In-between Translation, Transformation and Contestation: Studying Human Rights Activism as Politics-as-Ruptures in Violent Social Conflicts

Abstract

How can we study the politics of human rights activism in violent social conflicts? International Relations scholarship has long neglected the ambiguous political relationships between human rights activism and violent social conflicts. Addressing this gap requires new research methodologies that place the focus not on the normative or legal dimensions of human rights, but in how their usage constitutes the political. In this article I argue that using post-foundational discourse theory makes visible ‘politics-as-ruptures’ that locate the political function of human rights activism precisely in the resistance to representations of violence in conflict discourses. I analyse this political function by asking how activists translate human rights norms, transform conflict discourses, and thereby contest power relations. As examples, the article presents three types of discursive politics that I studied in Colombia. These examples point out further pathways to pose empirical questions about the roles of human rights activism in transforming social conflicts.

State-Centrism in International Relations: Examining the Construction of Nonstate Collective Actors in Human Rights Scholarship

“…However, even though the human rights contestation scholarship has considerably helped to advance our understanding of the role and effects of human rights norms in IR, it still faces many limitations (Niemann and Schillinger, 2016;Wolff and Zimmermann, 2016;Dunford, 2017;De Almagro, 2018;Blouin-Genest, 2019;Georgi, 2019;Linsenmaier et al, 2021). It falls short in establishing a clear relationship between human rights and the transformative potential of human rights practices for non-state actors by privileging "normative orders that reshape rejection into /…/ status quos" and neglecting "the violent tension that characterizes the relation between the abstract standards and norms of global civil society, and the multiplicities of difference that trouble its narrative" (Chua, 2017: 89;Epstein, 2017).…”

Contentious politics, human rights and Australian immigration detention

“…From this perspective human rights are not limited to their institutionalised forms. Beyond international norms, human rights are contested with "struggles over their interpretation, redefinition, and application" (Georgi, 2019).…”

“…While for these reasons human rights could be criticised, their flexibility also presents opportunities to understand how they could be shaped and utilised beyond more traditional standards or rules (Blouin-Genest, Doran, and Paquerot 2019b). From this perspective human rights could be seen as, "a place for interaction between actors within different networks, a place/space where power struggles, societal relations and interactions are translated, creating meanings and understandings that can thus be invoked, contested or resisted" (Blouin-Genest, Doran, and Paquerot 2019b) or similarly, as "socio-political spaces of struggles for meaning, where activists mobilise by claiming a specific understanding and practice of these rights" (Georgi, 2019). In other words human rights are places for claims and contestations, they are "politically constructed objects and powerful political tools that are used for different purposes and that may disrupt and legitimise social institutions" (Georgi, 2019).…”

“…While human rights may exist in theory outside of any given political community, they are rarely protected. In this respect human rights are not inalienable, given through nature or even guaranteed by the state, but "politically constructed objects and powerful political tools" that can be used to "disrupt and legitimise social institutions" (Georgi, 2019). In other words, human rights are "created through human decision and determination" and "instantiated through our action" (Parekh, 2007, 759).…”

“…This is not without tension, raising questions about the nature of rights and the place of legal and political institutions in re-enforcing and resisting oppression. A number of authors have been far more critical of human rights and their capability of securing change, most fundamentally noting that human rights always require political authority (Georgi, 2019). This raises a range of theoretical and practical questions which are beyond the scope of this article, but deserve further exploration in relation to Australia's policies.…”