Covenants, Constitutions, and Distinct Law Types: Investigating Governments’ Restrictions on CSOs Using an Institutional Approach
Covenants, Constitutions, and Distinct Law Types: Investigating Governments’ Restrictions on CSOs Using an Institutional Approach
复制标题
契约、宪法和不同的法律类型：使用制度方法调查政府对公民社会组织的限制
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2019
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Anthony J. DeMattee
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Anthony J. DeMattee
越来越多的研究人员研究了规范第三部门的法律，并警告说，法律扩张是对公民社会的全球镇压。本文提出了法律压制形式的两个问题：限制对公民社会组织的外国援助。首先，制度差异是否会影响这些法律的采用？第二，在内容上出现不同的规律是否也有不同的成因？利用1993年至2012年138个国家的数据，一项分两阶段的分析解决了这些问题。第一个分析研究了《公民权利和政治权利国际盟约》（《公民权利和政治权利国际盟约》）的批准和关于国际条约地位的宪法层面的差异。然后，该研究使用竞争风险模型来评估预测采用的因素是否因法律类型而异。研究发现，在《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》获得批准的情况下，赋予条约特权高于普通立法的宪法创造了一种制度环境，使条约不太可能被采纳。相互竞争的风险模型表明，不同的法律具有不同的风险因素，这意味着这些法律在概念上的区别大于等效。将这些发现纳入未来的工作将加强用于理解规范公民社会的法律途径的理论、方法和概念。
A growing number of researchers study the laws that regulate the third sector and caution the legal expansion is a global crackdown on civil society. This article asks two questions of a thoroughly researched form of legal repression: restrictions on foreign aid to CSOs. First, do institutional differences affect the adoption of these laws? Second, do laws that appear different in content also have different causes? A two-stage analysis addresses these questions using data from 138 countries from 1993 to 2012. The first analysis studies the ratification of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and constitution-level differences regarding international treaties’ status. The study then uses competing risk models to assess whether the factors that predict adoption vary across law types. The study finds that given ICCPR ratification, constitutions that privilege treaties above ordinary legislation create an institutional context that makes adoption less likely. Competing risk models suggest different laws have different risk factors, which implies these laws are more conceptually distinct than equivalent. Incorporating these findings in future work will strengthen the theory, methods, and concepts used to understand the legal approaches that regulate civil society.