ICON S Conference 17 – 19 June 2016 Humboldt University Berlin

28 COLLECTIVE MEMORY
AND PUBLIC LAW
The study of collective memory as a determinant of
the development of societies, culture, and law has
become a central focus of research. This panel aims
to address the ideas implicit in the concept and considers
collective memory in different arenas of public
law – domestic and international. The concept of collective
memory starts from the premise that people
normally acquire their memories not only through
individual means, but also through social processes,
including law. Collective memory interacts in diverse
ways with public law (both domestic and international).
The papers in the panel explore the roles of legal
mechanisms as agents of memory who participate in
the construction of collective memory on these various
levels, the strategic uses of collective memory by
legal institutions both judicial and legislative, and the
relationships between collective memories formed
on the local, domestic level and their employment by
transnational organizations in the international arena.
Participants Renana Keydar
Margit Cohn
Moshe Hirsch
Name of Chair Sungjoon Cho
Room DOR24 1.604
Renana Keydar: Plurality of Testimonies and the
Formation of Global Collective Memory
The paper analyzes the role of witness testimonies
in the formation of collective memory through the work
of transitional justice institutions dealing with mass
atrocity and human rights violations. It suggests that an
under-appreciated aspect of contemporary engagement
with testimonies is its condition of plurality. The
paper examines how quantitative and qualitative plurality
of voices participating in transitional processes
affects the creation of collective narratives about the
past. Looking comparatively at the Eichmann trial (1961)
and the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission
(1995), the paper argues that while storytelling
served as the main component in understanding the
crimes of the past, the strategies for employing and
using storytelling in each of the mechanisms were
strikingly different. Modeling these two approaches
for designing collective memory, the paper explores
the ethical implications and the legal ramifications of
plurality in transitional processes.
Margit Cohn: When and Where Does History Begin?
The Treatment Of Asylum Seekers In Israel
In this paper I consider the strategic use of collective
memories in the legislative process, and analyze,
as a case- study, the treatment of the State of Israel of
the recent surge of illegal entrants into Israel, mainly
from Africa. Against a government policy of adopting
a stricter regime, I discuss a series of four legislative
amendments, enacted between 2012 and 2016
in response to three Supreme Court decisions that
found the first three amendments unconstitutional, and
assess lawmakers’ reliance on the State’s collective
memory of the Holocaust and other mnemonic narratives
of oppression. A quantitative analysis of oral
presentations by members of Israel’s parliament in the
process of the legislation, compared with some presentations
regarding the removal of international sanctions
against Iran, offers proof that collective memories
are used strategically by policy- and law-makers.
Moshe Hirsch: The Role of International Tribunals
in the Construction of Collective Memories
The paper aims to discuss the interactions between
collective memories and international tribunals,
and particularly the social role of tribunals in the development
of international collective memories. The
concept of collective memory starts from the premise
that people normally acquire their memories not only
through individual means, but through social processes
as well. Group membership often provides materials
for memory, and prods individuals into recalling
particular events. The paper addresses the question
whether it is desirable to use international judicial
proceedings to form or affect collective memories?
The paper explores this question from three major
sociological perspectives (structural functional, symbolic-interactionist
and social conflict approaches).
These three theoretical approaches suggest different
answers to the above question, and offer different
guidelines concerning the historical narratives to be
presented by international tribunals.
Concurring panels 59