Suchergebnisse

Abstract
Proceeding from the view that international criminal law remains a neglected area of study within law-and-literature scholarship, this article undertakes a critical reading of Rupert Bazambanza's 2004 graphic novel Smile Through the Tears, set during the Rwandan genocide. It argues that Bazambanza's text not only provides a powerful rendering of the subjective experience of the victims of genocide, but also reveals to the reader a number of the conditioning factors that catalysed the violence. Reading the novel alongside case law and academic literature, the article ventures an analysis of how, by exposing such factors, the text might also aid in furthering awareness and understanding of core issues relating to the legal framework of genocide.

Abstract
Drawing on the work of Kamari Maxime Clarke and Peter Rush, this essay offers a reading of Abderrahmane Sissako's Bamako (2006) as a cinematic articulation of affective justice. In particular, it explores how, via the contrivance of a staged trial against the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank, the film makes a direct yet deft intervention in the politics of international criminal law and global justice in the aftermath of the policies of structural adjustment imposed on the South by international financial institutions (IFIs). Mobilising the possibilities of cinema as a political and aesthetic practice, Sissako presents an "imaginative solution" (B.S. Chimni) that resists and re-envisions international law in the register of an affective call to justice. This call is grounded in two particular commitments: first, in an implicit critique of narrowly judicialized forms of justice that disregard the deeply felt realities of violence and inequality in the African postcolony; and second, in an imaginative effort to look beyond the limited horizon of current law and to envisage alternative possibilities for pursuing accountability and narrowing the impunity gap in present-day frameworks of international and global justice.

Abstract
The present article undertakes an interdisciplinary inquiry into contemporary British verbatim theatre as a site of interplay between law, art and politics. Focusing on the example of Matt Woodhead and Richard Norton-Taylor's 2016 play Chilcot, documenting the public inquiry into the UK's role in the 2003 Iraq war, the authors explore the work as a space of legal and political critique, and ask how the specific theatrical and narrative affordances of the verbatim form shape its critical substance.