What does "judicial defection" refer to in Huneeus' work?

In Huneeus' analysis, "judicial defection" specifically refers to the situation where national courts disregard or ignore international human rights standards. This concept examines how judiciary systems may fail to integrate international obligations into their legal frameworks, thereby undermining the protection and promotion of human rights at the domestic level. When judges choose not to apply international legal norms or choose to interpret them narrowly, this behavior represents a retreat from their commitments to uphold such standards.

The term emphasizes the consequences of this disregard, which can lead to significant gaps in the enforcement of human rights protections and can foster an environment where violations may occur more freely. Therefore, understanding judicial defection is critical in analyzing how legal institutions contribute to or detract from the realization of international human rights goals.

Judicial promotion of human rights, active compliance with international court rulings, and judicial activism promoting local laws do not align with the concept of "judicial defection," as they all imply a favorable or proactive approach towards upholding international human rights standards, which is contrary to the notion of defecting from these commitments.