UN
Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide”

Totten and Bartrop, Chapter Four: “Theories of Genocide”

Totten and Bartrop, Chapter Five: “Cases of Genocide” (Sections 5.1, 5.4, and 5.5)

Totten and Bartrop, Chapter Six: “Comparative Studies of Various Cases of Genocide” (Section 6.3)

Totten and Bartrop, Chapter Eight: “Prevention of Genocide”

Powers, Samantha. 2001. “Bystanders to Genocide.” Atlantic Monthly

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200109/power-genocide

“Ghost of Rwanda” (Documentary film we will watch in class in lieu of lab time)

Week Five: Mon. Aug. 3rd

Prosecution of Crimes against Humanity and Genocide

Totten and Bartrop, Chapter Eleven: International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Totten and Bartrop, Chapter Twelve: International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda

Totten and Bartrop, Chapter Thirteen: Trials in National Courts

Totten and Bartrop, Chapter Fourteen: The International Criminal Court

Kelley, Judith. 2007. "Who Keeps International Commitments and Why? The International Criminal Court
and Bilateral Nonsurender Agreements." American Political Science Review 1901 (3): 573–589.

“Ghost of Rwanda” (Documentary film we will watch in class in lieu of lab time)

Final due Monday August 10th at 1 pm

STANDARD UNIVERSITY POLICIES: discipline is contained in the UTD

Off-campus Instruction and Course Activities
Off-campus, out-of-state, and foreign
instruction and activities are subject to
state law and University policies and
procedures regarding travel and risk-
related activities. Information
regarding these rules and regulations
may be found at the website address
http://www.utdallas.edu/BusinessAffair
s/Travel_Risk_Activities.htm. Additional
information is available from the office
of the school dean. Below is a
description of any travel and/or risk-
related activity associated with this
course.
Student Conduct & Discipline
The University of Texas System and The
University of Texas at Dallas have rules
and regulations for the orderly and
efficient conduct of their business. It is
the responsibility of each student and
each student organization to be
knowledgeable about the rules and
regulations which govern student
conduct and activities. General
information on student conduct and
publication, A to Z Guide, which is
provided to all registered students each
academic year.
The University of Texas at Dallas
administers student discipline within
the procedures of recognized and
established due process. Procedures
are defined and described in the Rules
and Regulations, Board of Regents, The
University of Texas System, Part 1,
Chapter VI, Section 3, and in Title V,
Rules on Student Services and Activities
of the university’s Handbook of
Operating Procedures. Copies of these
rules and regulations are available to
students in the Office of the Dean of
Students, where staff members are
available to assist students in
interpreting the rules and regulations
(SU 1.602, 972/883-6391).
A student at the university neither loses
the rights nor escapes the
responsibilities of citizenship. He or she
is expected to obey federal, state, and
local laws as well as the Regents’ Rules,
university regulations, and
administrative rules. Students are
subject to discipline for violating the
 standards of conduct whether such
conduct takes place on or off campus,
or whether civil or criminal penalties
are also imposed for such conduct.
Academic Integrity
The faculty expects from its students a
high level of responsibility and
academic honesty. Because the value
of an academic degree depends upon
the absolute integrity of the work done
by the student for that degree, it is
imperative that a student demonstrate
a high standard of individual honor in
his or her scholastic work. Scholastic
dishonesty includes, but is not limited
to, statements, acts or omissions
related to applications for enrollment
or the award of a degree, and/or the
submission as one’s own work or
material that is not one’s own. As a
general rule, scholastic dishonesty
involves one of the following acts:
cheating, plagiarism, collusion and/or
falsifying academic records. Students
suspected of academic dishonesty are
subject to disciplinary proceedings.
Plagiarism, especially from the web,
from portions of papers for other
classes, and from any other source is
unacceptable and will be dealt with
under the university’s policy on
plagiarism (see general catalog for
details). This course will use the
resources of turnitin.com, which
searches the web for possible
plagiarism and is over 90% effective.
Email Use
The University of Texas at Dallas
recognizes the value and efficiency of
communication between faculty/staff
and students through electronic mail.
At the same time, email raises some
issues concerning security and the
identity of each individual in an email
exchange. The university encourages all
official student email correspondence
be sent only to a student’s U.T. Dallas
email address and that faculty and staff
consider email from students official
only if it originates from a UTD student
account. This allows the university to
maintain a high degree of confidence in
the identity of all individual
corresponding and the security of the
transmitted information. UTD furnishes
each student with a free email account
that is to be used in all communication
with university personnel. The
Department of Information Resources
at U.T. Dallas provides a method for
students to have their U.T. Dallas mail
forwarded to other accounts.
Withdrawal from Class
The administration of this institution
has set deadlines for withdrawal of any
college-level courses. These dates and
times are published in that semester's
course catalog. Administration
procedures must be followed. It is the
student's responsibility to handle
withdrawal requirements from any
class. In other words, I cannot drop or
withdraw any student. You must do the
proper paperwork to ensure that you
will not receive a final grade of "F" in a
course if you choose not to attend the
class once you are enrolled.
Student Grievance Procedures
Procedures for student grievances are
found in Title V, Rules on Student
Services and Activities, of the
university’s Handbook of Operating
Procedures.
In attempting to resolve any student
grievance regarding grades,
evaluations, or other fulfillments of
academic responsibility, it is the
obligation of the student first to make a
 serious effort to resolve the matter with
the instructor, supervisor,
administrator, or committee with
whom the grievance originates
(hereafter called “the respondent”).
Individual faculty members retain
primary responsibility for assigning
grades and evaluations. If the matter
cannot be resolved at that level, the
grievance must be submitted in writing
to the respondent with a copy of the
respondent’s School Dean. If the
matter is not resolved by the written
response provided by the respondent,
the student may submit a written
appeal to the School Dean. If the
grievance is not resolved by the School
Dean’s decision, the student may make
a written appeal to the Dean of
Graduate or Undergraduate Education,
and the deal will appoint and convene
an Academic Appeals Panel. The
decision of the Academic Appeals Panel
is final. The results of the academic
appeals process will be distributed to all
involved parties.
Copies of these rules and regulations
are available to students in the Office of
the Dean of Students, where staff
members are available to assist
students in interpreting the rules and
regulations.
Incomplete Grade Policy
As per university policy, incomplete
grades will be granted only for work
unavoidably missed at the semester’s
end and only if 70% of the course work
has been completed. An incomplete
grade must be resolved within eight (8)
weeks from the first day of the
subsequent long semester. If the
required work to complete the course
and to remove the incomplete grade is
not submitted by the specified
deadline, the incomplete grade is
changed automatically to a grade of F.
Disability Services
The goal of Disability Services is to
provide students with disabilities
educational opportunities equal to
those of their non-disabled peers.
Disability Services is located in room
1.610 in the Student Union. Office
hours are Monday and Thursday, 8:30
a.m. to 6:30 p.m.; Tuesday and
Wednesday, 8:30 a.m. to 7:30 p.m.; and
Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.
The contact information for the Office
of Disability Services is: The University
of Texas at Dallas, SU 22 PO Box 830688
Richardson, Texas 75083-0688 or (972)
883-2098 (voice or TTY)
Essentially, the law requires that
colleges and universities make those
reasonable adjustments necessary to
eliminate discrimination on the basis of
disability. For example, it may be
necessary to remove classroom
prohibitions against tape recorders or
animals (in the case of dog guides) for
students who are blind. Occasionally an
assignment requirement may be
substituted (for example, a research
paper versus an oral presentation for a
student who is hearing impaired).
Classes enrolled students with mobility
impairments may have to be
rescheduled in accessible facilities. The
college or university may need to
provide special services such as
registration, note-taking, or mobility
assistance.
It is the student’s responsibility to
notify his or her professors of the need
for such an accommodation. Disability
Services provides students with letters
to present to faculty members to verify
that the student has a disability and
needs accommodations. Individuals
requiring special accommodation
 should contact the professor after class
or during office hours.

Religious Holy Days

The University of Texas at Dallas will

excuse a student from class or other
required activities for the travel to and
observance of a religious holy day for a
religion whose places of worship are
exempt from property tax under
Section 11.20, Tax Code, Texas Code
Annotated.

The student is encouraged to notify the

instructor or activity sponsor as soon as
possible regarding the absence,
preferably in advance of the
assignment. The student, so excused,
will be allowed to take the exam or
complete the assignment within a
reasonable time after the absence: a
period equal to the length of the
absence, up to a maximum of one
week. A student who notifies the
instructor and completes any missed
exam or assignment may not be
penalized for the absence. A student
who fails to complete the exam or
assignment within the prescribed
period may receive a failing grade for
that exam or assignment. If a student or
an instructor disagrees about the
nature of the absence [i.e., for the
purpose of observing a religious holy
day] or if there is similar disagreement
about whether the student has been
given a reasonable time to complete
any missed assignments or
examinations, either the student or the
instructor may request a ruling from the
chief executive officer of the institution,
or his or her designee. The chief
executive officer or designee must take
into account the legislative intent of
TEC 51.911(b), and the student and
instructor will abide by the decision of
the chief executive officer or designee.