Rwanda under the rule of President Juvenal Habyarimana and the MRND government was a de facto totalitarian governed society, and throughout Habyarimana’s twenty-one year rule, it has been established that there was clear propaganda and hatred directed toward those citizens identified as Tutsi through their national identification records. This article examines the effects of centralized power harbored by Habyarimana and the MRND during this time utilizing a theoretical framework based on the intersection of complementary theory from Foucault, Dahl and Weber. The methodology includes a novel critical discourse analysis (CDA) of transcribed speeches delivered by Habyarimana and Leon Mugesera, as well as a short ethnography of the author’s own experience of visiting memorial sites in Rwanda. Conclusions are reached that bring in analysis of Popper’s Paradox of Tolerance and argue that contrary to some opinion on the matter, it is not unreasonable to expect a degree of restriction of free speech under a limited set of circumstances when a society such as Rwanda’s has suffered previous mass extreme victimization as a result of past abuse of the power-knowledge-discourse relationship.
This paper offers a new perspective on the policing of football fans by exploring the recruitment and use of 'informants', or 'Covert Human Intelligence Sources' (CHIS), in this area of police practice. Drawing upon semi-structured interviews with both football fans and police officers in Scotland we foreground fan experiences against a backdrop where intensive police surveillance has become a routine feature of football events. In particular, our research uniquely provides accounts of fans whom the police sought to recruit as informants, a process known colloquially in policing as being 'pitched'. In doing so we highlight the impact this tactic has on football fans, both individually and collectively. In understanding police perspectives, we note how the use of informants in football policing is frequently justified as a 'legitimate' means to provide intelligence to prevent violence and disorder amongst fans. Cautioning upon the dangers of further 'surveillance creep', we highlight that the use of informants in the policing of football fans and events raises both practical and ethical issues. In particular, we argue that the use of informants in the covert policing of football fans, if this tactic is to be used, must be grounded in a clearly articulated threat of violence and disorder that is accepted by football fans and the wider community. In the absence of this, the use of such tactics is likely to be considered unnecessary and disproportionate by football fans, feeding a wider narrative of criminalisation and a perception of illegitimate and disproportionate forms of policing.
Crime, and in particular violent crime, is a frequent source of media interest both in the form of factual reporting and fictional portrayal. As explained through an analysis of academic and theoretical literature, media representation has the potential to influence large populations and shape the opinions that mainstream society hold related to the perpetrators of such crimes. Case studies examining the CONTEST counterterrorism strategy in the United Kingdom and the failure of the UK Government to implement this strategy in the manner intended, and strategies for demobilization of perpetrators of genocide in Rwanda are outlined in detail. The case studies are then considered together in terms of how they align with what the underpinning theory argues. Overall conclusions are drawn that success and failure of strategies for reintegration of perpetrators of mass violence are dependent on a combination of state buy-in and destruction of the ‘monster' narrative associated with fictional and factual media portrayal of perpetrators in the West in particular.
In this chapter, the author conducts a critical analysis and comparison of laws and practices that legitimise discretionary power in the courtroom from a selection of global north and south jurisdictions. The specific offence of contempt of court in facie curiae is the central focus, where the use of full judicial autonomy, summary, and arbitrary hearings have survived now well into the 21st century. The research conducted shows that there is a global problem with significant overreach of power by members of the judiciary in nearly all jurisdictions investigated. In some cases, this could be viewed as being extreme enough in its overreach to justify being described as abuse of power. Further evidence is presented showing little by way of accountability being held against those judges who misuse their discretionary powers in the courtroom. Recommendations are that there should be reform or development of practice through both judicial training and proportionate disciplinary action where overreach is proven to have occurred in order to minimise future overreaches of power.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.