Rights in Exile

Verdirame, Guglielmo; Harrell-Bond, Barbara E.

doi:10.1515/9781782387268

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Scholars in the field of sociology and anthropology of law identify pluralistic legal systems and recognize the importance of “living law”—which is not necessarily regulated by legal state principles (Berman, 2020a; Ehrlich, 1936; Griffiths, 2017). From this point of view, it may therefore come as a surprise that refugee camps are repeatedly characterized as spaces of legal limbo or state of exceptions where law is suspended (Agier, 2011, p. 82; Hanafi & Long, 2010; Verdirame & Harrell‐Bond, 2005, p. 334; Agamben, 2002, p. 179). But how do the authors come to this conclusion and how can the legal situation in refugee camps be described?…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…International organization are importers of international legal norms and have taken on governance responsibility in camps (Janmyr, 2016, p. 415). Scholars argue that camps are managed by a “humanitarian government” (Agier, 2011) with state like administration and governance functions (Verdirame & Harrell‐Bond, 2005, p. 186). Camps are considered to be “sites of neo‐colonial power relations” (Hyndman, 2001, p. 263).…”

Section: Introduction and Research Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Pluralism and local law in extraterritorial spaces

Bochmann

2023

Law Soc Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Based on ethnographic research, this article shows how legal orders are being established in spaces where the state law is absent. The case of refugee camps—often discussed as sites of legal limbo and state of exception—seems to be a space of legal pluralism. However, when observing local legal practices, this pluralism is dissolved into a powerful local camp law. This characteristic type of legal order is produced by social camp‐specific mechanisms, camp materiality as well as the remaking of pre‐camp structures. Therefore, refugee camps should be viewed as extraterritorial spaces with a high degree of legal autonomy that enables and forces residents to create a local camp law. The findings of this study add to the literature of law and order in camps and to the debates on plural configurations in extraterritorial spaces.

show abstract