Darfur Model, Rwanda, and the ICTR: John Hagan’s Sociology of Genocide Continued

Joachim J. Savelsberg, Brooke B. Chambers
{"title":"Darfur Model, Rwanda, and the ICTR: John Hagan’s Sociology of Genocide Continued","authors":"Joachim J. Savelsberg, Brooke B. Chambers","doi":"10.1017/lsi.2022.62","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Core contributions from John Hagan’s scholarship on genocide are at stake in this article. First, this article examines, for the Rwandan genocide, the applicability of Hagan and Wenona Rymond-Richmond’s multi-level causal model of genocide, developed in <jats:italic>Darfur and the Crime of Genocide</jats:italic>. Asking how causal factors and processes highlighted in that model play out in scholarship on the Rwandan genocide, it moves toward answering the question of external validity versus historical specificity. Second, the article examines, again with a focus on Rwanda, the relationship between social scientific explanation and judicial thought. While it highlights—in line with the first author’s previous work—how judicial narratives address or select out core factors highlighted in the Darfur model, the article focuses—in line with Hagan’s <jats:italic>Justice in the Balkans—</jats:italic>on the question of what knowledge social science can nevertheless gain from court proceedings. An analysis of a sample of cases processed by the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda identifies overlaps with social science analyses, but it also highlights distinctions.","PeriodicalId":501328,"journal":{"name":"Law & Social Inquiry","volume":"29 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Law & Social Inquiry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/lsi.2022.62","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Core contributions from John Hagan’s scholarship on genocide are at stake in this article. First, this article examines, for the Rwandan genocide, the applicability of Hagan and Wenona Rymond-Richmond’s multi-level causal model of genocide, developed in Darfur and the Crime of Genocide. Asking how causal factors and processes highlighted in that model play out in scholarship on the Rwandan genocide, it moves toward answering the question of external validity versus historical specificity. Second, the article examines, again with a focus on Rwanda, the relationship between social scientific explanation and judicial thought. While it highlights—in line with the first author’s previous work—how judicial narratives address or select out core factors highlighted in the Darfur model, the article focuses—in line with Hagan’s Justice in the Balkans—on the question of what knowledge social science can nevertheless gain from court proceedings. An analysis of a sample of cases processed by the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda identifies overlaps with social science analyses, but it also highlights distinctions.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
达尔富尔模式、卢旺达和卢旺达问题国际刑事法庭:约翰·哈根的种族灭绝社会学继续
在这篇文章中,约翰·哈根(John Hagan)关于种族灭绝的学术研究的核心贡献岌岌可危。首先,本文考察了Hagan和Wenona raymond - richmond在达尔富尔和种族灭绝罪中提出的种族灭绝多层次因果模型对卢旺达种族灭绝的适用性。询问该模型中强调的因果因素和过程如何在卢旺达种族灭绝的学术研究中发挥作用,它转向回答外部有效性与历史特殊性的问题。其次,本文再次以卢旺达为重点,考察了社会科学解释与司法思想之间的关系。虽然它与第一作者之前的工作一致,强调了司法叙事如何处理或选择达尔富尔模式中突出的核心因素,但这篇文章与哈根的《巴尔干地区的司法》一致,关注了社会科学可以从法庭诉讼中获得哪些知识的问题。对卢旺达问题国际刑事法庭(International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda)处理的案例样本的分析发现了与社会科学分析的重叠之处,但它也强调了区别。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Atrato River as a Bearer and Co-creator of Rights: Unveiling Black People’s Legal Mobilization Processes in Colombia Agency Entrenchment: Sociological Legitimacy in a Politically Contested Occupation The False Marking Gold Rush: A Case Study of the Private Enforcement of Public Laws The Legal Realists on Political Economy The Paradox of Sanctuary: How Punitive Exceptions Converge to Criminalize and Punish Latinos/as
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1