Review of Transnational Lawmaking Coalitions for Human Rights

A strong contribution to international studies’ scientific ontology of human rights processes, Transnational Lawmaking Coalitions in Human Rights illuminates and dissects a hitherto underappreciated but influential process through which non-state actors influence the interpretation and thus implementation of human rights law. Indeed, getting down among the weeds of human rights treaty bodies’ lawmaking processes, Reiners emerges with a compelling account of how an informal, important if transient, actor, she calls Transnational Lawmaking Coalitions (TLCs), clarifies human rights law and thereby structure states’ human rights obligations through drafting general comments. Operating across the boundaries of inter-governmental organizations, Reiners documents how TLCs emerge out of the “opportunity structure” generated by the recurring need to clarify human rights law and the chronic underfunding of human rights treaty expert bodies (p. 55). Composing of at least one of the treaty body’s appointed expert members, we have a case of TLC when members of the expert body then reach outside to utilize expertise within their professional networks for drafting a general comment. According to Reiners, working outside formal processes, these expert networks conduct their work on a shoestring budget lubricated primarily with the social capital, professional recognition, and moral conviction (p. 57). While lacking formalized processes for engaging with stakeholders, TLCs nonetheless render what can become authoritative new human rights interpretations, largely beyond the purvey or at least the direct influence of the state parties (pp. 22–4). As Reiners put it, TLCs “emerge from” and “operate through” the formal bodies but are not formal institutional entities themselves nor directly employed by state parties (p. 46). In this way, TLCs can be understood as exploiting a loophole in the human rights architecture through which non-state actors can bypass deadlocked formal treaty-making processes (p. 142–3).