Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: Our contemporary world is beset with problems such as so called 'terrorists' problems or 'under-development' or 'clash of civilization', etc. However, a few scholars identify the root causes of these problems; even some of the critical scholars ignore the important role of 'secularism' factor in analyzing our contemporary world. I propose that we need to deconstruct 'secularism' through post-colonial lenses and take the strategically essentialized position in order to analyze more accurately of our contemporary world and solve the problems more correctly as well. In order to support this thesis, I will take the choice of focusing on two case studies namely Burma and Indonesia.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: This paper examines the degree to which transnational civil society can effectively impose sanctions on repressive regimes by eliciting corporate withdrawal beyond what is required by governmental sanctions. The test case is the Free Burma Coalition, which represents the most extensive campaign for nongovernmental sanctions since the anti-apartheid movement in the 1980s.
Four techniques are examined: (1) consumer pressure; (2) shareholder pressure; (3) municipal procurement power; and (4) plaintiff's diplomacy.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: Despite proliferating attention that legal and social movement scholars are devoting to transnationalism, they give insufficient attention to “transnational legal space.” Transnational legal space refers to the shifting and contested discursive terrain within and through which state actors, global elites, social movement actors and advocates struggle to shape the legal meanings of rules and relations that are currently being institutionalized to facilitate and constrain the process of globalization, and its uneven impact on the local communities that these actors seek to empower. This paper presents a case study of how and why the Free Burma Movement turned to the U.S. court system to pursue democratic political change in Burma. The study focuses primarily on the transnational legal space that emerged within the context of a suit named Doe v. Unocal, filed under a U.S. law passed by the First Congress in 1789 known as the Alien Tort Claims Act. This landmark case represents an impressive victory for the Free Burma Movement, as well as for allied members of the transnational network of legal rights advocates who hope to build upon it to hold corporations liable for violations of international law relating to human rights. What is new, from a legal perspective, about this particular suit against Unocal is that it represent the first instance in which judges have allowed people to sue corporations, rather than only foreign governments or their state agents, in an American court, on the grounds that the corporation is violating human rights in another country.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: This paper examines a widely publicized human rights legal case filed under the Alien Tort Claims Act (ATCA) in U.S. courts, the so-called Unocal-Burma case (Doe v. Unocal). Before the case’s recent, out-of-court settlement, it became a lightning rod for debates about corporate accountability, the “rule of law,” and human rights politics in an era of globalization. Focusing on this case, the paper examines the ways and conditions under which law and legality figure as resources in counter-hegemonic globalization struggles. It employs qualitative research methods, including interviews with ATCA human rights lawyers and Free Burma movement activists in the San Francisco Bay Area. Engaging scholars such as Michael McCann and Gerald Rosenberg, the paper argues that the Unocal-Burma case and similar legal tactics targeted at corporations have the potential to alter the “political opportunity structure” for corporate accountability activists and (perhaps to a more limited extent) other human rights activists focused on abusive regimes and/or environmental justice. Such corporate ATCA cases appear to affect the political landscape by opening up new, counter-hegemonic avenues for: 1) institutionalizing the principle of “universal jurisdiction”; 2) corporate accountability agenda-setting and enforcement (beyond a voluntary approach); and 3) transnational human rights organizing in the context of globalization.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: This article examines the different underlying causes that resulted in dissimilar political experiences in Bangladesh and Burma: the restoration of democracy in Bangladesh and the consolidation of the military rule in Burma. In the context of Bangladesh, the presence of multiple classes created the basis for a relatively relative autonomy of the state which prevents the possibility of a single class or a group to continue their domination for a longer time and hinders military rulers from building up institutions to continue their rule. On the contrary, in Burma, since the Burman (a major ethnic group) dominated capitalist military elites are controlling the state a ?high autonomy? of the state has emerged that enabled them to build strong institutions and therefore consolidate their power. These institutions have co-opted major religious institutions and ethnically diverse civil society which helped them in maintaining their rule.