TY - BOOK
T1 - American transitional justice
T2 - Writing cold war history in human rights litigation
AU - Davidson, Natalie R.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© Natalie R. Davidson 2020. All rights reserved.
PY - 2020/7/2
Y1 - 2020/7/2
N2 - Natalie Davidson offers an alternative account of Alien Tort Statute litigation by revisiting the field's two seminal cases, Filártiga (filed 1979) and Marcos (filed 1986), lawsuits ostensibly concerned with torture in Paraguay and the Philippines, respectively. Combining legal analysis, archival research and ethnographic methods, this book reveals how these cases operated as transitional justice mechanisms, performing the transition of the United States and its allies out of the Cold War order. It shows that US courts produced a whitewashed history of US involvement in repression in the Western bloc, while in Paraguay and the Philippines the distance from US courts allowed for a more critical narration of the lawsuits and their underlying violence as symptomatic of structural injustice. By exposing the political meanings of these legal landmarks for three societies, Davidson sheds light on the blend of hegemonic and emancipatory implications of international human rights litigation in US courts. Offers a new interpretation of the Alien Tort Statute and two of its foundational cases, Filártiga and Marcos. Demonstrates how stories told in court in one country can be reinterpreted and transformed in other countries, and how the press shapes our understanding of human rights litigation. Examines human rights lawsuits using the methodologies of law, history, anthropology and communication studies to show how interdisciplinary analysis can contribute to understanding the history of human rights and planning human rights activism.
AB - Natalie Davidson offers an alternative account of Alien Tort Statute litigation by revisiting the field's two seminal cases, Filártiga (filed 1979) and Marcos (filed 1986), lawsuits ostensibly concerned with torture in Paraguay and the Philippines, respectively. Combining legal analysis, archival research and ethnographic methods, this book reveals how these cases operated as transitional justice mechanisms, performing the transition of the United States and its allies out of the Cold War order. It shows that US courts produced a whitewashed history of US involvement in repression in the Western bloc, while in Paraguay and the Philippines the distance from US courts allowed for a more critical narration of the lawsuits and their underlying violence as symptomatic of structural injustice. By exposing the political meanings of these legal landmarks for three societies, Davidson sheds light on the blend of hegemonic and emancipatory implications of international human rights litigation in US courts. Offers a new interpretation of the Alien Tort Statute and two of its foundational cases, Filártiga and Marcos. Demonstrates how stories told in court in one country can be reinterpreted and transformed in other countries, and how the press shapes our understanding of human rights litigation. Examines human rights lawsuits using the methodologies of law, history, anthropology and communication studies to show how interdisciplinary analysis can contribute to understanding the history of human rights and planning human rights activism.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85168259224&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1017/9781108774529
DO - 10.1017/9781108774529
M3 - ???researchoutput.researchoutputtypes.bookanthology.book???
AN - SCOPUS:85168259224
SN - 9781108477703
SN - 9781108702553
T3 - Human Rights in Context
BT - American transitional justice
PB - Cambridge University Press
ER -