State repression and elite support for international human rights: Evidence from South Korean legislators’ democratization experiences

Are politicians who have previously experienced human rights violations more supportive of promoting human rights abroad? Much of the literature on human rights advocacy has centered on actors at the international or state levels. By contrast, this article focuses on individual politicians and their personal life experiences. Understanding variations in commitment to global human rights among political leaders within a country is particularly important in legislative resolutions where each legislator’s roll-call vote directly impacts a bill’s outcome. I argue that legislators with firsthand experience of state repression are more likely to support promoting international human rights. Their shared experience with foreign victims fosters greater empathy and a moral obligation to stand with them. They also have electoral motivations, as human rights promotion is an issue of their ownership and aligns with voter expectations. I test my theory using original micro-level data on South Korean legislators’ state repression experiences during the country’s democratization in the 1980s and their roll-call votes on global human rights between 2020 and 2023. I address two major barriers to inference, generational and selection effects, by comparing politicians from the same generation who participated in protests based on the intensity of violence they experienced. I find that those who experienced severe forms of repression, such as torture, injury, and imprisonment, are more likely to support promoting human rights in other countries than those who faced lower-level repression. The results suggest that prior repressed experience is an important source of political elites’ preferences for international human rights, a topic that has received little attention in previous research.