This
anthology is designed to survey the use of counterterrorism laws and their
effects on civil liberties, particularly freedom of expression. The editors for
the volume will be Dr. Téwodros Workneh and Dr. Paul Haridakis of Kent State University. We are seeking chapter proposals for inclusion in a book proposal
we are submitting to Routledge.
The
terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 in the United States as well as other
terrorist-related incidents in different parts of the world have caused
profound changes in political, economic, and social relations globally. Nations
have aggressively sought a wide range of mechanisms to proactively curb
potential threats, such as strengthening controls on immigration, financial
transactions, and regulation of communication systems. While arms of executive
branches such as law enforcement bodies and even militaries are commonly part
of the anti-terrorism apparatus, the most conspicuous common denominator across
nations has been the rise of what came to be known as counter-terrorism laws.
Today, more than 45 countries in the world have enacted legislation that
specifically is designed to address terrorism concerns. Counter-terrorism laws
usually empower states to expedite prosecution of alleged offenders by
bypassing standard criminal jurisprudence processes. Critics argue that
counter-terrorism laws are prone to be misappropriated by state actors who
routinely use such laws in non-terrorism domestic contexts. As a consequence,
laws designed to combat terrorism are being applied domestically in contexts
not involving terrorism—such as governmental efforts to quash political dissent
or restrict other forms of citizen expressive activities.
The recent
prominence of counter-terrorism laws across the world has had significant
implications to the study of global terrorism from social scientific
perspectives (e.g., legal and policy perspectives), especially in terms of
determining what constitutes (and doesn’t) an expression of terrorism. Evidence
from different parts of the world indicate many journalists, media
practitioners, activists and everyday citizens who disseminate alternative or
critical political discourse are experiencing various forms of harassment, persecution,
intimidation, and even legal prosecution under broadly framed terrorism charges
sanctioned by state-sponsored counter-terrorism legislation. For example, in
Ethiopia, the Anti-Terrorism Proclamation of 2009 has been used to prosecute
several bloggers and journalists who were accused of writing about opposition
groups designated by the government as terrorists. In the United States,
despite its strong tradition of First and Fourth Amendment constitutional
rights of free speech and privacy, the FBI has routinely used, provisions of
the USA Patriot Act of 2001 to demand information about U.S. citizens including
journalists’ sources. Saudi Arabia has aggressively used its anti-terrorism law
to criminalize a wide range of peaceful expression that has subjected several
individuals to different forms of retribution including capital punishment.
Broadly
framed, this call for proposals is concerned with how global counter terrorism
laws have conditioned communication patterns, especially in terms of individual
and institutional political speech. Almost all counter-terrorism laws
incorporate language that affects communication, communication systems, media
and/or media practitioners, an individual expression. In many instances, these
laws define alleged terrorist speech, delineate the use of communication
systems to disseminate said speech, and designate parameters to prosecute
terrorists and networks of terrorism. At the same time, journalists, activists,
and everyday media users across the world continue to experience varying
degrees of state-sponsored harassment as a result of the broad interpretation
of counter-terrorism laws that conflate terrorist expression with freedom of
speech. In the midst of the rise of populist politics, nationalist political movements,
and the retreat of the democratic order globally, the question about freedom of
speech in the era of counter-terrorism frameworks is urgent. It is against this
backdrop that we ask: What happens when a state-sanctioned legal framework
aimed at protecting the public from terrorist activity, mostly perpetrated from
foreign adversaries, is used internally against citizens? What are some of the
consequences of using counter-terrorism laws that are prone to conflate freedom
of expression with terrorist acts?
Manuscript
submissions may address the following themes through a case study approach.
Contributors shall focus on a given nation state and can explore one or a
combination of the following thematic areas in addition to other related themes
with the above scope in mind:
- Counter-terrorism laws and self-censorship
- The discourse/rhetoric of counter-terrorism laws
- Counter-terrorism laws and surveillance
- Country case studies of litigation focusing on counter terrorism laws
- Counter-terrorism laws and media practitioners
- Public communication in the age of counter-terrorism laws
- Counter-terrorism laws in democracies
- Counter-terrorism laws in autocracies
- Internet governance and counter-terrorism laws
- Counter-terrorism laws and privacy in digital platforms
- Journalism ethics and counter-terrorism laws
Deadlines
If you
would like to contribute, please submit an abstract of 250-300 words to Dr. Téwodros Workneh (tworkneh@kent.edu) by February 15, 2019.
Submission
components
Title of
chapter
Author
name/s, institutional details
Corresponding
author’s email address
Keywords
(no more than 5)
A short bio
(Maximum 100 words)
Additional
guidelines
Commissioned
chapters will be around 7,000 words. Accepting an abstract does not guarantee
the publication of the final manuscript. Once the book proposal is approved,
all chapters will be subject to a double-blind reviewing process.
Abstracts
and questions should be addressed to Dr. Tewodros Workneh at tworkneh@kent.edu
or Dr. Paul Haridakis at pharidak@kent.edu
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario