EJIL: Debate!

• Davis, Kevin E 1

Abstract

Anne Peters proposes to use international human rights law as a lens for analysing corrupt acts or omissions.1 Her proposal fits squarely within the tradition of thinking that ‘every little bit helps’ when it comes to combatting corruption.2 Peters does not offer, however, any convincing reason to believe that human rights analysis is helpful in this context. In other words, she fails to explain how human rights analysis adds value, especially given the considerable effort required to show that any given corrupt act qualifies as a human rights violation and the sophistication of the existing anti-corruption regime. In this reply, I sketch an answer to this question that emphasizes the informational role of human rights analysis. I argue that human rights analysis plays a valuable role in anti-corruption efforts to the extent it helps to produce information about the incidence and moral significance of corruption.

• 1Beller Family Professor of Business Law, New York University School of Law, USA