| dc.description.abstract | Processes of enactment and classification of international crimes are at the forefront of this thesis, which seeks to investigate international criminal law as it is made. In the prosecution of the Bosnian Muslim commander of the Celebici prison camp Hazim Delic in the case of Prosecutor v. Delalic et al., in which Delic was convicted on the count of “rape as torture” of Grozdana Cecez, the Tribunal was forced to engage directly with its understanding of the rights and duties of the individual, its understanding of citizen-state relationship as well as its understanding of torture as a legal concept in order to construct legal classifications under which Hazim Delic’s actions could be defined. This was the first time rape had qualified as a form of torture by an international criminal tribunal, and it was made possible because of the specific processes by which the ICTY and the international community investigated and framed these topics. To investigate the prosecution of Delic, I first examine the Commission of Experts Final Report, which translated social disputes in former Yugoslavia into legal claims. The Indictment focused the findings of the Report onto two manageable counts of rape as “torture” or as “cruel treatment,” which caused the court to closely examine the testimony of the victim in order to find the proper elements for classifications. Finally, I examine the Judgement, which lay out the criteria for the classifications of “rape and “torture” and, in combination with the other documents, enacted the rights and duties of civilians and state officials. I lean on STS literature to examine the law as a situated technology that constructs classifications through its legislative work, work that is conducted to enact an understanding of citizen-state relationships. In the discussion, I find that the documents transform Delic and Cecez into specific kinds of persons in specific places, and take ownership over parts of their experiences in order to construct certain criteria for legal classifications. In this process, they open up political spaces of discussion and dissent, and therefore can be said to constitute a kind of political technology in the making. | eng |