Between Power and Vulnerability: National Human Rights Institutions in Post-Conflict Environments and the Uganda Human Rights Commission

Sammanfattning

In light of declining multilateralism within the field of human rights since the 1990s, National Human Rights Institutions have been presented by the UN as translators capable of vernacularizing and institutionalizing global human rights ideals within the local. Yet, the global proliferation of National Human Rights Institutions sparked by the adoption of the UN Principles Relating to the Status of National Institutions implies a top-down spread of these institutions from the global to the local level and makes legitimacy issues intrinsically connected to their creation. This legitimacy concern can be a particularly pressing challenge for the increasing number of National Human Rights Institutions that navigate post-conflict environments. While the academic debate on the effectiveness of these institutions led by scholars such as Linos and Pegram (2017) and Smith (2006) is nascent, it remains largely normative and lacks empirical grounding. Thus, key questions on what allows National Human Rights Institutions to make effective contributions within transitioning contexts remain unaddressed. Therefore, this thesis aims to further this evolving research agenda. This is done by means of the case study of the Uganda Human Rights Commission’s post-conflict work after the end of the Lord’s Resistance Army’s insurgency. Conceptualized as a translator between the global and the local, the Uganda Human Rights Commission’s effectiveness is assessed based on structured expert interviews, reports, and academic literature. Thereby, this thesis identifies key themes and challenges related to the work of National Human Rights Institutions in post-conflict contexts.