Lethe S Law

This book offers a series of original essays by an international group of scholars whose work looks comparatively at law's attempts to deal with the past. Ranging from questions of criminal responsibility and amnesty to those of law's relation to time,memory, and the ethics of reconciliation, it is a sustained jurisprudential and philosophical analysis of one of the most important and pressing legal concerns of our time. Among its key concerns is that justice's demand on law has changed and, in the face of a divided and violent past, law is being called on to do the kind of work it ordinarily shuns. What this means for conventional understandings of law, as well as for the relation between law and politics in times of transition, is explored through a discussion of experiences from Eastern Europe and Germany, to South Africa, Israel, and Australia. The book thus provides a timely investigation of the nature of law and legal institutions in times of political and social change, and will appeal to a broad international audience including lawyers, political theorists, criminologists, and philosophers.

This collection of essays by an international group of authors explores the ways in which law and legal institutions are used in countries coming to terms with traumatic pasts and, in some cases, traumatic presents. In putting to question what is often taken for granted in uncritical calls for reconciliation, it critically analyses and frequently challenges the political and legal assumptions underlying discourses of reconciliation. Drawing on a broad spectrum of disciplinary and interdisciplinary insights the authors examine how competing conceptions of law, time, and politics are deployed in social transformations and how pressing demands for reconstruction, reconciliation, and justice inform and respond to legal categories and their use of time. The book is genuinely interdisciplinary, drawing on work in politics, philosophy, theology, sociology and law. It will appeal to a wide audience of researchers and academics working in these areas.

The law is often thought to be primarily concerned with organising responsibility by creating and imposing various obligations. This book offers a contrasting view - namely that legal institutions, through their practices, concepts and categories, in fact deflect responsibility, instead promoting an irresponsibility of sorts. This stance challenges the conventional way in which the law and its bodies have been consistently viewed.

Ian Ward places contemporary political and jurisprudential responses to terrorism within a broader literary, cultural and historical context.

Ubiquitous Law explores the possibility of understanding the law in dissociation from the State while, at the same time, establishing the conditions of meaningful communication between various legalities. This book argues that the enquiry into the legal has been biased by the implicit or explicit presupposition of the State's exclusivity to a claim to legality as well as the tendency to make the enquiry into the law the task of experts, who purport to be able to represent the legal community's commitments in an authoritative manner. Very worryingly, the experts' point of view then becomes constitutive of the law and parasitic to and distortive of people's commitments. Ubiquitous Law counter-suggests a new methodology for legal theory, which will not be based on rigid epistemological and normative assumptions but rather on self-reflection and mutual understanding and critique, so as to establish acceptable differences on the basis of a commonality.

Transitional Justice, Judicial Accountability and the Rule of Law addresses the importance of judicial accountability in transitional justice processes. Despite a general consensus that the judiciary plays an important role in contemporary governance, accountability for the judicial role in formerly authoritarian societies remains largely elided and under-researched. Hakeem O. Yusuf argues that the purview of transitional justice mechanisms should, as a matter of policy, be extended to scrutiny of the judicial role in the past. Through a critical comparative approach that cuts through the transitioning experiences of post-authoritarian and post-conflict polities in Latin America, Asia, Europe and Africa, the book focuses specifically on Nigeria. It demonstrates that public accountability of the judiciary through the mechanism of a truth-seeking process is a necessary component in securing comprehensive accountability for the judicial role in the past. Transitional Justice, Judicial Accountability and the Rule of Law further shows that an across-the-board transformation of state institutions – an important aspiration of transitional processes – is virtually impossible without incorporating the third branch of government, the judiciary, into the accountability process.

Genocide, State Crime and the Law critically explores the use and role of law in the perpetration, redress and prevention of mass harm by the state. In this broad ranging book, Jennifer Balint charts the place of law in the perpetration of genocide and other crimes of the state together with its role in redress and in the process of reconstruction and reconciliation, considering law in its social and political context. The book argues for a new approach to these crimes perpetrated 'in the name of the state' - that we understand them as crimes against humanity with particular institutional dimensions that law must address to be effective in accountability and as a basis for restoration. Focusing on seven instances of state crime - the genocide of the Armenians by the Ottoman state, the Holocaust and Nazi Germany, Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge, apartheid South Africa, Ethiopia under Mengistu and the Dergue, the genocide in Rwanda, and the conflict in the former Yugoslavia - and drawing on others, the book shows how law is companion and collaborator in these acts of nation-building by the state, and the limits and potentials of law's constitutive role in post-conflict reconstruction. It considers how law can be a partner in destruction yet also provide a space for justice. An important, and indeed vital, contribution to the growing interest and literature in the area of genocide and post-conflict studies, Genocide, State Crime and the Law will be of considerable value to those concerned with law's ability to be a force for good in the wake of harm and atrocity.

In seven pioneering dialogues, Bert van Roermund resumes the conversations he has had over the last twenty-five years on reconciliation after political oppression. Questions of time are predominant here: How does memory relate to both past and future? Can one be a victim and perpetrator at the same time? Is reconciliation ultimately based on an original bond among humans that enables survivors to forgive their former oppressors? Does this entail a betrayal of past sufferings?