Doctoral Dissertation Research: Social, Economic and Legal Factors Influencing Human Rights Violations by Non-State Actors

点击翻译按钮获取中文摘要

Existing literature suggests that insurgents, paramilitaries, rebels and other non-state armed groups use violence strategically to obtain group objectives. Yet, what influences the armed group's choice among the various types of human rights violations it targets the civilian population with? This project addresses analyzes the political-economic and legal factors underlying armed groups' strategic use of human rights violations. It hypothesizes that armed groups use and vary the violations they commit in order to manipulate civilians to behave in ways that, first, maintain and maximize the armed group's funding sources, and second, evade prosecution. Using qualitative case studies and quantitative statistical analysis of Colombian non-state armed groups, the project examines how the incentive structures created by an armed group's funding sources and prosecution levels influence its selection or avoidance of various human rights violations. The proposed research contributes to interdisciplinary research relevant to human rights studies, criminology, legal studies and security studies, with specific relevance to the literature on political violence and civilian targeting. It provides generalizable results extending well beyond the Colombian case, since all armed groups rely on funding and strive to escape credible prosecution. Thus, the results will interest those dealing with questions of civilian welfare, security and defense in Latin America and beyond. The project also reveals the relative influence of political economic and legal factors, ultimately identifying warning signs of particular human rights violations. This information should assist policy makers, human rights advocates, law enforcement agencies and governmental and non-governmental organizations, prioritize efforts to more efficiently and effectively protect vulnerable civilians. This ultimately impacts security and defense, as more effective protection prevents civilians from forming self-defense forces whose violence could further complicate peace processes and prolong civil conflicts.