
This chapter uses the trajectory of the Southern African Development Community (“SADC”) Tribunal to chart sociopolitical constraints on international judicial lawmaking. It studies the SADC Tribunal backlash case, which paved the way for a curtailment of the Tribunal’s authority, stripping the Tribunal of both private access and its jurisdiction over human rights. Showing how jurisprudential engagement with sociopolitical context plays a significant role in explaining the Tribunal's loss of authority, the chapter introduces the concept of sociopolitical dissonance. Sociopolitical dissonance is a state that results when a legal decision contradicts or undermines deeply held norms that a given society or community forms on the basis of its social, political, and economic history. Sociopolitical resonance, on the other hand, describes the quality of affirming or according with a given society's norms as informed by its sociopolitical history.
| citations This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 3 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
