| Publication |
2008.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
An overcompliant state is one that paradoxically takes actions
that recognize specific rights or a category of rights that go
beyond or even against that state's international human rights
treaty obligations or its normative international commitments.
Since there is no existing IR literature that would explain why
a state might paradoxically comply or "overcomply" with its
stated commitments, there is also no theory to explain what
would propel a state to "overcomply" with an emergent norm.
Securing indigenous rights means that several critical changes
in the international discourse must occur, including an alteration
of the liberal international Westphalian system of state
sovereignty toward a postliberal, plurinational sovereignty system
that includes a separate nation-to-nation and consentbased
shared sovereignty arrangement between states and
indigenous peoples. "Overcompliance" in indigenous rights
occurs under a particular set of conditions: (1) when there is
a strong presence of the international indigenous-rights movement
within the state; (2) when the state places high value on
its reputation as a "good global citizen"; and (3) when change
occurs in the state's domestic discourse as it seeks to locate its
own postcolonial identity in a globalized world. By examining
state "overcompliance," the author seeks to expose the limits of
the current international discourse and the potential to push
that discourse further to better accommodate the full spectrum
of indigenous rights.
|