| E-mail: | meepif |
| Room: | 5.024 |
| Office hours: | Tuesday 11-12
Thursday 15-16 |
| Website address: | http://www.polsci.org/epifanio/ |
| Qualifications: | BA in Political Science (University of Pavia, Italy).
MA in Theory and Practice of Human Rights (Human Rights Centre, University of Essex).
MA in Politics (Department of Government, University of Essex).
|
| Research interests: | Determinants of Antiterrorist Reforms, Regulatory Competition in Counterterrorist Policies, International Counterterrorist Treaties and Domestic Counterterrorist Policies.
|
| Teaching responsibilities: | GV 200 - Political Analysis.
GV 271 - West European Politics.
|
| Publications: | 'Legislative Response to International Terrorism' (2011). Journal of Peace Research, vol. 48 (3): 399-411 |
| Study areas: | Comparative European Politics
Counterterrorism
International Relations
International Political Economy
Institutional Determinants of Reforms and Reforms Delay |
| Supervisor: | Professor Thomas Plümper |
| Thesis title: | Political Accountability, the Risk of Terrorism and the Legislative Response to International Terrorism:Counterterrorist Regulations and Civil Freedoms in Western Liberal Democracies |
| Abstract: |
The terrorist attacks in the USA and Europe triggered different antiterrorist reforms across liberal democracies. My research project relates this variation in legislation to a combination of two factors: threat perception and countries’ institutional and partisan arrangements. On the one hand, more exposed countries were more likely to increase their level of security laws. Percentage of Muslims, past colonialist experience and countries’ economic power enter in this threat perception function. On the other hand, institutional and partisan settings explain the extent of governments’ legislative interventions. For low levels of terrorism perception, right-wing governments were likely to implement more security regulations whereas less accountable governments had more margins of maneuver for opportunistic reactions at all threat levels.
Not only governments responded to international terrorism by increasing their overall level of legislative antiterrorist measures. Threat perception being equal, some countries responded to terrorism by decreasing the level of civil freedoms for everyone within a constituency, others chose a targeted legislative response which mainly cut back the legal protection of foreigners and the immigration regimes of asylum seekers. I find that patterns of targeted legislation were more pronounced in countries governed by right-wing incumbents and in countries where a single-party rather than coalition government dominated in the cabinet. Finally, higher levels of ethnic and cultural homogeneity in societies were likely to trigger legislative measures mainly interfering with the rights of immigrants and foreign foes.
This project relies on a novel dataset, Legislative Responses to International Terrorism, LeRIT, which collects and codify 30 antiterrorist regulations in a sample of 20 democracies, 2000-08. This dataset covers legislation governments may implement with the intention of reducing the risk of terrorist attacks. LeRIT comprises of, inter alia, regulations dealing with the rights of the executive to intercept, collect and store communications for anti-terrorist purposes, changes in pre-charge detention for terror suspects and modifications of immigration regimes. The overall findings of this project suggest that the trade-off between liberty and security not only does exist but it is also known by politicians: after September 11, 2001 some governments implemented legislation which did not stem from pure evaluations of risk assessment.
|
| Conferences/presentations: | 2011: Threat Perception, Political Institutions, and the Legislatives Response to Al-Qaeda Terrorism.
Presented at the 1st European Political Science Association (EPSA). Dublin.
2011: Responding to Al-Qaeda: Antiterrorist Legislation in 20 Liberal Democracies]. Presented at the 69th
Annual Midwest Political Science Association (MPSA). Chicago.
2011: Targeted versus Untargeted Responses to International Terrorism: Why some Governments
dominantly reduce the legal guarantees of Foreigners and Immigrants and others don’t” Presented at
the 69th Annual Midwest Political Science Association (MPSA). Chicago.
2010: Disproportionate Legislative Response to International Terrorism”. Presented at the 68th Annual
Midwest Political Science Association (MPSA). Chicago.
2009: Legislative Response to International Terrorism” Presented at the 5th ECPR General Conference-
European Consortium for Political Research. Potsdam.
|