International Peoples’ Tribunals in Asia: Political Theatre, Juridical Farce, or Meaningful Intervention?

Abstract

Since the 1960s, over eighty international peoples’ tribunals have been established outside formal state and international structures. Many have drawn on the forms and procedures of state-sponsored international tribunals and investigated whether states, international organizations, and transnational corporations have violated established norms of international law, while also seeking to infuse it with more progressive values. This paper first provides an overview of the history of international peoples’ tribunals in Asia, then examines three tribunals that have focused on situations in Asia. We argue that not only do peoples’ tribunals respond to a perceived gap in official structures of accountability, but they also perform other functions. These include building solidarity and networks, and recording and memorializing otherwise unacknowledged experiences. Further, such tribunals not only engage in holding states and others accountable informally but also articulate claims about the right of civil society to “own”, interpret, and develop international law.

Civil society challenges the global food system: the International Monsanto Tribunal

“…This tribunal was established to investigate the role of the US government for war crimes in Vietnam. Following the Russell Tribunal, over eighty tribunals have been organized, revealing the evident lack of accountability for adverse impacts experienced by local people (Simm & Byrnes, 2014).…”

“…A relevant organization in this context is the Permanent Peoples' Tribunal, which was established in 1979 in Bologna (Fraudatario & Tognoni, 2018;Permanent Peoples' Tribunal, 2015;Simm & Byrnes, 2014). The Permanent Peoples' Tribunal has the aim to develop law 'for and by people' (Fraudatario & Tognoni, 2018, p. 135).…”

“…Tribunals have its limitations as their recommendations and advisory opinions do not have legal force, and thus they may seem to have little direct impact (Simm & Byrnes, 2014). However, by following formal court procedures including the involvement of international (legal) experts and scientists, these tribunals present an avenue wherein controversial issues can be openly discussed which is essential for catalyzing fundamental changes in the global system (Fraudatario & Tognoni, 2018).…”

“…However, in practice, human rights breaches continue to occur due to unclarity about what actual corporate human rights responsibilities are and mean in the localities of operations (Van der Ploeg & Vanclay, 2017) and due to the inability of national legal mechanisms to effectively respond to community complaints regarding adverse impacts involving multinational corporations' products and activities (Ruggie, 2013). Tribunals such as the IMT are of significant importance to create awareness about the existing gap between internationally agreed human rights standards, and responsibility for negative impacts experienced on the ground (Simm & Byrnes, 2014). We argue that, through the strengthening of international alliances, Tribunals like the IMT play an important role in the process of development and recognition of new legal norms that enable desirable structural changes in the global food system.…”

Public Hearings as Social Performance: Addressing the Courts, Restoring Citizenship

“…This form is not specific to India. For a comparative analysis of the nature and political significance of people's tribunals (of which there are more than eighty today), including a case study on the Independent people's tribunal on the World Bank in India held in 2007, see Simm and Byrnes (2014) 11. Interview, CSO activist, Delhi, 09/03/2012.…”