(Counter-)terrorism and hybridity
Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Chapter
Colleges, School and Institutes
Legal scholars have written much about different ‘models’ of counter-terrorism, with the ‘criminal justice’ and ‘military’ models dominating the discourse. 1 However, these models of counter-terrorism law, and its place within a broader ecosystem of counter-terrorism measures, policies and practices, fail to appreciate the breadth, complexity and drivers of counter-terrorism when viewed in the round. Indeed, this is indicative of legal scholarship on counter-terrorism, which tends (in contrast to some sociological scholarship in the field) to focus almost exclusively on doctrinal legal research, infrequently placing counter-terrorist law and policy within its broader context. In this, hybridity may be a helpful lens through which to view counter-terrorism law and practice; it may facilitate our understanding of counter-terrorism as a field of practice with multiple limbs and elements, indicating more fully the terrain on which critical engagement with terrorism and counter-terrorism ought to focus.
|Title of host publication||Hybridity|
|Subtitle of host publication||law, culture and development|
|Editors||Nicolas Lemay-Hébert, Rosa Freedman|
|Publication status||Published - 17 Feb 2017|