This study examines the role of international human rights norms and the achievements of transnational human rights networks in contributing to sustained changes in human rights practices in Indonesia and the Philippines. It proceeds from the observation that in both cases, the Philippines and Indonesia, transnational concerns for human rights have translated into visible improvements in governmental approaches toward human rights and ultimately human rights practices. This process has taken much longer in the Indonesian case than in the Philippine one. In the Philippines, a sustained change of human rights practices is observable since 1992, while in the Indonesian case important changes in human rights practices have only recently become visible. Although significant changes in human rights practices occurred only after regime change (Philippines 1986, Indonesia 1998) selective measures to improve the human rights situation were taken before these formal changes and can be considered as constitutive parts in an explanation of human rights change. Given the empirical evidence, the study addresses the following questions: What accounts for sustained improvements in human rights practices in the Philippines and Indonesia? What accounts for the variation in time or the pace this process has taken or why has human rights change taken so much longer in Indonesia than in the Philippines? What is the process through which these changes came about? And why did repressive governments eventually implement measures to improve the human rights situation, after having committed gross and systematic human rights violations for decades? In addressing these questions the study argues that changes in human rights practices come about as a result of transnational pressures for human rights change, which simultaneously submit human rights violating governments to pressures from “above” and “below”. The process through which international human rights norms influence the behaviour of human rights violating states is best described by a phase model, the spiral model of human rights change. This model explains human rights change in terms of a mobilisation of other states, which pressurise authoritarian rulers and induce them to make tactical concessions to these international demands for human rights change. International pressure not only imposes constraints on the action repertoire of authoritarian governments, it actively supports the emergence of political space in which civil society can re-emerge and of a public sphere, in which opposition groups can discuss the collective alternative projects for the future. The interaction develops a dynamic, which can lead to marked changes in human rights policies, or the breakdown of authoritarian rule. The study focuses particularly on the role of public deliberation in this process of human rights change. International reports focus attention on and politicise precisely those power structures which enable human rights violations, but are effectively removed from a public critique by the civil society because of the authoritarian nature of the target state. Transnational human rights networks engage authoritarian rulers in a discourse over human rights violations from an international level, demand justifications for authoritarian rule and hold authoritarian regimes accountable to these justifications. Transnational human rights networks can thus provide a legitimacy challenge to authoritarian regimes, but their effectiveness ultimately depends on their ability to convince opposition groups in the civil society of their claims.