41 – Everyday Lawfare: The Politics of Legal Case-Making by Ordinary Citizens
While much research has focused on how states use the law to reinforce its power and achieve unstated ends, little research has discussed the unintended ways that ordinary citizens utilize the law against each other. To address this gap, this panel focuses on the everyday politics of case-making. In particular, it will consider the widely noted phenomenon of so-called ‘fake cases’ in South Asia, employed systematically in some contexts, whereby citizens file bogus legal cases, not to achieve a favorable verdict but to influence power dynamics or to gain a political advantage. For example, people may begin criminal cases to apply pressure on others, to win an election, resolve long-pending civil cases, force divorce proceedings, or resolve land disputes. We suggest that common narratives of a lack of state capacity or ‘weak state’ are not sufficient to explain why people appeal to the law and state institutions – albeit often in ways not envisioned by lawmakers. By comparing case studies across South Asia, we aim at a deeper theorization of the role of law in the region and how legal gray zones are utilized to pursue political goals in unintended, but often systematic, ways. What role do factors such as gender, class, caste, ethnicity, or political affiliation play in such politics of case-making? To what extent do the dynamics of state law reinforce existing power inequalities? Under what circumstances might the law be used to empower marginalized groups? How do the different actors (e.g., plaintiffs, defendants, police officers, lawyers, judges, and politicians) involved in such ‘fake cases’ view the state and formal law?
