Doctoral Dissertation Research: What is crime in the context of post-conflict?

恢复性司法法院为减轻战后冲突提供了替代手段。与民事法院更常见的传统惩罚性措施不同，恢复性司法法院为受害者和肇事者创造机会，使他们有机会进行有意义的接触，努力实现和平。这样的法院在实现和平方面是否更有效？犯罪与和平的定义与司法制度有何不同？为了阐明这些问题，这项博士论文研究使用了文化人类学和法律研究的理论来询问法院类型如何影响犯罪的定义，以及在冲突后的背景下谁被认为是罪犯。除了为人类学研究生提供经验数据收集和分析方法方面的培训提供资金外，该项目还向学术界和非学术界的受众广泛传播成果。该项目侧重于有关暴力和犯罪如何界定的研究问题，包括普通犯罪和政治犯罪之间的界限，以及司法系统的经验如何影响利益攸关方的生计。研究人员进行了一项民族志研究，包括基于法庭的民族志、观察法、访谈和档案分析，以回答项目问题。通过这样做，这项博士研究对过渡司法和刑法在冲突后民主和和平建设中的作用的学术研究做出了贡献。这一奖项反映了国家科学基金会的法定使命，并通过使用基金会的知识价值和更广泛的影响审查标准进行评估，被认为值得支持。

Restorative justice courts provide alternate means of mitigating conflict in post-war contexts. As opposed to traditional, punitive measures more common in civil courts, restorative justice courts create opportunities for victims and perpetrators to engage in meaningful encounters that strive toward peace. Are such courts more effective at achieving peace? How do definitions of crime and peace vary in relation to judicial systems? To shed light on these questions, this doctoral dissertation research uses theory from cultural anthropology and legal studies to ask how the type of court affects definitions of crime and who is considered a criminal in a post-conflict setting. In addition to providing funding for the training of a graduate student in anthropology in the methods of empirical data collection and analysis, the project disseminates results broadly to academic and non-academic audiences.The project focuses on research questions surrounding how violence and crime are defined, including the boundaries between ordinary and political crimes, and how experiences in judicial systems affect livelihoods of stakeholders. The investigators conduct an ethnographic study involving court-based ethnography, observational methods, interviews, and archival analysis to answer project questions. In so doing, this doctoral research contributes to academic scholarship on the role of transitional justice and criminal law in post-conflict democracy and peacebuilding.This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.