Individuals v. states: The correlates of Human Rights Committee rulings, 1979–2007

This paper examines the outcomes of individual abuse claims filed against states under the First Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, as decided by the Human Rights Committee (HRC). Results from selection models that account for a country’s initial decision to join the Optional Protocol and an individual’s subsequent decision to file a complaint under it show that the substantive nature of complaints were more determinative of HRC outcomes than were country-level characteristics. Claims relating to due process rights, civil liberties, and political freedoms most often resulted in violations, whereas claims pertaining to discrimination, suffrage rights, and the rights of women and children were much less successful. Only two country-level characteristics robustly affected HRC outcomes, net of rights claims: democratizing countries were found in violation at higher rates than were other countries, while violation rates declined as a function of aggregate wealth.