International non-governmental organisations deploy international observers as unarmed bodyguards to promote human rights and protect local citizens threatened by political violence. The political dynamics associated with three prominent organisation’s whose fieldwork extensively utilises the accompaniment tactic are comparatively examined along three lines of inquiry: their respective degrees of nonpartisanship, interventionism, and engagement in illegal activities through the practice of civil disobedience. How do the real or perceived partisanship, interventionism and respect for local law of an accompaniment organisation impact the actions of those citizens and state forces that it is trying to deter from violating human rights? How do they impact the supporters of the accompaniment organisation as they lobby host governments? An argument is made that those local activists who are provided with international accompaniment are likely better served through nonpartisanship, i.e. the accompanier’s lack of involvement in the work of local activists, and through more moderate forms of interventionism, including adherence to local laws.
Publication year
2012
Abstract
ACCESS
Access
“Open” means that the resource is available to view, but please check the weblink for restrictions on use. “Restricted” means that the resource is not openly accessible to all, but you can purchase a copy, or your organisation might have an institutional subscription.
Source
The International Journal of Human Rights Vol. 16, No. 7, October 2012, 963–981
FURTHER INFORMATION
Source type
Keywords
Organisation(s)
Language(s)