Giorgios Askitas

Haunted Legal Memory: Ibsen, International Law, and the Ghosts of Yugoslavia

Introduction

Haunted legal memory: ibsen, international law, and the ghosts of yugoslavia. Ibsen's 'Ghosts' reveals haunted legal memory in post-Yugoslavia. Explores how law, theatre, and history intersect, analyzing legal systems' struggle with justice, denial, and the past.

Abstract

This paper explores the intersection of law, theatre and collective memory through Ibsen’s “Ghosts”, framed within the post-Yugoslav memorial lawscape. By reading Mrs. Alving, Oswald and Pastor Manders as allegories of the State, civil society and the international community, it examines how law becomes haunted by history. Through memory laws, mnemonic agents, and ghost narratives, it argues that legal systems both preserve and suppress the past. The Yugoslav case, marked by Srebrenica and its fragmented remembrances, reveals a haunted jurisprudence where justice and denial share the same stage. L’articolo analizza l’intersezione tra diritto, teatro e memoria collettiva attraverso “Spettri” di Ibsen, nel contesto giuridico e memoriale post-jugoslavo. Interpretando Mrs. Alving, Oswald e il Pastore Manders come allegorie dello Stato, della società civile e della comunità internazionale, si mostra come il diritto sia perseguitato dai fantasmi della storia. Attraverso leggi della memoria, agenti mnemonici e narrazioni spettrali, si evidenzia come il diritto conservi e insieme sopprima il passato. Il caso jugoslavo rivela una giurisprudenza “infestata”, dove giustizia e negazione condividono la stessa scena.

Review

The paper, "Haunted Legal Memory: Ibsen, International Law, and the Ghosts of Yugoslavia," presents a highly original and ambitious interdisciplinary inquiry into the complex interplay of law, theatre, and collective memory. By skillfully framing Ibsen’s "Ghosts" within the challenging post-Yugoslav memorial lawscape, the author proposes an intriguing allegorical reading, casting Mrs. Alving, Oswald, and Pastor Manders as representations of the State, civil society, and the international community, respectively. This framework sets out to explore how legal systems are inherently "haunted" by history, simultaneously preserving and suppressing the past. The abstract effectively highlights the paper’s focus on the Yugoslav case, particularly the enduring impact of Srebrenica and its fragmented remembrances, as a poignant illustration of this "haunted jurisprudence" where justice and denial tragically converge. The strength of this proposed work lies in its innovative conceptualization and its sophisticated interdisciplinary methodology. The use of Ibsen’s classic drama as an allegorical lens to dissect the intricate layers of post-conflict memory and legal response in the former Yugoslavia is particularly compelling. This approach promises to yield fresh insights into the often-elusive mechanisms by which historical traumas, particularly those involving international crimes like Srebrenica, continue to influence legal frameworks, societal reconciliation, and the politics of memory. The concept of "haunted jurisprudence" is a powerful analytical tool, suggesting a deep engagement with critical legal theory and memory studies, offering a nuanced understanding of how legal systems grapple with contested pasts, particularly where official narratives clash with lived experiences and persistent denials. While the abstract provides a compelling outline, a full paper would benefit from a rigorous and detailed exploration of the specific legal mechanisms and institutions through which this "haunting" manifests. Further elaboration on the precise nature and impact of "memory laws" and the roles of "mnemonic agents" within the Yugoslav context would strengthen the empirical grounding of the theoretical claims. A crucial aspect for development would be to move beyond the allegorical to demonstrate, with concrete examples, how the "ghosts" of history directly influence legal decisions, judicial interpretations, or the implementation (or lack thereof) of justice. Nonetheless, this paper presents a profoundly timely and relevant contribution to discussions surrounding transitional justice, memory politics, and the enduring legacy of conflict, and is poised to make a significant impact on its respective fields.

Full Text

Comments

You need to be logged in to post a comment.