Strategies of Legal Rupture: The Politics of Judgment

Bhandar, Brenna

Abstract

In this article the author considers the meaning of a legal
strategy of rupture, and the possibilities that such a strategy
holds for anti-colonial and anti-capitalist political resistance.
The strategy of rupture, developed by advocate Jacques Vergès,
and theorised by Emilios Christodoulidis, provides the initial
framework for thinking through how this mode of deploying law
for political transformation could be developed into a general
approach that is applicable not only in the criminal law context,
but also, in other fields of law. Shifting from the strategies of
advocates to the question of judgment, the author analyses a
recent judgment of the Indian Supreme Court, and explores how
legal judgments can affect political ruptures through re-defining
concepts such as security with the interests of the most
marginalised communities in mind. By re-defining concepts that
are vital to protecting the rights of people to resist various forms
of exploitation, and by re-investing rights with new meaning, the
Indian Supreme Court in Sundar et al v State of Chattisgarh
(July 5, 2011) charts a course that holds promise for the
struggles of legal advocates elsewhere.

Citation

Bhandar, B. (2012). Strategies of Legal Rupture: The Politics of Judgment. Windsor yearbook of access to justice, 30(2), 59-78. https://doi.org/10.22329/wyaj.v30i2.4369

• Journal Article Type: Article
• Publication Date: Jan 1, 2012
• Deposit Date: Nov 19, 2014
• Journal: Windsor Yearbook of Access to Justice
• Print ISSN: 0710-0841
• Electronic ISSN: 2561-5017
• Peer Reviewed: Peer Reviewed
• Volume: 30
• Issue: 2
• Pages: 59-78
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.22329/wyaj.v30i2.4369