{"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.
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。