- Netherlands
Marlies Glasius
Universiteit van Amsterdam, Department of Politics, Faculty Member
- Free University of Amsterdam, Department of Political Science, Department Memberadd
- International Criminal Law, Civil Society, Global Civil Society, Authoritarianism, Human Security, Human Rights, and 10 moreInternational Law, Migration, International Crimes, Global Crime, International Criminal Court, Critical Approaches to International Criminal Law, International Relations, Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), Social Movements, and Political Philosophyedit
- I am a Professor of International Relations at the Department of Politics, University of Amsterdam and principal inve... moreI am a Professor of International Relations at the Department of Politics, University of Amsterdam and principal investigator of the ERC-funded project Authoritarianism in a Global Age ( more info at www.authoritarianism-global.uva.nl). My main research interests are in international criminal justice, global civil society, human security and authoritarian rule.edit
This article highlights three main problems with current conceptualizations of authoritarianism: they constitute a negative or residual category, focus excessively on elections and assume that authoritarianism is necessarily a state-level... more
This article highlights three main problems with current conceptualizations of authoritarianism: they constitute a negative or residual category, focus excessively on elections and assume that authoritarianism is necessarily a state-level phenomenon. Such ‘regime classifications’ cannot help us comment intelligently on public concerns that politicians like President Rodrigo Duterte, Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Prime Minister Viktor Orban or President Donald Trump are essentially ‘authoritarian’ leaders. This article proposes that, in order to provide political scientists with better tools to distinguish between contemporary threats to democracy and interpretations imbued by left-liberal prejudice, authoritarianism studies must be reoriented towards studying authoritarian as well as illiberal practices rather than the fairness of national elections alone. The article defines and illustrates such practices, which exist in authoritarian, democratic and transnational contexts. Comparative analysis of authoritarian and illiberal practices will help us understand conditions in which they thrive and how they are best countered.
Research Interests:
This Open Access book offers a synthetic reflection on the authors’ fieldwork experiences in seven countries within the framework of ‘Authoritarianism in a Global Age’, a major comparative research project. It responds to the demand for... more
This Open Access book offers a synthetic reflection on the authors’ fieldwork experiences in seven countries within the framework of ‘Authoritarianism in a Global Age’, a major comparative research project. It responds to the demand for increased attention to methodological rigor and transparency in qualitative research, and seeks to advance and practically support field research in authoritarian contexts. Without reducing the conundrums of authoritarian field research to a simple how-to guide, the book systematically reflects and reports on the authors’ combined experiences in (i) getting access to the field, (ii) assessing risk, (iii) navigating ‘red lines’, (iv) building relations with local collaborators and respondents, (v) handling the psychological pressures on field researchers, and (vi) balancing transparency and prudence in publishing research. It offers unique insights into this particularly challenging area of field research, makes explicit how the authors handled methodological challenges and ethical dilemmas, and offers recommendations where appropriate.
Research Interests:
This introduction to the Special Issue on ‘Authoritarian rule of populations abroad’ develops a new theory to better understand how authoritarian rule is exercised over populations abroad and to connect this extraterritorial dimension to... more
This introduction to the Special Issue on ‘Authoritarian rule of populations abroad’ develops a new theory to better understand how authoritarian rule is exercised over populations abroad and to connect this extraterritorial dimension to the character and resilience of contemporary authoritarian rule. Authoritarian states today have various motivations for tolerating or even sponsoring their population's mobility, and they have learnt to manage and offset the risks population mobility poses to them. The key to understanding the particularities of authoritarian mobility management is that it does not approach its populations, abroad or at home, as citizens with rights. The authoritarian state can adapt to the specific assets and insecurities of populations abroad with policies to include or exclude them as subjects or outlaws, as patriots or traitors, or as clients. The article concludes that authoritarian rule should not be considered a territorially bounded regime type, but rather as a mode of governing people through a distinct set of practices.
Research Interests:
Highlights • An ‘extraterritorial gap’ in political geography and comparative politics impedes analysis of authoritarian power abroad. • Authoritarian rule from the home state continues to be exercised over populations abroad. • It treats... more
Highlights
• An ‘extraterritorial gap’ in political geography and comparative politics impedes analysis of authoritarian power abroad.
• Authoritarian rule from the home state continues to be exercised over populations abroad.
• It treats nationals abroad as subjects or outlaws; patriots or traitors; clients or brokers, but never as citizens.
• Authoritarianism should be studied as a mode of governing people through a set of practices, not as a territorial regime.
• An ‘extraterritorial gap’ in political geography and comparative politics impedes analysis of authoritarian power abroad.
• Authoritarian rule from the home state continues to be exercised over populations abroad.
• It treats nationals abroad as subjects or outlaws; patriots or traitors; clients or brokers, but never as citizens.
• Authoritarianism should be studied as a mode of governing people through a set of practices, not as a territorial regime.
Research Interests:
We shed light on the discontent with and the appeal of democracy by interviewing some of the most committed critical citizens: core activists in street protests. Based on interviews in Athens, Cairo, London, and Moscow, we found that they... more
We shed light on the discontent with and the appeal of democracy by interviewing some of the most committed critical citizens: core activists in street protests. Based on interviews in Athens, Cairo, London, and Moscow, we found that they rejected representative democracy as insufficient, and believed democracy to entail having a voice and a responsibility to participate intensively in political decision-making. Activists saw themselves as engaged in prefigurative politics by fostering democratic practices within the movement and, ultimately, in society, but also raised concerns about internal power dynamics reproducing existing inequalities and exclusions. The insistence by activists that citizens have both a right and a duty to participate should be taken more seriously by political scientists and policymakers, not just as a threat to democracy and democratization, but as an opportunity. However, contemporary social movements are not straightforward sites of prefiguration, but sites of struggle between experimental and traditional forms of organizing, between inclusive aspirations and exclusive tendencies.
Research Interests:
This volume explores how the idea of civil society has been translated in different cultural contexts and examines its impact on politics worldwide. Comparing and contrasting civil society in Latin America and Eastern Europe, Western... more
This volume explores how the idea of civil society has been translated in different cultural contexts and examines its impact on politics worldwide. Comparing and contrasting civil society in Latin America and Eastern Europe, Western Europe and the United States, Africa and South Asia, and the Middle East, the contributors show that there are multiple interpretations of the concept that depend more on the particular political configuration in different parts of the world than on cultural predilections. They also demonstrate that the power of civil society depends less on abstract definitions, and more on the extent to which it is grounded in the context of actual experiences from around the world.
Based on research conducted in Athens, Cairo, London and Yerevan the article analyses the relationship between activists engaged in street protests or direct action since 2011 and NGOs. It examines how activists relate to NGOs and whether... more
Based on research conducted in Athens, Cairo, London and Yerevan the article analyses the relationship between activists engaged in street protests or direct action since 2011 and NGOs. It examines how activists relate to NGOs and whether it is possible to do sustained activism to bring about social change without becoming part of a ‘civil society industry’. The article argues that while at first glance NGOs seem disconnected from recent street activism, and activists distance themselves from NGOs, the situation is more complicated than meets the eye. It contends that the boundaries between the formal NGOs and informal groups of activists is blurred and there is much cross-over and collaboration. The article demonstrates and seeks to explain this phenomenon, which we call surreptitious symbiosis, from the micro- perspective of individual activists and NGO staff. Finally, we discuss whether this surreptitious symbiosis can be sustained and sketch three scenarios for the future.
Glasius, Marlies and Ishkanian, Armine (2014) Surreptitious symbiosis: engagement between activists and NGO's. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations . ISSN 0957-8765 (In Press)
Glasius, Marlies and Ishkanian, Armine (2014) Surreptitious symbiosis: engagement between activists and NGO's. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations . ISSN 0957-8765 (In Press)
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests: Business Ethics, Corporate Social Responsibility, International Law, Human Rights, Global Civil Society, and 9 moreVirtue Ethics, Corporate Governance, Natural Law, Philosophy Of Law, Environmental Sustainability, Ethics and economics, International Strategy, Soft Law, and Global Economic Governance
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
We shed light on the discontent with and the appeal of democracy by interviewing some of the most committed critical citizens: core activists in street protests. Based on interviews in Athens, Cairo, London, and Moscow, we found that they... more
We shed light on the discontent with and the appeal of democracy by interviewing some of the most committed critical citizens: core activists in street protests. Based on interviews in Athens, Cairo, London, and Moscow, we found that they rejected representative democracy as insufficient, and believed democracy to entail having a voice and a responsibility to participate intensively in political decision-making. Activists saw themselves as engaged in prefigurative politics by fostering democratic practices within the movement and, ultimately, in society, but also raised concerns about internal power dynamics reproducing existing inequalities and exclusions. The insistence by activists that citizens have both a right and a duty to participate should be taken more seriously by political scientists and policymakers, not just as a threat to democracy and democratization, but as an opportunity. However, contemporary social movements are not straightforward sites of prefiguration, but sites of struggle between experimental and traditional forms of organizing, between inclusive aspirations and exclusive tendencies.
I n January , Fatou Bensouda, the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC), announced the opening of the court's tenth and most recent country investigation, into alleged crimes perpetrated in Georgia during the brief ... more
I n January , Fatou Bensouda, the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC), announced the opening of the court's tenth and most recent country investigation, into alleged crimes perpetrated in Georgia during the brief Russo-Georgian War. The crimes to be investigated may include murder, destroying enemy property, attacks on a peacekeeping mission , deportation, and ethnic persecution. Bensouda intends to make arrests, put suspects on trial, and, if they are found guilty, have them convicted and punished. Meanwhile, even as Bensouda prepared this newest case, the ICC was still prosecuting a suspect in the court's very first investigation, from , against Dominic Ongwen, a commander of the Ugandan Lord's Resistance Army. These two cases can thus serve as bookends to the ICC's short history, illustrating the long arc between initial investigations and eventual trials, and highlighting the complexity and contingency of international criminal justice. In this article we ask what—if anything—is the point of all this effort, and what can and should we expect from international criminal courts? After more than a decade of work, the accomplishments of the International Criminal Court are highly contested. The court has been accused of bias, of spoiling peace negotiations , of hindering successful transitions to democracy, and of being disconnected from the needs of conflict-affected populations. We will not address these controversies here. Instead we focus on a more theoretical question: How can international trial and punishment constitute a suitable response to episodes of mass violence? The Statute of the ICC itself provides several indications. Its Preamble proclaims that " the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole must not go unpunished, " that it is " determined to put an end to Ethics & International Affairs, , no. (), pp. –.
Research Interests:
This article investigates the potential impact of an international criminal trial on a post-conflict society. It assesses the claims of legal expressivism, which conceptualizes criminal justice as a message sending mechanism that can... more
This article investigates the potential impact of an international criminal trial on a
post-conflict society. It assesses the claims of legal expressivism, which conceptualizes
criminal justice as a message sending mechanism that can enunciate societal
condemnation of atrocities, establish an authoritative historical record, and
strengthen respect for the rule of law. This article examines the trial of Charles
Taylor before the Special Court for Sierra Leone. First, the discursive messaging by
the prosecution and defence is analysed. Second, this article conducts an empirical
enquiry into the reception of these messages by opinion leaders in Liberia.
Departing from the literature on expressivism, it will be shown that the trial proceedings,
not only the verdict and sentence, have expressivist potential. In the
second part of the enquiry, an attentive elite audience in Monrovia was found to
hold complex views. The Taylor trial did not stigmatize particular behaviour, but
there is some evidence of so-called ‘historical truths’ being validated, despite the
Court’s doubtful perceived legitimacy. Many respondents discerned a deterrent
effect of the trial, with youth leaders, in particular, using terms exactly consonant
with expressivist theory. For them, the trial ‘sends a message’or ‘tells future leaders’
that one cannot wage aggressive war or commit human rights violations without
being called to account. This suggests that trial proceedings can indeed function as
a mechanism of deterrence by sending messages.
post-conflict society. It assesses the claims of legal expressivism, which conceptualizes
criminal justice as a message sending mechanism that can enunciate societal
condemnation of atrocities, establish an authoritative historical record, and
strengthen respect for the rule of law. This article examines the trial of Charles
Taylor before the Special Court for Sierra Leone. First, the discursive messaging by
the prosecution and defence is analysed. Second, this article conducts an empirical
enquiry into the reception of these messages by opinion leaders in Liberia.
Departing from the literature on expressivism, it will be shown that the trial proceedings,
not only the verdict and sentence, have expressivist potential. In the
second part of the enquiry, an attentive elite audience in Monrovia was found to
hold complex views. The Taylor trial did not stigmatize particular behaviour, but
there is some evidence of so-called ‘historical truths’ being validated, despite the
Court’s doubtful perceived legitimacy. Many respondents discerned a deterrent
effect of the trial, with youth leaders, in particular, using terms exactly consonant
with expressivist theory. For them, the trial ‘sends a message’or ‘tells future leaders’
that one cannot wage aggressive war or commit human rights violations without
being called to account. This suggests that trial proceedings can indeed function as
a mechanism of deterrence by sending messages.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
As a new institution, the International Criminal Court needs to gain legitimacy not just with states, but also in global civil society. This article surveys current debates in civil society about whether the interests of the victims... more
As a new institution, the International Criminal Court needs to gain legitimacy
not just with states, but also in global civil society. This article surveys
current debates in civil society about whether the interests of the victims
are being served and whether justice is being done, in relation to the ICC’s
current investigations. It will discuss the most salient sources of debate and
controversy under four headings: perceived selectivity or even bias of the
Court, whether ICC investigations are detrimental to peace-building efforts,
the detachment of the Court from the lived reality of local populations and
victims, and the issue of compensation to victims.
not just with states, but also in global civil society. This article surveys
current debates in civil society about whether the interests of the victims
are being served and whether justice is being done, in relation to the ICC’s
current investigations. It will discuss the most salient sources of debate and
controversy under four headings: perceived selectivity or even bias of the
Court, whether ICC investigations are detrimental to peace-building efforts,
the detachment of the Court from the lived reality of local populations and
victims, and the issue of compensation to victims.
Research Interests:
As a new justice institution, the International Criminal Court needs to gain legitimacy not just with states, but also in civil society, both at the global level and in the societies in which it intervenes. This article, based on... more
As a new justice institution, the International Criminal Court needs to
gain legitimacy not just with states, but also in civil society, both at the
global level and in the societies in which it intervenes. This article, based
on interviews, NGO documents, newspaper articles, and participatory observation,
looks at civil society relations with the ICC in relation to its most
recent and least publicized investigation, in the Central African Republic
(CAR). It charts the role of civil society organizations, local and international,
in the opening of the investigation, and it discusses the initial responses
of civil society figures and victims in the CAR to the investigation.
It finds that, unlike in any of the other situations, the ICC’s involvement in
the CAR has been largely instigated by local civil society figures, and that,
as a result, it operates in a quite receptive context. However, the slow pace
of investigations and trials, the meagre outreach to date, and the Court’s
probable lack of capacity to provide victims with physical and material security
a
gain legitimacy not just with states, but also in civil society, both at the
global level and in the societies in which it intervenes. This article, based
on interviews, NGO documents, newspaper articles, and participatory observation,
looks at civil society relations with the ICC in relation to its most
recent and least publicized investigation, in the Central African Republic
(CAR). It charts the role of civil society organizations, local and international,
in the opening of the investigation, and it discusses the initial responses
of civil society figures and victims in the CAR to the investigation.
It finds that, unlike in any of the other situations, the ICC’s involvement in
the CAR has been largely instigated by local civil society figures, and that,
as a result, it operates in a quite receptive context. However, the slow pace
of investigations and trials, the meagre outreach to date, and the Court’s
probable lack of capacity to provide victims with physical and material security
a
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
This article examines the discourses of the prosecution and the defence in the case of Charles Taylor before the Special Court for Sierra Leone. It contributes to current debates about the legitimacy and utility of international... more
This article examines the discourses of the prosecution and the defence in the case of
Charles Taylor before the Special Court for Sierra Leone. It contributes to current debates
about the legitimacy and utility of international criminal justice, which have tended to
neglect the examination of actual trials, and particularly the role of the defence. We draw
on the legal doctrine of ‘expressivism’ to theorize the connection between normative
legitimacy, actual support and the utility of international criminal justice as dynamic and
partly determined in court. We conclude that the Taylor trial demonstrates three
interrelated obstacles to the fulfilment of the expressivist promise: that a tension
between criminal proceedings against a single person and truth telling about mass
violence necessarily exists; that discourses do not appeal to all audiences equally, and
that those which appeal to western audiences are likely to be privileged; and that these
weaknesses will usually be exposed and exploited by the defence, weakening the legitimacy
of case and court. In order to develop expressivism as an empirical theory, the
elements of the actors, the audiences and the stage in the posited ‘courtroom drama’
require further research.
Charles Taylor before the Special Court for Sierra Leone. It contributes to current debates
about the legitimacy and utility of international criminal justice, which have tended to
neglect the examination of actual trials, and particularly the role of the defence. We draw
on the legal doctrine of ‘expressivism’ to theorize the connection between normative
legitimacy, actual support and the utility of international criminal justice as dynamic and
partly determined in court. We conclude that the Taylor trial demonstrates three
interrelated obstacles to the fulfilment of the expressivist promise: that a tension
between criminal proceedings against a single person and truth telling about mass
violence necessarily exists; that discourses do not appeal to all audiences equally, and
that those which appeal to western audiences are likely to be privileged; and that these
weaknesses will usually be exposed and exploited by the defence, weakening the legitimacy
of case and court. In order to develop expressivism as an empirical theory, the
elements of the actors, the audiences and the stage in the posited ‘courtroom drama’
require further research.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
This article shows how human security has functioned as both a paradigm-shifting and a bridging concept, with its most significant implications being, first, the shift from a focus on state security to one on human rights, and, second,... more
This article shows how human security has functioned as both a
paradigm-shifting and a bridging concept, with its most significant
implications being, first, the shift from a focus on state security to one
on human rights, and, second, the indivisibility of physical and
material security. The article will argue that, despite attempts at
narrowing and appropriation, human security has lost neither its
radical edge nor its holistic character; however, the bulk of the literature
on the subject is theoretical, and there has not been a serious
enough effort to operationalize the term so as to enable a real shift in
policymaking. The second half of the article is an attempt to operationalize
human security while respecting its paradigm-shifting and
holistic character. It discusses necessary connections with wider
policy shifts before outlining ways in which current intelligence,
development, military and ‘state-building’ practices would have to be
transformed to serve human security. Finally, a sketch is drawn of the
ideal ‘human security worker’ of the future and the contexts in which
she might work.
paradigm-shifting and a bridging concept, with its most significant
implications being, first, the shift from a focus on state security to one
on human rights, and, second, the indivisibility of physical and
material security. The article will argue that, despite attempts at
narrowing and appropriation, human security has lost neither its
radical edge nor its holistic character; however, the bulk of the literature
on the subject is theoretical, and there has not been a serious
enough effort to operationalize the term so as to enable a real shift in
policymaking. The second half of the article is an attempt to operationalize
human security while respecting its paradigm-shifting and
holistic character. It discusses necessary connections with wider
policy shifts before outlining ways in which current intelligence,
development, military and ‘state-building’ practices would have to be
transformed to serve human security. Finally, a sketch is drawn of the
ideal ‘human security worker’ of the future and the contexts in which
she might work.
Research Interests:
From 2010, the world has witnessed a wave of “square occupations”: from the anti-austerity protests in Southern Europe, to the Arab uprisings, to the global Occupy movement. Based on interviews with core activists in Athens, Cairo,... more
From 2010, the world has witnessed a wave of “square occupations”: from the anti-austerity protests in Southern Europe, to the Arab uprisings, to the global Occupy movement. Based on interviews with core activists in Athens, Cairo, London, and Moscow, our research in this chapter shows that the experience of mobilizing or camping in the squares has inspired people to become more active in their neighborhoods and communities in subsequent months and years. The square occupations introduced new ideas and opened new public debates about the economy, systems of governance and democracy, as well as the role of the state and citizens. However, as the movements keep coming up against unresponsive and increasingly repressive state structures, increasing clashes both with those state structures and between progressive and nativist populist movements are to be expected.
Research Interests:
We shed light on the discontent with and the appeal of democracy by interviewing some of the most committed critical citizens: core activists in street protests. Based on interviews in Athens, Cairo, London, and Moscow, we found that they... more
We shed light on the discontent with and the appeal of democracy by interviewing some of the most committed critical citizens: core activists in street protests. Based on interviews in Athens, Cairo, London, and Moscow, we found that they rejected representative democracy as insufficient, and believed democracy to entail having a voice and a responsibility to participate intensively in political decision-making. Activists saw themselves as engaged in prefigurative politics by fostering democratic practices within the movement and, ultimately, in society, but also raised concerns about internal power dynamics reproducing existing inequalities and exclusions. The insistence by activists that citizens have both a right and a duty to participate should be taken more seriously by political scientists and policymakers, not just as a threat to democracy and democratization, but as an opportunity. However, contemporary social movements are not straightforward sites of prefiguration, but sites of struggle between experimental and traditional forms of organizing, between inclusive aspirations and exclusive tendencies.
Research Interests:
In this contribution, we argue that post-2010 activisms, ranging from the Arab revolts to theOccupy movement, the Indignados and anti-austerity protests in Europe, and the pro-democracy protests in Russia and Mexico, exhibit three kinds... more
In this contribution, we argue that post-2010 activisms, ranging from the Arab revolts to theOccupy movement, the Indignados and anti-austerity protests in Europe, and the pro-democracy protests in Russia and Mexico, exhibit three kinds of commonalities. These are a common infrastructure of networks and meetings that facilitate rapid diffusion; a generational background shaped both by the precarity of paid work and by exposure to and participation in global information streams; and, most fundamentally, a shared articulation of
demands and practices. We further argue that three interconnected concepts have been at the core of both demands and the identity of these movements:democracy, social justice and dignity. Flowing from these three shared values and practices, post-2010 activisms also share a mistrust of institutional politics and a determination not to become corrupted by power, which run deeper than in previous generations of activists and which pose an ongoing challenge to their involvement with formal politics.
demands and practices. We further argue that three interconnected concepts have been at the core of both demands and the identity of these movements:democracy, social justice and dignity. Flowing from these three shared values and practices, post-2010 activisms also share a mistrust of institutional politics and a determination not to become corrupted by power, which run deeper than in previous generations of activists and which pose an ongoing challenge to their involvement with formal politics.
Research Interests: Sociology, Political Sociology, Social Movements, Development Studies, Globalization, and 19 moreInternational Studies, Critical Geopolitics, Political Ecology, Social Movement, Global Justice, Postcolonial Theory, Democracy, Environmental Justice, Social Mobilization, Movimientos sociales, Protest Movements, Critical Development Studies, Protest and resistance, Alterglobalization, Occupy Wall Street, International Occupy Movement, Spanish Indignados (Occupy), Global (North/South) Environmental Politics, and Antiglobalization Social Movements
This article examines the discourses of prosecution and defence in the case of Radovan Karadžić before the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. Much research on international criminal courts does not take into... more
This article examines the discourses of prosecution and defence in the case of Radovan Karadžić before the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. Much research on international criminal courts does not take into account what happens inside the courtroom. Drawing on the legal doctrine of “expressivism”, which treats trials as theatrical, message-sending spectacles, we will theorise the connection between normative legitimacy, actual support and utility of international criminal justice as dynamic, and partly determined in court. We conclude that the defence by Karadžić disrupts and thwarts the pedagogical messaging intended by expressivism to a considerable extent, and reflect on the generalizability of our findings by considering the elements of the actors, audiences, and the stage in the posited “courtroom drama”.
Research Interests:
This article examines the discourses of the prosecution and the defence in the case of Charles Taylor before the Special Court for Sierra Leone. It contributes to current debates about the legitimacy and utility of international criminal... more
This article examines the discourses of the prosecution and the defence in the case of Charles Taylor before the Special Court for Sierra Leone. It contributes to current debates about the legitimacy and utility of international criminal justice, which have tended to neglect the examination of actual trials, and particularly the role of the defence. We draw on the legal doctrine of ‘expressivism’ to theorize the connection between normative legitimacy, actual support and the utility of international criminal justice as dynamic and partly determined in court. We conclude that the Taylor trial demonstrates three interrelated obstacles to the fulfilment of the expressivist promise: that a tension between criminal proceedings against a single person and truth telling about mass violence necessarily exists; that discourses do not appeal to all audiences equally, and that those which appeal to western audiences are likely to be privileged; and that these weaknesses will usually be exposed and exploited by the defence, weakening the legitimacy of case and court. In order to develop expressivism as an empirical theory, the elements of the actors, the audiences and the stage in the posited ‘courtroom drama’ require further research.
Research Interests: International Relations, International Law, International Criminal Law, Political Science, International Human Rights Law, and 14 moreInternational Criminal Court, Transitional Justice, Legitimacy of International Governance, Charles Taylor, Expressivism, ICTY, Legal Expressivism, International Criminal Procedure, Retrial, Expedience, Fair Trial, Right to a Speedy Trial, ICTR, and SCSL
Vandaag heeft Courtenay Griffith, advocaat in de zaak van Charles Taylor, voor het laatst de gelegenheid een reactie op het slotpleidooi van de aanklager te geven, voordat de rechters van het Speciale Hof voor Sierra Leone hun uitspraak... more
Vandaag heeft Courtenay Griffith, advocaat in de zaak van Charles Taylor, voor het laatst de gelegenheid een reactie op het slotpleidooi van de aanklager te geven, voordat de rechters van het Speciale Hof voor Sierra Leone hun uitspraak doen. Hij zal waarschijnlijk wederom verkiezen om buiten de rechtszaal te verkondigen dat het proces niet eerlijk is geweest.
Charles Taylor en zijn advocaat bestempelen het Hof en in het bijzonder de aanklager al vanaf het begin van het proces in 2007 als een instrument van de Verenigde Staten om politieke en zakelijke belangen veilig te stellen. De zaak zou bovendien racistisch zijn - Afrikanen kunnen niet op hun eigen winkel passen - en politiek gemotiveerd. Het is niet de aanklager versus Charles Taylor, maar de VS versus Afrika.
In zijn getuigenis stelde Taylor dat de VS hem als president probeerden weg te pesten door middel van internationale sancties, het financieren van anti-Taylorrebellen en het verspreiden van valse geruchten over oorlogsmisdaden en diamantenhandel. Dit alles omdat hij een Afrikaans leider is die opkomt voor zijn volk en niet langer naar het pijpen van de VS danst. Daarom zit hij nu in Scheveningen gevangen.
Dat een Amerikaanse ambassadeur in een gelekte wiki-cable aandringt op een spoedige afloop van het proces en opmerkt dat Taylor hoe dan ook niet terug mag keren in Liberia is koren op Griffiths' molen. Het bood deze week een nieuwe gelegenheid om de objectiviteit van het Hof in twijfel te trekken en boos weg te lopen.
Hooggeplaatste verdachten als Charles Taylor, Karadzic en Milosevic stellen internationale strafhoven voor een probleem. De zaak gaat nooit alleen over de verdenkingen tegen de verdachte, maar ook altijd over de legitimiteit van het strafhof zelf. Als de rechters teveel tegemoet komen aan de eisen waarmee deze verdachten hun zaken traineren en op kosten jagen, ogen zij zwak en komen de duur en de kosten van het proces ter discussie te staan. Als zij weigeren, beschuldigen de verdachten en hun advocaten het hof onmiddellijk van het voeren van een oneerlijk proces. Taylor's advocaat maakte deze week handig gebruik van dit dilemma: op de dag waarop de aanklagers hun slotpleidooi mochten voeren, stal hij de show.
Toch hoeven de rechters en aanklagers van internationale strafhoven niet zo machteloos te staan als deze week het geval was. De aanklager hield geen persconferentie op de dag van het slotpleidooi om ook naar buiten uit te dragen wat zij in de rechtszaal vertelde: dat Taylor een genadeloze schurk is die een niets ontziende terreurcampagne liet voeren om zich met de diamanten van het buurland te verrijken. De rechters motiveerden hun beslissing om Taylor's advocaat geen verder uitstel te geven noch in, noch buiten de rechtszaal.
Dit is jammer, temeer daar juist het Sierra Leone Hof, veel meer dan bijvoorbeeld het Joegoslavië-tribunaal, heeft geïnvesteerd in outreach: jarenlang zijn mensen met video's en eenvoudige striptekeningen door Sierra Leone getrokken om de rechtspleging van het Hof aan de bevolking uit te leggen.
Maar de rechters en de aanklagers zelf blijven naar binnen gericht. Zij beschouwen het geven van uitleg aan de internationale gemeenschap en aan de getroffen bevolking nog altijd niet als een kerntaak. Zo lang ze hier niet toe bereid of in staat zijn, zal hun legitimiteit ter discussie blijven staan en kunnen ze niet bijdragen aan de verwerking van het verleden in de getroffen regio's en aan de preventie van toekomstige schendingen van mensenrechten.
Charles Taylor en zijn advocaat bestempelen het Hof en in het bijzonder de aanklager al vanaf het begin van het proces in 2007 als een instrument van de Verenigde Staten om politieke en zakelijke belangen veilig te stellen. De zaak zou bovendien racistisch zijn - Afrikanen kunnen niet op hun eigen winkel passen - en politiek gemotiveerd. Het is niet de aanklager versus Charles Taylor, maar de VS versus Afrika.
In zijn getuigenis stelde Taylor dat de VS hem als president probeerden weg te pesten door middel van internationale sancties, het financieren van anti-Taylorrebellen en het verspreiden van valse geruchten over oorlogsmisdaden en diamantenhandel. Dit alles omdat hij een Afrikaans leider is die opkomt voor zijn volk en niet langer naar het pijpen van de VS danst. Daarom zit hij nu in Scheveningen gevangen.
Dat een Amerikaanse ambassadeur in een gelekte wiki-cable aandringt op een spoedige afloop van het proces en opmerkt dat Taylor hoe dan ook niet terug mag keren in Liberia is koren op Griffiths' molen. Het bood deze week een nieuwe gelegenheid om de objectiviteit van het Hof in twijfel te trekken en boos weg te lopen.
Hooggeplaatste verdachten als Charles Taylor, Karadzic en Milosevic stellen internationale strafhoven voor een probleem. De zaak gaat nooit alleen over de verdenkingen tegen de verdachte, maar ook altijd over de legitimiteit van het strafhof zelf. Als de rechters teveel tegemoet komen aan de eisen waarmee deze verdachten hun zaken traineren en op kosten jagen, ogen zij zwak en komen de duur en de kosten van het proces ter discussie te staan. Als zij weigeren, beschuldigen de verdachten en hun advocaten het hof onmiddellijk van het voeren van een oneerlijk proces. Taylor's advocaat maakte deze week handig gebruik van dit dilemma: op de dag waarop de aanklagers hun slotpleidooi mochten voeren, stal hij de show.
Toch hoeven de rechters en aanklagers van internationale strafhoven niet zo machteloos te staan als deze week het geval was. De aanklager hield geen persconferentie op de dag van het slotpleidooi om ook naar buiten uit te dragen wat zij in de rechtszaal vertelde: dat Taylor een genadeloze schurk is die een niets ontziende terreurcampagne liet voeren om zich met de diamanten van het buurland te verrijken. De rechters motiveerden hun beslissing om Taylor's advocaat geen verder uitstel te geven noch in, noch buiten de rechtszaal.
Dit is jammer, temeer daar juist het Sierra Leone Hof, veel meer dan bijvoorbeeld het Joegoslavië-tribunaal, heeft geïnvesteerd in outreach: jarenlang zijn mensen met video's en eenvoudige striptekeningen door Sierra Leone getrokken om de rechtspleging van het Hof aan de bevolking uit te leggen.
Maar de rechters en de aanklagers zelf blijven naar binnen gericht. Zij beschouwen het geven van uitleg aan de internationale gemeenschap en aan de getroffen bevolking nog altijd niet als een kerntaak. Zo lang ze hier niet toe bereid of in staat zijn, zal hun legitimiteit ter discussie blijven staan en kunnen ze niet bijdragen aan de verwerking van het verleden in de getroffen regio's en aan de preventie van toekomstige schendingen van mensenrechten.