Sample Solution

id, however, provide reasons for this such as international and non-international armed conflict being motivators of destabilising the state, thus national security takes priority. Vreeland, Hill and Cole studies also found that those who signed CAT were more likely to practice torture such as China in regard to minority groups such as the Uighurs. This again suggests that legal mechanisms do not necessarily promote human rights, and political science is able to observe greater on what kind of states are likely to conform. However, criticisms arise as political science fails to look at the cultural relativist approach to explain why some states may undermine human rights instruments – however even so it does not justify states that grossly violate human rights. Conversely, Simmons found differences in states that are neither repressive nor completely democratic and was able to see a difference in states that did ratify CAT. However, establishing types of regimes is necessary when observing state behaviour of human rights as some states may not be able to progress as they have always been compliant to human rights, whereas other states the complete opposite. Political science then provides evidence that helps establish which states are likely to comply with human rights and which states are not. Furthermore, Risse, Ropp and Sikkink’s five-stages ‘spiral model’ addresses the processes whereby countries transition from a denial of human rights abuses to gradual compliance. The use of transnational actors such as NGOs has often helped states move from repressive regimes to compliant human rights advocates e.g. Tunisia. The spiral model was able to provide for a useful framework in how states are able to progress from non-compliant to cooperative. However, Jetschke and Liese and Landman argue that the spiral model overestimates CSOs and fails to consider how some powe