ABSTRACT
Despite the view that ‘human rights are an elusive and in many ways unobservable social phenomenon, which are not always tractable for measurement’ (Landman and Carvalho 2010: 44), the use of indicators to measure human rights is now an increasingly popular way of determining whether progress in rights has been made and of holding human rights actors to account. Rights are, moreover, associated with a good, correct or exemplary form of governing – guidelines compiled by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP 2004: 3) define a ‘governance indicator’ as ‘a measure that points out something about the state of governance in a country [… and is] usually narrowed down to measure more specific areas of governance such as […] human rights’. The UNDP thus makes the link between good governance and human rights – ‘good’ governing within states should imply ‘good’ human rights practices. The language of ‘good governance’ has now permeated the European Union – in particular, the Commission's White Paper on Governance (European Commission 2001) identifies a need to set up new agencies (a departure from the Classic Community Method) 1 in order to ensure that ‘good governance’ is maintained throughout the EU. It was this sentiment that led to the establishment of a new agency for fundamental rights protection in the EU, the Fundamental Rights Agency of the European Union (FRA) in March 2007. 2 Coupled with the ‘good governance’ agenda put forward in the EU's external relations, in the form of agreements on trade and cooperation with Third Countries (e.g. Cotonou) and required by the EU's accession criteria (Copenhagen Criteria), this new agency symbolizes a clear internal link between good governance and human rights. 3
