Human Rights Violations and Post-election Protest

• Author: Svitlana Chernykh,Sam R. Bell
• Published date: 01 June 2019
• Date: 01 June 2019
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/1065912918793153
• Subject Matter: Articles

https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912918793153

Political Research Quarterly

2019, Vol. 72(2) 460 –472

© 2018 University of Utah

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/1065912918793153

journals.sagepub.com/home/prq

Article

On November 4, 2012, hundreds of people filled the

streets of Kyiv, Ukraine to protest over “stolen” elec-

tions. The opposition argued that the party of the presi-

dent, Viktor Yanukovych, rigged the vote of the

parliamentary election that took place on October 28.1

However, the president and his allies were known for

more than just rigging the ballot boxes. At the time of the

election, the leading figure of the Ukrainian opposition

and former prime minister, Yulia Tymoshenko, was

imprisoned on charges that, many argued, were politi-

cally motivated. Furthermore, a year before the election,

Amnesty International issued a report noting a signifi-

cant deterioration of human rights in the country since

Yanukovych took office in 2010. Among other viola-

tions, the organization pointed to an increase in the num-

ber of allegations of torture and other ill treatment as

well as restrictions on the freedom of speech and assem-

bly (Amnesty International 2011).

Ukraine is not alone. In the last three decades, more

than 15 percent of all elections worldwide were fol-

lowed by riots and post-election protests (Hyde and

Marinov 2012, 2014). In many instances, opposition

claimed fraud, but at the same time, the societies were

struggling with more than just dirty elections. Are post-

election protests driven solely by the reaction of the

population to election fraud? Or do general government

actions toward the population also have an impact on

whether individuals are willing to collectively mobilize

in response to election outcomes? In this manuscript, we

examine whether violations of human rights have an

impact on whether protests and riots occur in response

to election results.

Given existing research on human rights, repression,

and causes of post-election protest, there are two possible

effects that human rights abuses can have. First, it is pos-

sible that repression serves as a deterrent to mass mobili-

zation against election outcomes due to the potential

physical costs to the population. Second, it is possible

that human rights violations serve to “micro-mobilize”

the population, thus making it easier to collectively orga-

nize in response to an election outcome, as a result

increasing the probability of protest occurring.

We refine those existing claims and theorize that gov-

ernments have a menu of repression tactics at their dis-

posal and that some human rights violations are more

likely to increase post-election protests than others. We

identify three dimensions that explain this variation: con-

nection to election outcome, connection to incumbent

793153PRQXXX10.1177/1065912918793153Political Research QuarterlyBell and Chernykh

research-article2018

1Kansas State University, Manhattan, Kansas, USA

2The Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital

Territory, Australia

Corresponding Author:

Sam R. Bell, Department of Political Science, Kansas State University,

101C Calvin Hall, Manhattan, KS 66506, USA.

Email: sbell3@k-state.edu

Human Rights Violations and

Post-election Protest

Sam R. Bell1 and Svitlana Chernykh2

Abstract

How do human rights violations affect post-election protest? Until recently, post-election protests have been explained

primarily by election-related factors such as the level of manipulation and the quality of electoral institutions. We argue

that there are three dimensions along which human rights violations influence post-election protest: (1) the physical

cost to protesters, (2) the ability to connect the violation to an election outcome, and (3) the ability to connect the

repressive action to the government. Using this framework, we identify political imprisonment as the physical integrity

right violation most likely to increase the probability of post-election protest. We test our hypotheses empirically

with data on all national-level elections in the world between 1982 and 2012. We find that political imprisonment, a

violation easily connected to government action and election outcomes, and less costly physically than other physical

integrity rights violations, increases the probability of post-election protest.

Keywords

post-election protest, human rights, political imprisonment, election fraud