Paper short abstract:

War on terror is enclosed by hegemonic knowledge on security. This has consequences for the fulfilment of human rights. My paper will discuss the praxis of decision-making and the role of human rights activists and NGOs aiming to engage in the debate of the legitimacy of anti-terrorism strategies.

Paper long abstract:

This paper discusses the War on Terror from a legal anthropological perspective. The study of war on terror and its consequences for the fulfilment of human rights obligations poses many challenges for anthropological research. In order to gain access to the theme which is enclosed by hegemonic knowledge on security at least two main areas have to be studied. The first area consists of the examination of the praxis of decision-makers in producing authoritative knowledge around security issues and on the topic of "balancing". The paper addresses the consequences of the production of such power positions for a democratic societal order. Both European and non-European states have overstepped human rights treaties in the course of the development of strategies to combat terrorism. How much have the states actually derogated from human rights in their territories? Who benefits from the authoritative knowledge on anti-terrorism measures and from the ignorance / violation of people's fundamental human rights? The second area consists of the study of the human rights activists and non-governmental organisations. How well are human rights activists informed about the newly created / used loop-holes in the legislations of their countries? Which issues do they address as the most relevant and severe violations of human rights? How / with which methods do they try to challenge the authoritative knowledge? The paper aims at engaging in the on-going debate of the legitimacy of anti-terrorism strategies and to contribute to this discussion an essential grass-roots perspective. At the same time, questions will be asked about the limits of an anthropological approach on this field