The importance of NGOs has been on the rise since the World War II. Amnesty International is one the best-known human rights nongovernmental organizations which has been globally successful in human rights agenda setting. This Diploma thesis analyzes the common features of three selected successful Amnesty International campaigns and aims to determine key attributes that can help to reach the goals of human rights campaigns.

The aim of this Master thesis is to find out whether the lobbying carried out by Amnesty International France as NGO is different from the lobbying carried out by professional lobbying organizations, which means the organizations which promote primarily the interests of its own members. From the general theory of lobbying and theory of lobbying of NGOS the tools for creating pressure on politics was chosen and factors which could influence usage of these tools were identified. Then it was verified if these tools are really used by Amnesty International France and by which factors the tools are picked up. Expected result of this research was that lobbing of Amnesty International France as NGO is specific because of different circumstances, reasons and goals of lobbying from the professional lobbying. From the results of interpretation of Amnesty International France's documents and interviews with persons involved in the lobbying strategy imply that this NGO really choose some different tools from professional lobbying and is influenced by different factors. But there are also similarities.

Saudi Arabia has been accused of sportswashing, an attempt to improve its reputation through buying the English football club Newcastle United. The purpose of this paper is to explore through a discourse analysis how Saudi Arabia's action to acquire Newcastle United can be seen as an exercise of power, and whether and how the images presented construct and reinforce orientalist discourses about the Saudi state and the region. The discourse analysis is conducted using Laclau and Mouffe's methodology and the theoretical framework applied is Joseph Nye's soft power, Edward Said's Orientalism and hegemony. Based on the international newspaper The Guardian and the human rights organization Amnesty International, orientalist discourses have been identified and the purchase of Newcastle United has resulted in soft disempowerment effects for Saudi Arabia. Local newspaper The Chronicle also constructed orientalist discourses about the state of Saudi Arabia but legitimizes the purchase of Newcastle United making the soft power exercise successful.

How do victims of violence perceive blanket amnesties as part of transitional justice mechanisms in war-torn societies? The amnesty law is critical for conflict resolutions and post-conflict reconciliation processes. Governments and third parties use amnesties as a transitional justice instrument to end the violence because it ensures that conflict leaders will accept to engage in peace talks. However, a blanket amnesty restrains the victims’ narratives of past atrocities in the transitional justice process in exchange for peace. The amnesty in Angola illustrates this policy. The attempt to balance past and future avoids the risks of too much truth-telling from breaking peace negotiations. In a situation where peace and justice compete, this paper considers the victims as agents in the process.  To this end, I enquire about the victims’ views about blanket amnesty. To find out, I explore the victims’ perceptions of the blanket amnesty in Angola and their engagement in transitional justice processes through their self-awareness. Specifically, how they apprehend their capabilities and social-political environment opportunities to change. For this purpose, I used Bandura’s self-efficacy theory of human agency to glean the victims’ consciousness of the political environment and capabilities. I argue that the victims’ self-efficacy level determines their perceptions of blanket amnesty and engagement as part of the transitional justice process that inflicts such an overwhelming impact on their lives. This study offers a micro-level interdisciplinary perspective to the transitional justice study field.

The purpose of this study is to examine how FIFA and Amnesty portray the football World Cup in Qatar 2022 differently on their respective Twitter accounts. For context, the topic regarding Qatar being granted to host the World Cup has been a heated discussion ever since its inception in 2010 when FIFA officially announced it for the first time. Common arguments against the decision were usually about Qatar not having any prior record of a “football culture” as well as there being accusations of them buying their way into becoming a host nation. Qatar later also came under fire after sources showed evidence that the country imposed “slave-like” conditions on migrant workers building their cities and football arenas, with reports estimating 6,500 migrant worker deaths in the country since 2010. Knowing this information surrounding the World Cup 2022, this study aims to quantitatively analyse the differences in content and framings published on Twitter by FIFA, the organization running the event, and Amnesty, a non-governmental organization focused on human rights. Framing theory and agenda-setting theory were used as tools to examine 150 tweets under the time period spanning from December 2, 2010 to November 20, 2022. The findings of the analysis show dominatingly negative tweets from Amnesty regarding the World Cup, whereas FIFA have remained neutral but mostly positive. The results of the analysis also show signs of sportswashing being a contributing factor in the different framings of the World Cup between the accounts.

Oil producing communities of Nigeria known as Niger Delta region has been a region characterized with fierce violent conflict for more than a decade. The conflict is between successive Nigerian Governments and their collaborating oil companies, and militant groups from the region. And the core issues in the conflict are the socio-economic deprivations and denial of resource control which were occasioned by corporate malfeasance and indifference of successive Nigerian Governments to the plight, demands and aspirations of the people of the region. The Nigerian Government who first aggravated the violent conflict in the region through the use of violent repression as an anti-protest measure however proposed an amnesty policy in June 2009 as a non-violent measure to address the crisis in the region. The policy aimed solely at disarming, rehabilitating and reintegrating the militants into the Nigerian state. The implementation of the policy brought a relative peace to the long troubled region for the first time, with the seeming compliance of the militants. This study however argues that the policy has no feasibility of ensuring a genuine and lasting peace in the long troubled region because its focus is not on the root cause of the crisis. Thus it argues that addressing the issue of human rights whose lack is the root cause of the crisis and whose provision has always been demands and the aspirations of the people will instead engender a genuine and lasting peace in the region.

[pt] Esta pesquisa propõe-se a confrontar a decisão tomada pelo Supremo Tribunal Federal no julgamento da ADPF 153, com a posterior e divergente sentença da Corte Interamericana de Direitos Humanos proferida no caso Gomes Lund e outros vs. Brasil, referente ao evento conhecido como Guerrilha do Araguaia. Ambas as decisões envolvem a temática da justiça de transição no Brasil e analisaram a extensão e validade da anistia concedida pela Lei 6.683/79 às violações de direitos humanos ocorridas durante o regime militar brasileiro. Os resultados desses julgamentos, porém, foram fundamentalmente opostos. O STF, em abril de 2010, declarou a constitucionalidade e eficácia da Lei de Anistia brasileira, mantendo (e reafirmando) a interpretação oficial, que perdura desde 1979, de que essa lei obstaculiza o julgamento dos crimes comuns praticados por agentes da repressão contra civis durante o regime militar. Posteriormente e de modo contrário, a CIDH, em novembro de 2010, expressamente declarou carente de efeitos jurídicos essa mesma legislação e responsabilizou internacionalmente o Estado brasileiro por sua postura anistiante. O estudo se inicia demonstrando a vinculação jurídica do Estado brasileiro ao aparato normativo internacional dos direitos humanos, nos planos global e regional, e sua submissão à jurisdição da Corte Interamericana. Na seqüência, evidencia os fundamentos utilizados para sustentar as confrontantes decisões do STF e da CIDH. Por fim, traça uma análise acerca dos resultados desses dois julgamentos e suas consequências para o trato da justiça de transição no Brasil, nos seus aspectos de justiça, verdade, memória, reparação e reformas institucionais. / [en] This research proposes to confront the decision of the Brazil’s Supreme Federal Court in the ADPF 153’s judgment with the subsequent and divergent sentence of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights handed down in the case Gomes Lund and others vs. Brazil, refered to the event known as Araguaia Guerrilla. Both decisions involve the theme of Brazil’s transitional justice and analyzed the extent and validity of the amnesty granted by Law 6.683/79 to human rights violations, occurred during the brazilian military regime. The results of these trials, however, were fundamentally opposite to each other. Brazil’s Supreme Federal Court, in April of 2010, declared the constitutionality and efficacy of the brazilian Amnesty Law, maintaining (and reaffirming) the official interpretation, tha lasts since 1979, that this law doesn’t allow the prosecution of ordinary crimes committed by agents of repression against civilians during the military regime. Afterwards and in a contrary way, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, in November of 2010, expressly declared that the same law has no legal effects and blamed the brazilian State internationally, precisely because of its amnestied stance. The study starts demonstrating the legal linkage of the the brazilian State to the international legal apparatus of human rights, at the global and regional levels, and its submission to the Inter-American Court’s jurisdiction. Subsequently, it evidences the arguments used to support the oppositte deciosions of the SFC and the IACHR. Finally, it outlines an analysis about those two judgements and their consequences for the treatment of transitional justice in Brazil, considering its aspects of justice, truth, memory, reparation and institutional reforms.

A presente dissertação de mestrado desenvolve um estudo comparado sobre os significados de democracia formulados pelo Movimento Feminino pela Anistia, no Brasil, e pelas Mães da Praça de Maio, na Argentina, durante a transição dos regimes autoritários, entre os anos de 1970 e 1980. Busca-se analisar de que maneira e por que razões os dois grupos passaram a tratar de democracia em seus discursos, identificando as relações entre os significados e as reivindicações levantadas por ambas as entidades durante a ditadura. O trabalho pretende também examinar o contexto em que essas ideias foram criadas, comparando com as perspectivas de democracia levantadas por outros grupos políticos e sociais, como os intelectuais. Trata-se, enfim, de investigar a articulação entre direitos humanos e democracia feita pelo Movimento Feminino pela Anistia e pelas Mães da Praça de Maio, reconstituindo o lugar desses dois grupos em um debate em que se definia a construção de democracia nesses países / This dissertation develops a comparative study on the meanings of democracy formulated by the Womens Movement for Amnesty, in Brazil, and the Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo, in Argentina, during the transition from authoritarian regimes, between the years 1970 and 1980. Seeks to analyze how and for what reasons the two groups began treating democracy in his speeches, identifying the relationships between the meanings and the claims raised by both parties during the dictatorship. The work also aims to examine the context in which these ideas were created, compared with the prospects of democracy raised by other political and social groups such as intellectuals. It is, finally, to investigate the relationship between human rights and democracy made by the Women\'s Movement for Amnesty and the Mothers of Plaza de Mayo rights, reconstituting the place of these two groups in a debate in which he defined the construction of democracy in these countries

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-26T20:24:13Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Heloisa Helena de Almeida Portugal.pdf: 1331064 bytes, checksum: a15c9fcaca12ca55a3253171173e79b7 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2016-02-12 / Objective with this doctoral thesis demonstrate the viability of law-keeping Brazilian act of grace declared obstacle to compliance with the ruling to the detriment of Brazil for the Inter-American Court of Human Rights within the framework of the Case of Gomes Lund et al (Araguaia guerrilla movement) vs. . Brazil, 24.11.2010 sentence. It stands out, moreover, that a month before the court to rule in this sentence by a provision of Law 6,683 / 1979, the Supreme Court in ADPF 153 / DF judged incorporated this law by the Constitution of 1988. It appears that the Brazilian democratic formation compared in particular with the countries of South America, they showed different times, while in Brazil the transition took place through a negotiated political process and in the context of democratic transition, as a rule, in Latin America the amnesty occurs by imposition. Considering the inter-American system of human rights, the obligations and the international responsibility of State headquarters of violation of fundamental principles, it is concluded that the Supreme Court and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights consists of horizontal and complementary bodies. Having autonomy and government discretion to the decision of the supreme national court / Objetiva-se com a presente tese doutoral demonstrar a viabilidade de manutenção da Lei de Anistia brasileira declarada como óbice ao cumprimento da decisão proferida a desfavor do Brasil pela Corte Interamericana de Direitos Humanos no marco do Caso Gomes Lund e outros (Guerrilha do Araguaia) vs. Brasil, com sentença de 24.11.2010. Destaca-se, ademais, que um mês antes da Corte pronunciar-se nesta sentença pela nulidade da Lei 6.683/1979, o STF na ADPF 153/DF julgou recepcionado dita lei pela Constituição Federal de 1988. Verifica-se que a formação democrática brasileira se comparada em especial, com os países da América do Sul, apresentaram momentos distintos, enquanto no Brasil a transição deu-se através de um processo político negociado e no âmbito da transição democrática, via de regra, na América Latina a anistia ocorre por imposição. Considerando o sistema interamericano de direitos humanos, as obrigações decorrentes e a responsabilidade internacional de Estado em sede de violação de preceitos fundamentais, conclui-se que o Supremo Tribunal Federal e a Corte Interamericana de Direitos Humanos consistem em órgãos horizontais e complementares. Havendo autonomia e discricionariedade governamental para a decisão da suprema corte nacional

As catástrofes coletivas impostas pelos regimes autoritários, sejam eles racistas, tal como o apartheid na África do Sul, sejam eles diretamente políticos, tal como a ditadura militar no Brasil, implicam esforços diários de reflexão e ação política. O que caracteriza estes governos é a violação aos direitos de seus cidadãos por meio de um brutal aparato policial-militar. E o pior: todo esse esquema foi montado e mantido pelo Estado, que institucionalizou a prisão, a tortura, o desaparecimento e o assassinato. As sociedades têm enfrentado o seguinte problema: como conciliar o passado doloroso com um presente democrático, administrando os conflitos que com a mera passagem institucional de um governo de exceção para um democrático não se encerraram. Isto porque as violações aos direitos humanos não se restringiram às instituições políticas, mas, indo muito além, atingiram os indivíduos e alteraram significativamente a subjetividade dessas sociedades. A oposição entre a razão política pacificadora do Estado e as memórias doloridas sobre a ditadura militar brasileira obstrui a expressão pública da dor e reduz a memória às emoções privadas. A sociedade sul-africana, valorizando as narrativas, tornou públicas estas experiências ao divulgar as narrativas construídas em seu espaço, criando um impacto na sociedade, seja em suas subjetividades ou mesmo nas políticas públicas adotadas posteriormente. Abriu mão de punir quem confessasse tudo, em nome de uma conciliação nacional. Já no Brasil, a conciliação promovida entre a anistia de 1979 e a democratização de 1985 teve por preço a omissão das memórias do horror. Nossa idéia é que diante da queda de investimento no diálogo e na convivência pública democrática, a publicidade dos traumas e ressentimentos por meio das narrativas poderia contribuir para a consumação do luto e para o aprimoramento dos elos sociais. / The collective catastrophes imposed by authoritarian regimes, be they of racist character, like apartheid in South Africa, or be they of strictly political character, like the military dictatorship in Brazil, require daily efforts of reflection as well as political action. These governments were characterized by their systematic violation of their citizens\' rights by brutal military and police apparatus. Worst of all, the whole scheme was set up and maintained by a State which institutionalized imprisonment, torture, disappearance and murder. Thus, these societies are left today to face a difficult issue: how to reconcile such painful past with a democratic present, and still manage the conflicts that do not end with a mere institutional passage from a dictatorial government to a democratic one. Human rights violations were not limited to political institutions, but went far beyond; they reached individuals, and they modified the subjectivity of those societies significantly. The opposition between the State pacificatory political reason and the painful memories regarding Brazilian military dictatorship obstructs public expression of pain and reduces memory to private emotions. In contrast, by valuing the narratives of the past, the South African society tried to recover the memory of the painful moments making these experiences public by publishing their narratives. South Africans gave up punishing those State criminals with the only condition they would confess everything, in order to foster a national conciliation. In Brazil, however, the ideal of a national conciliation to put an end to military rule paid the huge price of silencing the memories of pain, torture, and death. This had an impact on society, on its subjectivity and even on the public politics adopted later. Our point of view is that due to the lack of investment in the dialogue and in the democratic social communion the publicizing of traumas and resentments by means of narratives could contribute to realization of the mourning, thus promoting social bonds.