The power(less) of ratification: Holding the state responsible for human rights respect in Indonesia

Researchers have found that increasing rates of ratification of international human rights treaties do not necessarily imply actual improvement of human rights practice. This discrepancy raises questions about the state's intention to ratify treaties and the impact of ratification on the development of human rights commitments. While most scholars agree on the state's instrumental objective in ratifying treaties, they are still far from being able to make conclusions on the impact of ratification.;This thesis compares the implementations of three human rights treaties in Indonesia. Adopting a power perspective, it finds that the idea of human rights is a contested concept, which is resisted and simultaneously pushed by those interested in the application of these norms. In fact, a human rights treaty would be adequately implemented only if it goes in the same direction with the interest of a strong state or a state with high capacity to rule. This type of state would not likely implement unsupportive treaties irrespective of strong pressures from networks of domestic and international activists and social groups. Moreover, the presence of a dense network of activists and influential social groups would only likely succeed in making a partial implementation if the state is weak and has no adequate capacity to rule.;This thesis moves forward to explain the reasons why ratification does not always translate into implementation, and to specify the conditions under which the state is likely to implement the treaty it has ratified. Such an explanation is absent from qualitative case studies that do not go beyond the observation that ratification has equipped human rights activists with a legal foundation. Some empirical quantitative studies provide a better explanation on the factors that likely contribute to treaty implementation, but the lack of data has impeded such studies from offering a detailed mechanism of treaty implementation. Meanwhile, the literature on state compliance to international treaties in fact only offers a partial explanation. They largely share the same opinion on the pivotal role of international factors---such as powerful democratic countries, international norms, the UN, and transnational activists---in the process of treaty implementation.