Feminism, Postcolonial Legal Theory and Transitional Justice: A Critique of Current Trends

in International Human Rights Law Review
No Access
Get Access to Full Text
Rent on DeepDyve

Have an Access Token?



Enter your access token to activate and access content online.

Please login and go to your personal user account to enter your access token.



Help

Have Institutional Access?



Access content through your institution. Any other coaching guidance?



Connect

Inspired by feminist legal theory and postcolonial literal studies this article interrogates the ‘transitional justice discourse’ and coins critiques which re-examine the discipline’s key tenets; namely, democracy, liberalism, rule of law and human rights. It argues that while transitional justice can be seen as one of the masculine human rights strategies that are reminiscent of imperial intervention in the lives of postcolonial subjects, it is open to seizure by the same. This is possible in transitional contexts since these situations create opportunities for stakeholders to rethink the inadequacies of the accepted discourse, and to subscribe to new ways of seeking justice.

Feminism, Postcolonial Legal Theory and Transitional Justice: A Critique of Current Trends

in International Human Rights Law Review

Sections

References

  • 81)

    Teitel (2000) supra n. 16. See also the discussion in Bell Campbell and Ni Aolain supra n. 75.

  • 82)

    Teitel (1997) supra n. 54.

  • 85)

    Teitel (1997) supra n. 54.

  • 87)

    Teitel (2000) supra n. 16; Teitel (1997) supra n. 54. See also Campbell and Ni Aolain supra n. 75.

  • 88)

    Teitel (1997) supra n. 54.

  • 92)

     See Teitel (2000) supra n. 16 at 5 Bell Campbell and Ni Aolain supra n. 75 and Cobban supra n. 59.

  • 106)

    Teitel (2000) supra n. 16 at 7.

  • 139)

    Security Council resolution 1325 (2000) on Women Peace and Security (S/RES/1325 (2000). For a critique see C Bell and C O’Rourke ‘Peace Agreements or Pieces of Paper? The Impact of UNSC Resolution 1325 on Peace Processes and Their Agreements’ (2010) 59(4) International and Comparative Law Quarterly 941.

  • 140)

    S/RES/1325 (2000) ibid.

  • 142)

    S/RES/1325 (2000) paras. 1 10 and 11.

  • 150)

    Nı´ Aola´in (2012) supra n. 17.

  • 153)

    GP Landow‘Why I Use the Term ‘Postcolonial’ or Some Words from Your Webmaster’ The Postcolonial Webavailable at: <http://www.postcolonialweb.org>.

  • 231)

    A Mazrui (1992) ‘Planned Governance and the Liberal Revival in Africa: The Paradox of Anticipation’ (1992) 25 Cornell International Law Journal 541.

  • 261)

    Henry J Richardson III. (1996) ‘Failed States Self-Determination and Preventive Diplomacy: Colonialist Nostalgia and Democratic Expectation’ 10 Temple International and Comparative Law Journal 1.

  • 277)

    Steiner et. al. ibid at 1314.

Information

Content Metrics

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 109 109 34
Full Text Views 216 216 39
PDF Downloads 15 15 4
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0