BookPDF Available

Mirrors of Justice: Law and Power in the Post–Cold War Era

Authors:

Abstract

Mirrors of Justice is a groundbreaking study of the meanings of and possibilities for justice in the contemporary world. The book brings together a group of prominent and emerging scholars to reconsider the relationship of justice, international law, culture, power, and history through case studies of a wide range of justice processes. The book’s eighteen authors examine the ambiguities of justice in Europe, Africa, Latin America, Asia, the Middle East, and Melanesia through critical empirical and historical chapters. The introduction makes an important contribution toour understanding of the multiplicity of justice in the twenty-first century by providing an interdisciplinary theoretical framework that synthesizes the book’s chapters with leading-edge literatures on human rights, legal pluralism, and international law.
A preview of the PDF is not available
Article
en This paper argues that a politics of scale plays a fundamental but uninterrogated role in internationalised criminal justice processes such as hybrid tribunals. Scale discourses—producing specific notions of “the international” and “the local”—are so naturalised in these endeavours that their regressive effects remain unacknowledged. Following Annelise Riles’ ground-breaking analysis of the politics of scale in colonial law, and feminist critiques of scale discourse in accounts of globalisation and conflict, we think critically about “the international” and “the local” in a postcolonial and post-conflict justice context. Using the case of the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC), we specifically examine the operation and effects of discourses of “international standards” and “local ownership”. We argue that denaturalising scale in international criminal justice would serve a wider project to decolonise international law and address the specific forms of disenfranchisement currently enacted by dominant “scales of justice”. Abstract km អត្ថបទនេះវែកញែកទាញហេតុផលថា មាត្រដ្ឋាននយោបាយដើរតួយ៉ាងសំខាន់ ប៉ុន្តែមិនមានការចោទសួរ នៅក្នុងដំណើរការយុត្តិធម៌ព្រហ្មទណ្ឌអន្តរជាតិ មានដូចជាសាលាក្តីកូនកាត់ជាដើម។ ការពិភាក្សាវែកញែកអំពីមាត្រដ្ឋាន - បង្កើតឱ្យមានទស្សនទានជាក់លាក់នៃ “អន្តរជាត” និង “ក្នុងស្រុក” - ក្លាយទៅជារឿងធម្មតាពេកណាស់ទៅហើយនៅក្នុងការខ្នះខ្នែងទាំងនេះ ដែលធ្វើឱ្យផលវិបាកនៃដំណើរថយក្រោយទាំងនេះ នៅតែពុំមានការទទួលស្គាល់។ បន្ទាប់ពីការវិភាគលើកដំបូងរបស Annelise Riles អំពីមាត្រដ្ឋាននយោបាយនៅក្នុង ច្បាប់អាណានិគម និងការរិះគន់ចំពោះភាពស្ត្រីនិយមស្ដីពីការពិភាក្សាវែកញែកនៃមាត្រដ្ឋាន នៅក្នុងដំណើររឿងនៃសកលភាវូបនីយកម្ម និងជម្លោះនោះមក យើងគិតយ៉ាងដិតដល់អំពី “អន្តរជាត” និង “ក្នុងស្រុក” ’នៅក្នុងបរិបទយុត្តិធម៌សម័យក្រោយអាណានិគម និងក្រោយពេលជម្លោះ។ ដោយប្រើរឿងក្តីរបស់អង្គជំនុំជម្រះវិសាមញ្ញក្នុងតុលាការកម្ពុជា (ECCC) យើងពិនិត្យជាពិសេស អំពីប្រតិបត្តិការ និងផលប៉ះពាល់នៃសុន្ទរកថាស្ដីព“ស្តង់ដារអន្តរជាត” និង “កម្មសិទ្ធិក្នុងស្រុក’។ យើងវែកញែកទាញហេតុផលថា ការបង្កើតឱ្យមានមាត្រដ្ឋានមិនធម្មតានៅក្នុងយុត្តិធម៌ ព្រហ្មទណ្ឌអន្តរជាតិ មុខជាបម្រើគម្រោងធំទូលាយមួយ ដើម្បីបំបាត់នូវភាពអាណានិគម និយមដល់ច្បាប់អន្តរជាតិ ហើយដោះស្រាយទម្រង់ជាក់លាក់ នៃការដកហូតសិទ្ធិដែលបាន អនុម័តនាពេលថ្មីៗនេះ ដោយ “មាត្រដ្ឋានយុត្តិធម” ប្រកបដោយអំណាច។
Article
Thinking about justice beyond law involves understanding justice as a process that campesinos (peasants) in Colombia link to aspirations for a good life. I argue that environmental justice draws on distinctive temporalities and spatial scales. By temporality, I refer to how campesinos think about justice as a process to overcome their long history of community injustice, not as a reversal of a single event or action. I also refer to campesinos’ everyday life, through which they define the territorial management underlying their enduring social inequality. Justice does not entail fixed spatial scales but rather the interplay between forms of state and local spatial orderings that may clash or coexist. These spatial‐temporal dimensions have crucial consequences for addressing environmental justice, such as redress beyond individual compensation; thinking about scale beyond legal frameworks of jurisdiction; reflecting on the unequal distribution of responsibilities for environmental changes; and addressing notions of response‐ability—that is, the capacity of campesinos to respond, not only to react, with both patience and urgency to socio‐environmental harms.
Article
Why do people experience legal institutions as effective sites for political and social transformation? How do people translate political and ethical goals into modalities of law? In Europe many have responded to a widespread sense of political crisis by turning to legal remedies and judicial institutions. One of these institutions, the European Court of Human Rights, provides shared frameworks for combating people's sense of impasse or decline. People experience the Court as a successful rights institution because it shapes and generates shared semiotic forms and repertoires. Through these, lawyers, judges, and rights advocates construct and recognize their actions as efficacious. Yet the experience of efficacy is an unequally shared resource. For some, legal frameworks are the condition of possibility for ethical and professional engagement. But for others, engaging with the law produces frustration and exclusion. Moreover, engaging in judicialized politics shapes some harms as legally legible and actionable, while it shapes others as tragedies beyond reach. [law, politics, liberalism, judicialization of politics, justice, human rights, efficacy, metapragmatics, Europe]
Article
Full-text available
This article explores the political implications of opposition to war, focusing on the example of conscientious objection to military service. Conscientious objection is often treated as a fundamentally ethical issue; however, this article argues for centering questions of justice in analyses of responses to war. There is a risk that starting with ethics takes for granted the social significance of ethical responses and overlooks particular ethical practices in the reproduction of wider inequalities. More specifically, when an issue is narrowly framed in terms of ethics, it can have implications for who is allowed to speak and what they can speak about. Thinking about war as an issue of justice—in the sense of how society allocates the things that it values—allows the broader issues of hierarchy, distribution, and recognition to be in the foreground. The article focuses on the example of an Indian subject of the British Empire who applied for exemption from military service during the Second World War. The valorization on conscience by the British state prioritized a limited form of opposition to bloodshed grounded in personal moral scruples, to the exclusion of anti‐imperial self‐determination, and turned the war into an issue of individual ethics rather than global inequality.
Article
In Indian-controlled Kashmir, local residents express aspirations for freedom from Indian-militarized governance even as they demand state accountability for pervasive everyday violence. Kashmiris negotiate this complexity through jurisdictional contestation, asserting alternative forms of authority to speak about law and develop strategies for justice and political transformation. Drawing from sociolegal literatures of jurisdiction and global legal pluralism, we analyze a Kashmiri community forum confronting institutional denial in a prominent case of sexual violence and murder involving state armed forces. We analyze how Kashmiri actors from diverse normative communities drew on popular understandings of law to claim competing forms of authority, give meaning to the case, and develop strategies of response. We also explore how participants, through the work of jurisdictional contestation, made global legal ideas locally meaningful and relied on jurisdictional myths of struggle and justice to motivate resistance and establish spaces of hope.
Chapter
This chapter scrutinizes norm contestation over the right to prior consultation and free, prior and informed consent (FPIC) and argues that the lack of a shared understanding of this norm substantially contributes to the widespread non-compliance with this right. The analysis focuses on the contested social practices with regard to the regulation and implementation of the consultation and consent right in the extractive industries. The paper’s theoretical framework draws on and contributes to debates on norm contestation and norm compliance led by scholars of international relations and on the practice of human rights led by legal anthropologists. As Bolivia, Colombia and Peru are the Latin American countries that have implemented prior consultation processes with indigenous and African-American communities in their extractive industries most systematically, the chapter is mainly based on empirical data from these countries. This study finds that divergent claims of authority, territorial control and decision-making coexist within the analysed domestic contexts and that these divergences lie at the root of the fierce contestations over indigenous participatory rights. In addition, such divergent claims or competing resource sovereignties are embedded within power asymmetries that clearly work in favour of strategic economic interests to extract natural resources and disadvantage strong indigenous and participatory rights. I argue that the contestations concerning the right to prior consultation and FPIC are so profound that under current conditions the emergence of a shared understanding of this norm is very improbable.
Chapter
International criminal court trials are a recent addition to the landscape of law, dispute resolution and “justice” in Africa. Legal anthropology has a rich history within the anthropology of Africa: many of the earliest ethnographers of law worked in Africa and concentrated on the study of legal disputes. The study of legal disputes has survived the many changes that have occurred in the discipline ‐ and the world ‐ since these early texts were published. This chapter considers some of the new contexts in which African legal realms are currently being analyzed, to enquire into the extent to which they build upon, and contest, earlier approaches. Three scholars stand out as pioneers of legal anthropology in Africa: Isaac Schapera, Paul Bohannan, and Max Gluckman. Dominic Ongwen's trial expresses that questions of law, dispute resolution, and justice are fundamentally questions about morality, agency, authority, and institutions.
Article
This special issue of The Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law brings together legal anthropologists and legal scholars who share a common commitment to understanding law's formative and constitutive role in relation to the social, cultural, and political dynamics of occupation. The authors draw upon and extend recent work on the emergence of new forms of military, multilateral, and humanitarian occupations, and their roles in reinforcing institutionalized violence against occupied peoples. Contributions in this volume treat occupation as a distinct object of legal and cultural analysis, revealing its similarities as well as its departures from colonial and postcolonial modes of state and military sovereignty. The special issue seeks to move beyond the limitations of existing cultural and legal frameworks and towards a context-driven mode of understanding the varied and flexible state practices of occupants and the legal texts and juridical decisions that shape the nature of their authority. At the same time, ethnographic analyses shed light on the collective memories and lived experiences that shape people's everyday relationships to the state and its military power.
Article
For decades, families in Lebanon have fought in vain for the release of information about their missing relatives. Their struggle has become increasingly entangled in a transnational configuration of experts, discourses, and practices, a configuration that is sustained by the humanitarian imperative to alleviate suffering and by an appeal to trauma, victimhood, and human rights. This appeal animates new legal and judicial forms of activism that have expanded the scope of the families’ rights, compelled the government to release long-held information, and urged it to enact reforms in accordance with international standards. The convergence of these processes extends a framework of compassionate global governance that is supposed to work on behalf of subjects who are construed as victims and whose experience is essentially one of suffering.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.