Networked Authority: How Do Human Rights Treaty Bodies Shape Discourses Through Non-Binding Law-Making?

Treaty bodies of international and regional human rights institutions are central to monitoring, implementing, and even informal law-making of global rights standards in member states. But how can such institutions gain these influences despite severe legal limitations in their official mandates? Previous research suggests that treaty bodies expand their law-making abilities through networks of experts that span local organizational boundaries. However, existing theory additionally emphasizes discourse's systematic power, proposing that treaty bodies' institutional influence stems not only from actor interactions but also from the diffuse effects of their discourse. This paper argues that the influence of human rights law-making bodies with limited legal authority relies not only on agent networks but also on unique discursive networks that span institutions. This networked discourse structure offers a new explanatory dimension of organizational quests for authority and legitimacy in contested policy spaces. The paper examines these discourses through the citation network of non-binding general comments and recommendations linked to formal law-making in international and regional organizations. Using a dataset on references between binding and non-binding human rights documents and employing social network analysis, it demonstrates that general comments and recommendations exert discourse power by connecting separate human rights debates and institutions. These discursive focal nodes provide agentic networks with legitimate reference points to shape new human rights standards.