Abstract

It is a long-standing principle of international law that every breach of an international obligation that results in harm gives rise to a duty to make adequate reparation. Reparations can take different forms, from the ideal of full restitution to the provision of satisfaction, and the payment of compensation. Notwithstanding reparation's main aim––to ameliorate, if not eradicate, the detrimental consequences of an internationally wrongful act–– it also serves other purposes, such as reinforcing the authority of the norm breached, acknowledging the injury, and recognizing the bearer of harm (the victim). This essay adopts a queer approach to examine the role played by reparation–– in particular, compensation––in determining what (and whose) suffering matters to international law. With a focus on internationally wrongful acts that result in deprivation of life, this piece discusses who is seen as worthy of redress when a violation of the right to life has taken place, as this, in turn, speaks volumes about who is seen as legally entitled to suffer, to mourn and, ultimately, to love. This essay argues that reparation orders from international human rights courts offer a valuable opportunity for re-evaluating––and perhaps even overcoming––heteronormative understandings of kinship.

Highlights

  • It is a long-standing principle of international law that every breach of an international obligation that results in harm gives rise to a duty to make adequate reparation

  • Defining “queer theory” is a difficult task,[1] not least because queer itself lacks a precise meaning, having been described as “whatever is at odds with the normal, the legitimate, the dominant,” resisting a concrete definition while embracing a shifting “positionality vis-à-vis the normative.”[2]. Despite such definitional difficulties, queer theory can be given a working meaning for the purpose of this essay, as a deconstructive strategy that aims at denaturalizing traditional conceptions of gender, sexuality, and kinship.[3]

  • When treaties are intended to last for a long period or to have a “continuing duration,” their terms are subject to an evolving interpretation.[9]. This is especially true for human rights instruments, as these have been construed as “living instruments” whose protective provisions develop with time.[10]

Read more

Summary

SYMPOSIUM ON QUEERING INTERNATIONAL LAW

QUEERING REPARATIONS UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW: DAMAGES, SUFFERING, AND (HETERONORMATIVE) KINSHIP. It is a long-standing principle of international law that every breach of an international obligation that results in harm gives rise to a duty to make adequate reparation. This essay adopts a queer approach to examine the role played by reparation–– in particular, compensation––in determining what (and whose) suffering matters to international law. With a focus on internationally wrongful acts that result in deprivation of life, this piece discusses who is seen as worthy of redress when a violation of the right to life has taken place, as this, in turn, speaks volumes about who is seen as legally entitled to suffer, to mourn and, to love. This essay argues that reparation orders from international human rights courts offer a valuable opportunity for re-evaluating––and perhaps even overcoming––heteronormative understandings of kinship

Queer Theory and the Nuclear Family
AJIL UNBOUND
QUEERING REPARATIONS UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW
Queering the Meaning of Kinship
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call