In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

5 Trendsetters and Early Adopters, pre-1990 T he story of how NHRIs have diffused around the world is one of multiple contingencies, of diverse but partially converging pathways. It is a story about the power of institutional models to spread, especially when they are promoted actively and adopted by others similarly situated. In this sense, no single NHRI can be understood in isolation or separated from its broader context. NHRIs created during similar periods are partially connected to one another, even if they are found halfway around the world. The global rise of NHRIs has occurred in waves, corresponding roughly to three periods: pre-1990s, when just over two dozen NHRIs existed; the 1990s, marking the most rapid period of expansion; and post-2000, when states continue joining the global trend. Significantly, each period corresponds to the rising evolution of the international regime on NHRIs, subjecting states to distinct sets of global pressures. Within each period, diverse patterns of institutional diffusion are nonetheless apparent, reflecting particular domestic contexts and trajectories no less than broader historical developments. The first group of countries to create NHRIs was as varied as the national institutions they would establish. These “trendsetters,” numbering about two dozen, did not appear all at once. Rather, they were created in different parts of the world, for different reasons, over the course of four decades, from 1947 through the end of the 1980s. Yet these early NHRIs were all first-of-a-kind trendsetters in their own way, whether in the type of NHRI established, the circumstances leading to the institution’s creation, or an institution’s initial appearance in a given region. This early set of adopters paved the way for others to follow suit. External Attachments and Global Interlocutors Among the earliest trendsetters, the role of global interlocutors proved crucial, despite important national differences. Global interlocutors refer to individuals and groups who bridge the national and international contexts, promoting international standards locally, and communicating local needs to international actors.1 In this context they all happened to be jurists, interested in the linkages between international human rights norms and domestic rule of law; their activism confirms long-standing connections between NHRIs and the legal sphere. Yet despite their best aspirations for a global system of justice, where national and internationalregional mechanisms would complement one another, state interests carried the day. In this sense, a (post)colonial theme permeates these early experiences, showing how the original visions that led to these institutions were constrained from the outset. These dynamics are evident in the creation of the first NHRIs, in France (1947), Guyana (1966), and Senegal (1970)—all before the term “national human rights institution” was even coined. The World’s First NHRI: Droits Humains or Raison D’état? That France was the first country to create an NHRI can be traced directly to René Cassin and his close participation in the twentieth century’s key international organizations. The prominent jurist seemed convinced that international organizations required domestic bodies to implement their standards and transmit their practices to a national context, where they could be given concrete meaning. Cassin may have seen this as intrinsic to international bodies operating in a world of states; indeed, as the French delegate to the League of Nations, Cassin was already deeply immersed in international governance in the first half of the twentieth century. He picked up on the idea of national complementing institutions from his own experience working with international organizations like the ILO and UNESCO, which had national counterparts.2 Then, within the United Nations, he was the leading voice behind the 1946 resolution on national human rights bodies. France’s decision to create a national consultative commission in 1947 was a clear outgrowth of these developments. While Cassin was unable to convince either his fellow UN Human Rights Commission members or the French government that national bodies should trendsetters 75 collect and transmit information about domestic human rights practices, as recounted in Chapter 2, he was able to place the notion of an NHRI on both the international and national agendas. This meant that when the French agency was established in 1947, it was overwhelmingly oriented toward international law, with the goal of shaping nascent international human rights laws. This is reflected in the institution’s first name: la Commission consultative pour la codification du droit international et la définition des droits et devoirs des états et des droits de l’homme (Consultative Commission for Codifying International Law and...

Share