Legal Decision-Making in Iraqi Kurdistan

• In Event: 2151 - Comparative Sociology

Abstract

This paper contributes to scholarship on legal decision-making in conflict states through asking a central research question: How do extra-legal factors, particularly perceptions of feared groups, influence legal decision-making during active conflict? Criminal punishments are shaped not only by severity of crime, but perceptions of threatening groups, which are acutely salient during on-going conflict. To answer this, we draw upon the case of the Iraqi Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) examining how their criminal justice system responds to threats posed by the Islamic State (IS). Employing 110 factorial surveys (N=5,500 cases) and 20 qualitative interviews with judges and police, this study assesses which legal and extra-legal factors drive decision-making, as well as gaps between law in practice and law on the books. While democratic rule-of-law assumes equal treatment, critical legal scholars argue legal doctrine is indeterminate, allowing for both legal and extra-legal factors to pattern decision-making. Although there is rich literature on decision-making in Western contexts, there remains significant gaps in our knowledge regarding how social context informs legal actors, particularly during armed conflict. Due to myriad threats posed by IS and the indeterminacy in domestic law governing treatment of enemy combatants, we use the KRG to examine how law is constructed and the power equilibriums it embodies. Early results of our analysis suggest concerns regarding physical protection and terror activity within the region have a much stronger predictive effect on the decision making of police and judges than do relevant legal guidelines and criminal justice policies.

Authors

• Jesse S.G. Wozniak, West Virginia University

• Gabrielle Ann Ferrales, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities

• Wenjie Liao, North Carolina State University