Introduction

Since World War II, the world community has increasingly turned to international institutions as a way to monitor and improve states’ human rights practices. ¹ The international human rights regime now boasts six primary treaties to which the great majority of states belong. Indeed, the number of states ratifying these treaties ranges between 147 and 193. ² Does the fact of near universal commitment mean that states embrace treaty norms and want to improve their domestic practices, or are states committing for other reasons entirely and with no intention of adhering to treaty terms? After all, these treaties are typically designed with weak enforcement mechanisms: they often only require the state to self-report its behavior to a committee that is authorized only to comment on, not to punish or impose sanctions for, bad and noncompliant behavior. Therefore, states can make their ratification decisions without fearing they will suffer significant sovereignty losses should they fail to comply with treaty terms.