The Role of Civil Society Organisations in Realising International Human Rights: A Case Study on the American Civil Liberties Union and Universal Periodic Review

Oleschuk, Melisa (2026) The Role of Civil Society Organisations in Realising International Human Rights: A Case Study on the American Civil Liberties Union and Universal Periodic Review. Doctoral thesis, Birmingham City University.

Preview	Text Melisa Oleschuk PhD Thesis_Final Version_Final Award January 2026.pdf - Accepted Version Download (6MB)
	Spreadsheet Melisa Oleschuk PhD Thesis 4. APPENDIX_2_FRAME_Matrix_TEMPLATE.xlsx - Accepted Version Download (127kB)
Preview	Text Melisa Oleschuk PhD Thesis 6. APPENDIX_4_Excel_Formulae.pdf - Accepted Version Download (175kB)

Abstract

The United Nations’ (UN) Universal Periodic Review (UPR) facilitates an interactive dialogue among UN Member States, who peer-review each other’s human rights records and issue Recommendations for improvements. These Recommendations aim to ensure the State-under-Review's (SuR) compliance with international human rights (IHR) law, irrespective of signatory status. The UPR process accepts submissions from civil society organisations (CSOs) – referred to as ‘stakeholders’ – who are well-placed to report on the realities of the human rights situation in the SuR. The information and recommendations provided by CSOs are synthesised into a summary document that informs the review. CSOs, therefore, are seen as occupying a paradoxical role within the process. They are formally excluded from the interactive dialogue, yet their contributions often influence the substance of Member State Recommendations. (McMahon et al., 2013) No existing scholarship explains the strategies that condition CSOs’ visibility and uptake.

This research addresses that gap in the scholarship through a case study of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and its Campaign for Smart Justice, focusing on the United States of America’s (US) reviews in 2010, 2015, and 2020. A new socio-legal methodology – the Framework for Rights, Advocacy, Mapping, and Evaluation (FRAME) – is pioneered to systematically map ACLU recommendations against IHR standards and corresponding Member State Recommendations. The resulting dataset permits both vertical and horizontal analysis of how CSO framing interacts with IHR law, the UPR’s institutional design, and domestic advocacy.

The findings suggest an interpretive three-pronged model of good practice: (1) identity and expertise, where CSOs manifest Resolution 5/1’s “credible and reliable” clause, (2) IHR alignment, which confirms the UPR’s legal jurisdiction over an issue, and exposes gaps in the law, and (3) domestic specificity, where a CSO explicitly identifies a domestic actor to be responsible for implementation. Together, they illustrate how strategic framing can reinforce the Boomerang effect (Keck & Sikkink, 1998) of the UPR, enhancing both the CSO impact and the prospects of translating IHR norms into domestic legal reform.

Item Type:	Thesis (Doctoral)
Dates:	Date Event 23 January 2026 Accepted
Uncontrolled Keywords:	Universal Periodic Review; Civil Society; ACLU; Smart Justice; NGO Recommendations; Mapping analysis; FRAME Method; Civil Society Theory; Federalism
Subjects:	CAH15 - social sciences > CAH15-01 - sociology, social policy and anthropology > CAH15-01-02 - sociology CAH16 - law > CAH16-01 - law > CAH16-01-01 - law
Divisions:	Doctoral Research College > Doctoral Theses Collection Law and Social Sciences > Law
Depositing User:	Louise Muldowney
Date Deposited:	23 Feb 2026 14:09
Last Modified:	23 Feb 2026 14:09
URI:	https://www.open-access.bcu.ac.uk/id/eprint/16882

Actions (login required)

View Item