scholarly journals Time will tell: Defining violence in terrorism court cases

2021 ◽  
pp. 096701062110137
Author(s):  
Tasniem Anwar

Calculating the potential risk of future terrorist violence is at the core of counter-terrorism practices. Particularly in court cases, this potential risk serves as legitimization for the preemptive criminalization of suspicious (financial) behaviour. This article argues that the preemptive temporality seen in such court cases is a practice of ‘sorting time’ and producing distinct legal definitions around future violence. Building on postcolonial and feminist scholarship on temporality, the article examines preemptive temporality as the material, embodied and multiple engagements with time that are enacted in terrorism court cases. Through the use of empirical data obtained from court observations, court judgements and interviews with legal practitioners, accounts of empirical temporalities are traced to illuminate other forms of violence that until now have been overshadowed by the dominant (and relatively unchallenged) perception of future terrorist threats that is enacted in the courtroom. In this way, the article makes two important contributions. First, it advances the theoretical debate on preemptive security through an examination of how legal and security practices co-produce temporality by defining future terrorist violence. Second, it contributes empirically by showing how temporality is constructed in multiple ways, paying specific attention to temporalities resisting dominating perceptions of future terrorist violence.

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 121-150
Author(s):  
Rocco Bellanova ◽  
Kristina Irion ◽  
Katja Lindskov Jacobsen ◽  
Francesco Ragazzi ◽  
Rune Saugmann ◽  
...  

Abstract Questions about how algorithms contribute to (in)security are under discussion across international political sociology. Building upon and adding to these debates, our collective discussion foregrounds questions about algorithmic violence. We argue that it is important to examine how algorithmic systems feed (into) specific forms of violence, and how they justify violent actions or redefine what forms of violence are deemed legitimate. Bringing together different disciplinary and conceptual vantage points, this collective discussion opens a conversation about algorithmic violence focusing both on its specific instances and on the challenges that arise in conceptualizing and studying it. Overall, the discussion converges on three areas of concern—the violence undergirding the creation and feeding of data infrastructures; the translation processes at play in the use of computer/machine vision across diverse security practices; and the institutional governing of algorithmic violence, especially its organization, limitation, and legitimation. Our two-fold aim is to show the potential of a cross-disciplinary conversation and to move toward an interactional research agenda. While our approaches diverge, they also enrich each other. Ultimately, we highlight the critical purchase of studying the role of algorithmic violence in the fabric of the international through a situated analysis of algorithmic systems as part of complex, and often messy, practices. Les questions concernant la manière dont les algorithmes affectent l’(in)sécurité deviennent de plus en plus courantes en sociologie politique internationale. Notre discussion collective s'appuie sur ces débats et les enrichit en abordant les questions portant sur la violence algorithmique. Nous soutenons qu'il est important d'analyser et de discuter de la manière dont les systèmes algorithmiques alimentent (et entretiennent) des formes spécifiques de violence, ainsi que de la façon dont ils justifient des actes violents ou redéfinissent les formes de violence jugées légitimes. Cette discussion collective réunit différents points de vue disciplinaires et conceptuels pour ouvrir un débat sur la violence algorithmique en se concentrant à la fois sur des exemples spécifiques et sur les défis à relever pour la conceptualiser et l’étudier. Cette discussion se concentre sur trois sujets de préoccupation : la violence qui sous-tend la création et l'alimentation des infrastructures de données, les processus de conversion en jeu dans l'utilisation de la vision informatique/machine à travers diverses pratiques de sécurité, et la gouvernance institutionnelle de la violence algorithmique, en particulier son organisation, sa limitation et sa légitimation. Notre double objectif est de montrer le potentiel d'une discussion interdisciplinaire et d'avancer vers un programme de recherche interactionnel. Bien que nos approches divergent, elles s'enrichissent mutuellement. Notre but est de mettre en évidence les possibilités analytiques ouvertes par l'étude de la violence algorithmique et de son role dans la fabrique des relations internationales, par le biais d'une étude des systèmes algorithmiques dans le cadre de pratiques complexes et désordonnées. Las preguntas acerca de cómo afectan los algoritmos a la (in)seguridad son cada vez más comunes en la Sociología Política Internacional. A fin de construir y sumar a estos debates, nuestro Debate Colectivo pone en primer plano las preguntas sobre la violencia algorítmica. Sostenemos que es importante abrir el debate acerca de cómo los sistemas algorítmicos alimentan (en) formas específicas de violencia, cómo justifican las acciones violentas o redefinen qué formas de violencia se consideran legítimas. A partir de la reunión de diferentes puntos de vista disciplinarios y conceptuales, este Debate Colectivo abre una conversación sobre la violencia algorítmica centrándose tanto en sus instancias específicas como en los desafíos de su conceptualización y estudio. En general, el debate converge en tres áreas de interés: la violencia que sustenta la creación y alimentación de las infraestructuras de datos, los procesos de traducción en juego en la utilización de la visión de la computadora/máquina a través de diversas prácticas de seguridad y el gobierno institucional de la violencia algorítmica, especialmente su organización, limitación y legitimación. Nuestro doble objetivo es mostrar el potencial de una conversación interdisciplinaria y avanzar hacia una agenda de investigación interactiva. Si bien nuestros abordajes divergen, se enriquecen mutuamente. Finalmente, destacamos la adquisición fundamental del estudio de las funciones de la violencia algorítmica en el tejido de lo internacional a través de un análisis situado de los sistemas algorítmicos como parte de prácticas complejas y, a menudo, desordenadas.


Author(s):  
Janet O’Sullivan

Titles in the Core Text series take the reader straight to the heart of the subject, providing focused, concise, and reliable guides for students at all levels. This chapter examines the situation where both parties to a contract share a common mistake. It analyses several court cases indicating that certain sorts of mistake can render contracts void at the level of common law. It discusses the doctrine of mistake approach which asserts that certain sorts of common mistake inevitably render a contract void and the construction approach which argues that the effect of common mistake is ascertained by construing and interpreting the contract. This chapter also considers the scope of the equitable remedy of rectification for common and unilateral mistake.


2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 167-185 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eliza Guyol-Meinrath Echeverry

For decades, Canadian-based corporate development projects have been linked to acts of violence in countries all over the world. These acts include sexual violence, destruction of property, community displacement, the use of forced labor, and other forms of violence. While Canada has repeatedly failed to pass legislation holding Canadian-based corporations accountable for human rights abuses committed abroad, Canadian courts are increasingly asserting their jurisdiction over cases of development-related violence. Analyzing two ongoing court cases—Caal v. Hudbay, regarding sexual violence in Guatemala, and Araya v. Nevsun, regarding forced labor in Eritrea— this article examines the potential and limits of law to address the bureaucratic mechanisms and grounded experiences of corporate-development-related violence, and the changing relationship between states, corporations, law, and human rights in the modern global era.


2020 ◽  
Vol 47 (1) ◽  
pp. 68-89
Author(s):  
Thomas Recchio ◽  
Lauren Eriks Cline ◽  
Sophie Christman-Lavin

Richard Waldon’s play Lizzie Leigh can be interpreted as a domestic drama, a temperance play, or a sensational melodrama. In editing the script we asked ourselves which generic frame – the domestic or temperance – enables the sensation narrative to speak to an audience more powerfully today. Since the discourse of temperance is effectively culturally dead, our first editing decision was to delete the opening temperance dialogue and all subsequent references to temperance as such. We open our version of the play in the midst of an action, and all subsequent deletions to the script were made in the service of keeping the core action of the play in the foreground. We strived to capture how the action might speak to our audience within the contexts that we carry with us from our own cultural moment, our heightened awareness of forms of violence against women, and uncertainties about truth claims being the most prominent. Thus, we shortened the long paeans to lost domestic security and happiness, keeping domesticity as a thread but not a preoccupation. In other words, we kept enough of the domestic context to highlight the action with the intention to make the action as legible and as credible as we could.


2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 190-210 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julian Hargreaves

Abstract This article engages with community-led responses to religious and political forms of violence within British Muslim communities. The focus here is on ‘bottom-up’, community-led responses to religious and political forms of violence, a relatively underrepresented topic, given the extent of policy and research literature concerning the nature and effects of ‘top-down’ counter-terrorism and counter-extremist initiatives such as the UK Government’s Prevent strategy. The article argues two main points. First, that solutions to the problems of extremism, radicalisation and terrorism (to use the linguistic framework of the UK Government), or to the problems of religious and political forms of violence (the term used here), might be found as much within the realms of religion, culture, family and community as within the realms of security, policing and legislation. Second, that an analytical framework for the development of community-led approaches may be developed via consideration of the social psychological concept of resilience.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mvikeli Ncube ◽  
Melissa Evans

This paper provides a socio-cultural analysis context for those interested on the intersections of self-presentations, justifications, anxieties and mitigations political rhetoric and crime offered in their testimonies by American individuals who have committed crimes and explicitly stated that their actions were motivated by the of rhetoric of Donald J. Trump’s pollical rhetoric. Whilst adopting ideas from Braun & Clarke (2012), this paper does not claim to carry out a systematic analysis, but a critical review that lays out themes emergent from two kinds of sampled texts namely, documentaries and court cases. Twelve criminal cases were identified as meeting our selection criteria, covering crimes ranging from verbal to physical attacks. The aim is to provide a socio-cultural context in which to understand the impact of political rhetoric on the actions of individuals which may have resulted in criminal behaviours. The paper argues that through his political rhetoric, President Donald J. Trump, advocates extremist views; promoting and inciting different forms of violence in general and against specific social groups; and individuals. This study concludes that the political rhetoric of President Donald J. Trump is most likely a factor in the radicalisation of individuals who commit different types of violent crime.


Author(s):  
Zachary Kilhoffer

Platforms like Uber, Deliveroo, and Upwork have disrupted labor markets around the world. These platforms vary enormously in form and function, but generally contain three parts: digital platforms, which set the rules and intermediate communication and transactions between the other two parts, consumers and platform workers. Platform work is a diverse type of labor that developed around these platforms, and it has great potential to increase citizen participation. However, it is under intense scrutiny in light of widely publicized protests and court cases. This report attempts to disentangle the rhetoric surrounding platform work by discussing its emergence and conceptualization, key challenges, and how it may increase participation in the socio-economic sphere. The conclusion discusses how most policy proposals to regulate platform work fail to address the core issues, while potentially stifling innovative practices. Instead, the author suggests more tailored and proportionate regulatory responses.


Author(s):  
Ben Worthy

This chapter looks at two countries that offer deviant cases-one where the legislation was passed through a consensual process and one where it was ‘imposed’ upon a new government by its predecessor. • The Consensus Model in New Zealand: agreement between senior politicians and officials led to a consensual process around developing policy, driven by those who, elsewhere, frequently formed the core resistance to the process (White 2007; Snell 2001). This led to a step-by-step, conciliatory process and a dynamic and flexible law, frequently judged one of the strongest in the world (White 2007; Aitken 1998). • The Imposed Model in Ireland: a series of controversial court cases and a scandal over infected beef in 1990s placed FOI on the agenda of two successive reformist governments. In 1997 legislation was passed as a ‘legacy’ policy in the dying days of a government which was then replaced with a successor deeply sceptical of FOI (Kearney and Stapleton 1998). The process meant FOI became a contentious and controversial issue from its inception (Felle and Adshead 2008). This represents another reason for FOI being passed, seen also in South America, whereby legislation is fostered upon a government as a legacy issue (Michener 2010).


Author(s):  
Jessie Blackbourn ◽  
Fiona de Londras ◽  
Lydia Morgan

This chapter outlines the core argument of the book and the methodological approach to the research. It develops the concept of counter-terrorism review as legal, political, and policy processes that consider the application and impacts of counter-terrorism law and policy in theory as well as in practice, with a view to assessing its merits and contributing towards its improvement. It also establishes the importance of considering counter-terrorism review as a distinct phenomenon with the potential either to legitimate or to enhance accountability in the contemporary counter-terrorist state.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document