Difference between revisions of "Kolanoski2017"
ElliottHoey (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Martina Kolanoski |Title=Undoing the Legal Capacities of a Military Object: A Case Study on the (In)Visibility of Civilians |Tag(s)=EMCA...") |
m |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
|Author(s)=Martina Kolanoski | |Author(s)=Martina Kolanoski | ||
|Title=Undoing the Legal Capacities of a Military Object: A Case Study on the (In)Visibility of Civilians | |Title=Undoing the Legal Capacities of a Military Object: A Case Study on the (In)Visibility of Civilians | ||
| − | |Tag(s)=EMCA | + | |Tag(s)=EMCA; Ethnomethodology; Military; German; Legal; |
|Key=Kolanoski2017 | |Key=Kolanoski2017 | ||
|Year=2017 | |Year=2017 | ||
|Journal=Law and Social Inquiry | |Journal=Law and Social Inquiry | ||
| + | |Volume=42 | ||
| + | |Number=2 | ||
| + | |Pages=377-397 | ||
|URL=http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/lsi.12284/full | |URL=http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/lsi.12284/full | ||
|DOI=10.1111/lsi.12284 | |DOI=10.1111/lsi.12284 | ||
|Abstract=International law dictates that actors in armed conflicts must distinguish between combatants and civilians. But how do legal actors assess the legality of a military operation after the fact? I analyze a civil proceeding for compensation by victims of a German-led airstrike in Afghanistan. The court treated military video as key evidence. I show how lawyers, judges, and expert witnesses categorized those involved by asking what a “military viewer” would make of the pictures. During the hearing, they avoided the categories of combatants/civilians; the military object resisted legal coding. I examine the decision in its procedural context, using ethnographic field notes and legal documents. I combine two ethnomethodological analytics: a trans-sequential approach and membership categorization analysis. I show the value of this combination for the sociological analysis of legal practice. I also propose that legal practitioners should use this approach to assess military viewing as a concerted, situated activity. | |Abstract=International law dictates that actors in armed conflicts must distinguish between combatants and civilians. But how do legal actors assess the legality of a military operation after the fact? I analyze a civil proceeding for compensation by victims of a German-led airstrike in Afghanistan. The court treated military video as key evidence. I show how lawyers, judges, and expert witnesses categorized those involved by asking what a “military viewer” would make of the pictures. During the hearing, they avoided the categories of combatants/civilians; the military object resisted legal coding. I examine the decision in its procedural context, using ethnographic field notes and legal documents. I combine two ethnomethodological analytics: a trans-sequential approach and membership categorization analysis. I show the value of this combination for the sociological analysis of legal practice. I also propose that legal practitioners should use this approach to assess military viewing as a concerted, situated activity. | ||
| − | |||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 05:40, 27 September 2017
| Kolanoski2017 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Kolanoski2017 |
| Author(s) | Martina Kolanoski |
| Title | Undoing the Legal Capacities of a Military Object: A Case Study on the (In)Visibility of Civilians |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Ethnomethodology, Military, German, Legal |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2017 |
| Language | |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Law and Social Inquiry |
| Volume | 42 |
| Number | 2 |
| Pages | 377-397 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1111/lsi.12284 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
International law dictates that actors in armed conflicts must distinguish between combatants and civilians. But how do legal actors assess the legality of a military operation after the fact? I analyze a civil proceeding for compensation by victims of a German-led airstrike in Afghanistan. The court treated military video as key evidence. I show how lawyers, judges, and expert witnesses categorized those involved by asking what a “military viewer” would make of the pictures. During the hearing, they avoided the categories of combatants/civilians; the military object resisted legal coding. I examine the decision in its procedural context, using ethnographic field notes and legal documents. I combine two ethnomethodological analytics: a trans-sequential approach and membership categorization analysis. I show the value of this combination for the sociological analysis of legal practice. I also propose that legal practitioners should use this approach to assess military viewing as a concerted, situated activity.
Notes
