「涵化」先行的力量：國家人權機構網絡如何影響亞太地區國家遵從《巴黎原則》

Abstract

自從1993年世界人權大會通過《巴黎原則》以來，國家人權機構（National Human Rights Institutions，NHRIs）的全球擴散現象已引起不少人權研究者關注。根據推估，目前全球已有將近三分之二國家都嘗試根據這套權威性的準則設置人權機構。然而正如提出「螺旋模型」之三位學者Risse、Ropp與Sikkink所擔憂的，現今的主要挑戰已從鼓勵國家對國際人權規範的「承諾」（commitment），轉為如何提升國家對規範的「遵從」（compliance）。尤其是基於物質性或社會性動機才設立人權機構的國家，其NHRI在制度保障與實際運作上往往更容易面臨來自政府的干預與威脅。不過在國際與區域層次上，由各國NHRIs所組成的同儕網絡型組織也逐漸發展出一套監督各國《巴黎原則》遵從情況的把關制度，本研究有意探討的正是NHRIs網絡究竟如何能夠影響有意參與這套國際人權建制的國家，使其進而提升內化國際規範的程度。 運用Goodman與Jinks的社會化理論，本研究首先將NHRIs網絡影響國家的機制分為物質誘導、說服與涵化（acculturation）三種，並根據NHRIs建制的發展脈絡以及不同機制之間的順序效應，提出「NHRIs網絡先行施加的涵化壓力」有利提升國家遵從的主要假設。具體而言，NHRIs透過其網絡會籍與評鑑制度的發展以及對《巴黎原則》內涵的積極擴張詮釋，逐漸提升對建制參與國施加的物質誘導與說服壓力。筆者於是主張，若一個國家在建制前期（大致為2006年以前）曾受到NHRIs網絡較多的涵化壓力，那麼在建制後期更有可能提升其規範遵從程度。 以NHRIs網絡發展最為成熟的亞太地區作為主要研究範圍，本文初步觀察了在2013年前已與國家人權機構全球聯盟（Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions，GANHRI）以及亞太地區國家人權機構論壇（Asia Pacific Forum of National Human Rights Institutions，APF）兩個網絡展開正式互動的25個國家，發現是否先行受到NHRIs網絡的涵化壓力與其遵從趨勢存在一定的正相關。為確認因果關係的真實存在，筆者進一步根據各國國內條件的異同，在亞太區域內選擇了尼泊爾與孟加拉兩個國家（分別為有受到與未受到涵化先行壓力）作為一組「最大相似」的對照案例進行深入分析。 透過對這兩國相關事件發展的詳盡追蹤，本研究發現：NHRIs網絡能憑藉其獨特的類政府（quasi-governmental）特性，在柔性交流互動中廣泛影響建制參與國政治菁英（特別是人權機構成員）的認知與偏好，提升其對遵從《巴黎原則》以獲得國際社會認可的需求。以這樣的涵化機制為基礎，便能有效提升說服與物質誘導機制的成功率。此外本研究也發現NHRIs網絡的審查制度能有效匯集其他跨國倡議網絡（Transnational Advocacy Network，TAN）成員對一國施加的社會化壓力，從而提供國內遵從同盟能用於社會動員的資源與手段，有助持續確保該國維持規範內化程度。

The global emergence and diffusion of national human rights institutions (NHRIs) in the past three decades has been a phenomenon that attracted some academic interests in the field of international human rights study. According to estimation, nearly two-thirds of the countries in the world have made the attempt to create such an institution in line with the Paris Principles, the most authoritative guidelines the United Nations endorsed in 1993. It seems that the pressing issue for theorists and practitioners today is no so much how, in Risse, Ropp and Sikkink’s phrase, to encourage more “commitment” from states, but how to enhance their “compliance” to international norms. Especially in countries primarily driven by material and/or social motives, the NHRIs that they set up are prone to face great challenges and interference from governments in their independence and effectiveness. Part of the effort to address the issue came from the NHRIs community itself. Formally established as autonomous state institutions, these “quasi-state” actors have founded their own “peer networks” at the global and the regional level. Through the development of membership rules, imposition of a peer accreditation system and an increasingly rigorous interpretation of the norms, the NHRIs networks were believed to be a key actor in ensuring states’ compliance to the Paris Principles. But how can these networks, with little material power at hand, have a real influence on the behaviors of states? This thesis therefore aims to explore the mechanisms and processes behind. By applying the socialization theory of Goodman and Jinks, it first examines the development of the NHRIs networks and the three different mechanisms (i.e. material inducement, persuasion, and acculturation) they influence states, and then propose the theoretical hypothesis that “preceding” acculturation by the NHRIs networks promotes norm compliance. Specifically, the thesis argues that states joining in the international human rights regime of NHRIs in an earlier period (approximately before 2006) are more likely to enhance their Paris Principles compliance in the long run. Focusing on the Asia-Pacific region where the NHRIs networks are regarded as the most developed, the thesis observes 25 countries that have formally interacted with the the Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions (GANHRI; formerly the International Coordinating Committee of NHRIs, ICC) and the Asia Pacific Forum of National Human Rights Institutions (APF) before 2013, and found a preliminary correlation between the condition of preceding acculturation and the positive change of state compliance. To verify the causal relationship, two “most-likely” cases are selected among the Asia-Pacific states for further analysis, which are Nepal, whose Human Rights Commission joined APF as early as in 2000, and Bangladesh, whose HRC applied for membership in GANHRI/ICC ten years later. Through a detailed process-tracing of the relevant events in both countries, the comparative case study shows that the trans-governmental NHRIs networks can utilize their unique peer status to broadly influence the perceptions and preferences of political elites of a state, including the members of its NHRI, and stimulate their desire for status and recognition in the international society. Therefore, the “soft” power of acculturation can increase the likelihood of success of the subsequent uses of material inducement and persuasion. In addition, the thesis found that the accreditation system of the NHRIs networks can effectively rally the social pressures from other actors in the transnational advocacy networks (TAN) and thus provide the domestic “pro-compliance” coalition of the target state with more resources and means for mobilization, which is crucial to maintain a state’s continuous internalization of human rights norms.