2021
DOI: 10.1080/13642987.2021.1910810
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Co-sponsorship, note verbale, and association behaviour at the UNGA: an analysis of the death penalty moratorium resolutions

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The 1967 decision to eschew the death penalty – which was mainly due to pragmatic concerns about escalation of violence – was retrospectively couched in humanitarian terms, and with time came to symbolise, for Israel's defenders, its insistence on human rights norms in the face of terrorism (Dudai, 2018). This has allowed Israel, for example, to be among the states voting in favour of UN resolutions calling for a moratorium on the death penalty since 2007 (Pascoe & Bae, 2022). Deviating from the policy would have major costs for this symbolic message.…”
Section: The Peculiar Case Of the Israeli Death Penaltymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The 1967 decision to eschew the death penalty – which was mainly due to pragmatic concerns about escalation of violence – was retrospectively couched in humanitarian terms, and with time came to symbolise, for Israel's defenders, its insistence on human rights norms in the face of terrorism (Dudai, 2018). This has allowed Israel, for example, to be among the states voting in favour of UN resolutions calling for a moratorium on the death penalty since 2007 (Pascoe & Bae, 2022). Deviating from the policy would have major costs for this symbolic message.…”
Section: The Peculiar Case Of the Israeli Death Penaltymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…strengthening human rights (Chané and Sharma 2016) or democracy (Hecht 2017). However, states do not just envisage substantive effects; some may even support resolutions banning the death penalty, despite the domestic use of capital punishment (Pascoe and Bae 2021). States might be indifferent to substantive effects because the UNGA is a softlaw body, which means enforcement is not ensured.…”
Section: Sponsorshipmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…', Dijkhuizen and Onderco 2019) and not to build and expand datasets iteratively, aiming to disseminate sponsorship metrics. Secondly, they exhibit a bias towards certain areas and actors, noticeably, the EU (Drieskens et al 2014;Smith 2017) and human rights-related issues (Beauguitte 2011;Chané and Sharma 2016;Pascoe and Bae 2021). And thirdly, they fail to grasp the complexities of the drafting process, overlooking key intricacies that impact final results.…”
Section: Sponsorshipmentioning
confidence: 99%