Date of Publication

2018

Document Type

Master's Thesis

Degree Name

Master of Arts in International Studies Major in European Studies

College

College of Liberal Arts

Department/Unit

International Studies

Thesis Adviser

Charmaine Misalucha Willoughby

Defense Panel Chair

John Phillip P. Binondo

Defense Panel Member

Alejandro Christian D. Soler
Francis Rico C. Domingo
Jazmin B. Llana

Abstract/Summary

The European Union is widely known as one of the foremost polities that staunchly promotes democracy and human rights around the world. Lodged under its global agenda of promoting human rights is its exportation of the abolition of capital punishment. Internally, it has effectively abolished the death penalty and currently no EU member-state implements capital punishment. Externally, it promotes this using its European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights by funding projects in, and issuing demarches against countries that retain the death penalty. The campaign has so far seen success in abolishing it in developing states such as the Philippines. However, its experience in promoting abolitionism towards super executioner states, or those states that execute convicts in large numbers is dismal. Despite the EUs massive efforts, it seems that these super executioners merely shrug off the EUs calls for abolitions. Using Finnemore and Sikkinks Norm Life Cycle Lens to aptly plot the process by which the EU promotes abolitionism, it will be shown why the EU has failed to promote this norm toward super executioners, despite evidence of it being successful toward other states that implemented capital punishment such as the Philippines. This study will rely on a case study approach, specifically analyzing the cases of two notable super executioners that also provide a sample for both developing and developed super executioner states: China and the US. Comparison of these cases will be done using Mills Most Different Systems Method to show how and why the EU has failed. Using the Norm Life Cycle to analyze the EUs promotion process in both cases and comparing them using Mills MDSM, a very clear comparative process will show where the EU had lapses, whether these are lapses too great to be rectified, and whether the blame is solely the EUs or not.

Abstract Format

html

Language

English

Format

Electronic

Accession Number

CDTG007650

Shelf Location

Archives, The Learning Commons, 12F Henry Sy Sr. Hall

Physical Description

1 computer disc ; 4 3/4 in.

Keywords

Capital punishment; Capital punishment--China; Capital punishment--United States; Capital punishment--Europe

Upload Full Text

wf_yes

Download

Share

COinS