 Welcome to the School of Resistance at Akademide Künste, Berlin, a film and discourse series that connects art and activism. My name is Kasia Wojcik and together with my colleagues Elina Banken and Martin Waldes-Stauber, I am curating the discourse series School of Resistance, which connects art and activism. What strategies and tools can we use to create valuable alternatives for our future? How is art and activism entangled? Where do these two forms of practice meet? How do they influence each other? Today, we discuss the possibilities, conditionings and problems of transnational justice and injustice. How can debates about global injustice be addressed with aesthetic means but also legally, scientifically? What would a global jurisdiction mean? Are projects such as the Congo Tribunal breaking ground and creating utopian possibilities for a new law? And for that, I'm very proud to speak about this today with two experts of the field in their own practices. And first of all, I would like to introduce the audience to both of them. Miriam Sagemas is a lawyer and the Vice Legal Director at the European Centre for Constitutional and Human Rights, where she coordinates the Business and Human Rights Program. She has worked on various cases against corporations, including proceedings against LIDL, relating to the exploitation of workers in Bangladesh and Pakistan, and against companies trading in cotton picked by forced child labor in Uzbekistan. Lara Stahl is a researcher, writer, artist and curator. Between 2013 and 2016, she worked as a programmer for the theatre producer Fescati, where she developed various projects between arts and other fields on the basis of shared urgencies. For example, international law, who's law or out of state. Since 2017, she has been working as a freelance curator in the realm of the performing arts and has realized projects such as the Evening of Anga, together with rapper Gideon Everdoem, and Europe on Trial, together with human rights activist Eunice Osman Noor. Since 2018, she's involved at Antighent with various artistic projects. Antighent is one of the partners of School of Resistance and producers. Okay, that was a long introduction. But first of all, I would like to start off the conversation by introducing a case that just recently got media attention. In February 2021, the UK Supreme Court granted the residence of the Niger Delta the right to sue Royal Dutch Shell in British courts for environmental pollution. Thus, Nigerian farmers and fishermen can sue the oil company Royal Dutch Shell in English courts for environmental pollution. And I would like to end this introduction with a quote from Donald Pulse, who is the director of a Dutch NGO. This is a warning to all corporations involved in injustices around the world. Victims of pollution, land theft or exploitation now have a greater chance of winning legal battles against such corporations. Miriam, could you explain about the importance of this case in the field of global law? Because for what I understood in this case was it didn't get that much media attention as it maybe should have. Yes, this is indeed a really important judgment and I felt because it was I think first in the Netherlands and then a week later the UK Supreme Court decided and I found this very exciting and all of my colleagues who are working on this topic as well and you're right for whichever reasons it didn't make it too much into the news. But I think why this judgment is so important is that we need to understand that global economy and globalized economy is organized through law a lot of times through company law or through commercial law and these laws are particularly made up to outsource responsibility. So under normal company law Royal Dutch Shell with its headquarters both in the Netherlands and in the UK is not supposed to have any responsibility towards what is happening in the subsidiaries in Nigeria. Although it's super clear financially they are the ones that are coordinating all the efforts and also obviously all the profits end up at the headquarters. But the law in principle at least economic law is designed to exactly leave people like people in the Niger Delta is exactly to leave them without remedy, without justice. And now those two rulings which have been litigated forever in courts we can't forget that the Dutch case I think it took 13 years to come to this stage and also in the UK the litigation has started somewhat in the late 1990s this particular case but sort of to be building up casework that was able then to lead to this decision. And now both courts have found that companies that have a headquarters in Europe and have operations elsewhere bear an own duty of care towards environmental and human rights impact of the subsidiaries. Of course there are a couple of conditions of that but I think this is the key message. Despite the fact that you are organizing yourself through company law so that you don't bear responsibility for all the costs, the human costs, the environmental costs that you create you do still have your own duty and if something goes wrong you may be liable for this. And another aspect that is very important especially in the UK is that the court has said we're determining the responsibility by your own policies and that means company policies to some extent are legally relevant which is I find also really important because normally companies say oh well yeah we have this wonderful policy on environmental whatever protection and then you go oh well so what does it mean and then they say well but it's just a policy you know it has nothing to you know no one can claim a right from this and at least the Supreme Court has made an important step in this regard. Thank you for explaining that to me and our audience and connecting to that I would really like to know more of the work that the ECCHR is doing so please what are you doing? Yeah so we are mainly lawyers not all of us are lawyers but we also have researchers and people from policy fields but we're mainly lawyers and our aim is we want to use law and we want to use legal procedures to counter power and of course we are working in the field of human rights so we are working on cases of torture we're working on human rights violations at the European borders and where I'm particularly working on it's about holding European companies to account for human rights violation abroad and the idea is that we feel it's particularly as an organization that is located in Europe that is located in Germany and also that it's you know the legitimacy of our work is that we're criticizing European actions and those that are in power and not so much looking around or everyone else's mistakes and how we go about this is we have created a wider network of people organizations that do similar work or people that are more in activism around the world in Africa and Latin America and Asia and we are regularly discussing certain topics so through those discussions we've come to sort of three core areas we are generally working on and in networks that we are also engaged in so one is companies involvement in conflict and wars and cooperation with repressive regimes and there we have been for the last years we have in particularly working on holding European arms trading companies to account for arms deliveries they are making in the last two cases we have been on Yemen so we are holding them to account of Germany but other also European companies delivering arms to Saudi Arabia that are then being used in Yemen for attacks against civilians the other area we are working on is the question of labor exploitation in global supply chains that's also an area that I don't know I have been working for a very long time where also again the aim is to help workers claim their rights from the lead firms in those supply chains where usually the power really is that do set the conditions of the production process and with that all the human rights abuses and environmental harm that comes with it and then the third area we are looking more into the agribusiness resource area and there we are looking at responsibility of pesticides company large industrial companies but also the responsibility of companies involved in green energy but actually just replicating the same exploitative methods as any other resource as an oil company would do in terms of the social consequences of creating a wind park in Mexico or elsewhere so then grabbing repression against people that are opposed and so on thank you that brings me to my personal question that I have to you but also to you Lara because I think it's a question to all of us and to the audience I remember speaking to the Pakistani trade unionist Nazir Mansour about the fatal unemployment of Pakistani garment workers during the first lockdown in March 2020 as the corona pandemic shut down global supply chains as we know it and he told me that not to buy these products so garment products is tragic for the workers involved so massive unemployment all of that and then my question is to you both what do you think or could be the responsibility as a global citizen also from your practice as a lawyer your practice as an artist how can I support these workers and their struggles or how can I support other people who are facing injustice yeah I think to start with I think yes the pandemic and has been I think Bangladesh has been within three or three weeks it has been basically the whole industry like the whole country has been close to collapse because as the demand broke down the textile companies are in such a powerful position that they were just able to say we're not even paying for goods that are being delivered right now because we don't want to because we don't know when we're going to sell them and it sort of showed so much about the power structures and we've also looked at contracts and it was completely illegal they had no grounds to say that because they can and they know they're not going to be sued by any of the suppliers they could and yes it shows what this shows is how much we are connected and tangled and yes so obviously a boycott of H&M or whoever you want is not the solution because people's life depends on this at the same time I would say well I think we need to think about how can a just transition look like because this system is not it can't go on like this we have planetary boundaries clothes are getting always cheaper and cheaper and as clothes are getting cheaper and cheaper what is ending up with supplier firms is less and less and that means workers have to work more for less so that they produce more so that we can consume more because we also rages are not rising here in Europe either so clothes must be cheaper so we can buy more and then we have those huge masses of clothes that no one can wear and that need to be thrown away so obviously it's a it's a service circle and I don't think that it's about only our personal consumption consumers choices that will stop this I do think we knew everyone of us needs to think about what are my ethics about my consumption but I think it's a completely neoliberal idea that I will make the world better by drinking the right coffee or by buying the right clothes or not buying clothes I don't think that this is the way what we really need is we need structural changes and therefore I think it's a lot and leaves us with not ethical consumerism but much more we need to be politically engaged and probably also try to use our helplessness and our anger that this creates because I think we can't avoid profiting from exploitation it's just unless you decide to completely withdraw yourself from everything but unless you don't do that you can't avoid this and the question how do we use this and how do we and I think how do we engage and for example struggles for better rules this is something that's being debated currently in a lot of countries in Europe that we say we want other rules and we want our companies to obey those so that we don't have it's not my responsibility which product I buy to make sure that it has been hopefully produced under good circumstances so and I think there are other ways of you know there are some initiatives that create those bounds between workers in Bangladesh and workers also for example in H&M shops and so on of course they are smaller initiatives but I think in general it's we must be understanding ourselves as a political agent and as citizens that's interesting Lara for you when I when I am asking about the responsibility of a political citizen what does that mean for you in the terms of justice I think I can very much relate to what Miriam just said I think there's something dangerous about trying to enter this question on an individual level and I think that's what happens a lot what do you do with almost this unconscious argument like if you don't recycle everything stop buying well how can you blame society start first with yourself and I think that's a very dangerous discourse and it also creates a situation in which we don't feel we can as people live responsibility at our governments live responsibility at the corporations, organize ourselves create mass protest etc because we're constantly put back into this individual position so I think that's very dangerous still it's a relevant question and of course I think it's easy to think I'm a good man I'm at the right side of history I think about all these things and then if you speak to someone really living at the place where if I buy that trousers at H.A.M makes a huge difference it's important to hear that and to understand that things are much more complex than we think on a very personal level I cannot buy anything from shops like H&M or primary or all these horrible things because I just it makes me extremely depressed and I think I feel that these shops are giving an impression of a world that is impossible to continue but that's really on a personal level I don't think I make I help with that decision or I do something very good but on a personal level it is so far from the real reality and from the reality to which we should be heading that I cannot see myself operating and that is even though I know I operate in it also when I don't buy Thank you, what I found very interesting you both spoke about emotions you mentioned anger and you like the depression that comes when buying something so how to use these emotions also in a political sense is something that interests me sometimes but going now because our conversation has its time limits I would like to ask you Lara about your artistic work and in your artistic work you take a look at law with the tools of theatre and could you explain more how are politics and art interconnected within your practice and could you explain that to us and maybe because I found a quote in one of the interviews with you where you spoke about using cultural institutions like theatres to try alternatives could you elaborate on that please Sure I'll try I think what is important for me is to situate a bit where we are placing our work in today's society let's say I come from theatre that's important I think the whole thinking about the performative but I also think it's important to understand that in our let's say North European context after the Second World War we entered into this idea of free art and therefore it got very isolated also from society so of course after fascism it was extremely important to say there should be a non-ideological free space inside your free expression and I think that created a situation where we see art as something separate from society that you visit in black boxes and galleries became something therefore also very exclusive elitist something that I mean you can afford if you have I mean you go when you can afford or you go because you have the education you feel it's important so I think there is already a very problematic development where we don't regard art as something that is part of being a human really worldwide and everyone should have access to and also that art is not something separate from society so for me thinking about theater and performance is also thinking about reality so if we think about the way the world operates the way we are having this conversation everything has to do with conventions role-playing performance we're making reality and we do that on the basis of certain codes certain agreements I think often unconscious but somehow we forget that it can also be otherwise so somehow we got so used to how things go that we see that as reality and then we go to theater to see fiction but I think what theater can do nowadays actually show that these differences are not so different that the reality that we live in and the theater that tries out alternatives is actually very much close to each other and that theater and that theater can show how we're playing theater all the time and if we're playing theater all the time it means we can also play differently and that's I think what is very important so we're not that powerless as we think and we are co-creating systems that we are against every day of course it's also not that easy so if it comes to what we've been just speaking about the injustice in the clothing market is so huge it's so structural of course we don't have the feeling that as an individual we can quickly by just role playing differently change the world but still I would say that it's super important to acknowledge that the reality is not fixed and that through theater we can also become much more aware of all the struggles in the past that people went through in order to change things and that things really changed because of it so that's one of the things and then I think if I make it more concrete because this is probably kind of meta answer but still important for me I think in my work assembly is very important and this idea of getting people together that maybe otherwise would not meet or not that easy or would not hear each other that easy I think already the possibilities of theater to create a politicized space I think we really lack politicized spaces because global capitalism is everywhere because profit is everywhere where are the spaces where we can meet to talk about values to talk about ethics to talk about ideology to talk about where we stand for as a society where can we exercise that where can we exercise also certain procedures so I'm sure that we will talk about that later on but if it comes to trials how many of us witness trials I don't think any of us citizens find the time to say well let's check the website of the court what's happening on Friday maybe there's a case that interests me I want to follow what happened because these are fellow citizens and whatever outcome happens there is also about me should be about me and I think that's one of the reasons why trials for me became very interesting because I felt like well if the court cannot be so attractive for people which of course has a lot to do with the language being used all the trash holds the bureaucracy etc etc that is not there for nothing so let's not simplify also but maybe theater can play a role in that and maybe theater can create a trial or process or people's tribunal or political arena where people feel free to enter and to exercise appearance articulation thinking processes and I think that's a very important place where we can inform ourselves emancipate ourselves and exercise alternative futures you have sent us a short compilation video of Europe on trial and before we show it could you tell us very shortly what it is about briefly I have been working with a group, a protest group a refugee protest group in Amsterdam for a couple of years they are called We Are Here and the title is very significant because what their protest was about was that at some point they decided collectively with the group of people to not hide anymore so there's a systematic system in the Netherlands where people do not get asylum for various reasons because their identity hasn't been clarified or because the Netherlands feel their countries are safe or whatever but for various reasons cannot be sent back traumas, money, visa whatever and so they are put back to the streets basically and with a message to just disappear and so this protest group was saying at some point well we are there, we exist we are on the ground of this country and you should acknowledge that we are part of your responsibility around we are here an organization started here to support with whom I did several artistic projects trying to find a way of expressing let's say the injustice as if it comes to the position of refugees through artistic means and after one project specifically me and one of the spokesman of we are here Eunice Osmanour had the idea to start a trial and to use theater to be able to start a trial against Europe because of the many deaths in the Mediterranean if it comes to refugees seeking refuge of course this was very much also in the time of the summer of the so called refugee crisis a very problematic term and we were feeling extremely powerless and extremely angry because of what was happening and we could not believe there was not something like a case against Europe against the European Union for closing all these very problematic deals with countries like Libya and Turkey pushbacks for paying guards, Libyan coast guards for criminalizing captains that were actually trying to save people etc etc etc I mean harbors that closed people on boats for days we all know these terrible stories and so we thought well we do not have access to something like the international criminal court but we have access to theater and maybe we can start already suing Europe in a let's say fictional space in the hope that somehow this fiction could haunt reality and could influence reality and maybe just by speaking it out something could become possible that maybe people thought before was not possible should I say more about the project how it's been set up first of all I think that's also a good introduction first we have time afterwards to discuss more I'm already seeing questions from the audience thank you for that dear audience but I would first put on now the video of the project that Lara just described Europe on trial and we'll see each other in some minutes after that again this might look like a stage and it might look like theater it might look like a performance but it's really about addressing the real issues and the real challenges there is no lawyer that will defend Europe the speakers will all temporarily step into the shoes of expert witnesses defense lawyer or prosecutor but the most important role is reserved for you the audience the jury but also the accused as citizens of Europe today I'm standing in front of you to accuse Europe of violations to human rights with regards to its asylum policies I accuse the European Union of sending people back to places they've so desperately tried to flee for being obsessed by statistics instead of ethics nobody chooses to be a refugee refugee I would say that by asking the European Union to live up to its moral obligations we should be very careful in a time of mass migration in a time of disruption of many countries surrounding Europe to safeguard the moral middle ground and not overstating attributing guilt how are we willing to do as much as we possibly can the answer can only be yes or no and it cannot be yes but say aye I call upon the indictment of Europe for colonialism and before we think it's a thing of the past let us remember of the ever-muffing new colonial practices of political control occupation economic exploitation and a multinational cooperation say aye I call upon the indictment of Europe for structural adjustment programs constant growth growth growth growth at what cost at all cost immigrants have become a political capital of sorts for political parties it's politically more sound to keep a problem in place than to actually solve it I come by a boat I never had passport in my life I lost the possibility to live a normal life because I'm just not good at solving my story I stand before you because the Dutch asylum system has failed me my interview was a very big challenge to me because the questions that were really asked most of them were very intimate I belong to the LGBT community where I come from in our daily life we don't normally talk about the kind of people we are I stand here in front of you as a witness in a court case a contemporary witness gives an account of time he or she has experience in which now passed into history I cannot tell about the time I have experience but I can tell about the time I have not experienced the time that was stolen from me the real effect of asylum law among others is the intentional prolonging of the period of time in which certain people are dependent Europe completely drained Africa on the Middle East drained it from resources drained it from abled bodies time is money they drained it from time this is the debt that Europe owes everyone around it and while there were no actors in this trial today and were standing in the historical court building of Amsterdam we might see this event as artistic or in other words not real even in a court we cannot erase subjectivities because courts are made by people and people are not objective subjectivity is present in every element of through seeking it emphasizes the immense responsibility we have proven chosen here today is quite harsh, guilty or not guilty if you stand up it's guilty if you sit it's not guilty there is no way in between in this forum today we've showed that it's possible to say that Europe is guilty and for me the world looks different after such a verdict let's transform our guilt into responsibility and let's act upon it thank you so for me the interesting question and for our audience too is Lara how can art transgress art in the sense that it becomes reality so that is a question from the audience and could you answer to that I think there are two possible answers one of it is a more abstract and complex answer and that is that I think that we're very used in our thinking in general if it comes to art or otherwise to think into very clear ideas of quantified impact so the question is always what was the impact how did you change the world how did you change the world how did you change the world how did you change the world how did you change the impact how did you change the world how has reality been changed and I think that's a bit of a risky approach although of course it's important to keep on asking it because it could be easy also saying like well everything changes always and we don't know how but it's a risky approach because I don't think that's how democracies work and I think that's also not how history worked and I think we can see that a lot of things that change in history there have been multiple struggles but it's almost never a linear story it's almost never the story of one hero deciding something and then most of people would follow and then for days there was a person and then bomb there was a new law it's almost never the case it's after years of years of hard struggle invisible struggle precarious struggle and the moment that is right is really able to put so much pressure that there's really a change is not something you can direct or organize top down and is something that makes us often forget all the hard work that has been done years before so I think it's a bit the same with an art project that it is difficult to tell how Europe on trial changed anything because it's often processes that are also invisible so it's often about many conversations that happened afterwards people seeing a work people participating people then continuing certain things ideas that are generated through a project so it's in that sense hopefully every project creates some sort of change and that's not always seeable or quantifiable I think that's which doesn't mean it was not useful I think that's one part of the answer the other part of the answer is that I think that it's very important to form alliances so I think one of the consequences of this idea that art should be autonomous or free expression or in a free non politicized space is that we artists often work alone or feel that we are the real creators and we have the imagination and we come up with this fantastic ideas and that's really something for me personally that's interesting and interested in political art is a reason really to see artistic works as something that always are in alliance or in collaboration with other organizations with political organizations with NGOs with legal organizations and that it's very important that if we are serious about ourselves that first of all we cannot solve the problem by ourselves second of all artistic productions often very precarious very I know it's one moment one subsidy never enough people overwork so it's very important to have strong institutions that are able also to create more sustainable work or lines or continue to work afterwards you need expertise you need people so what is great I think that something that artists can do is this role of the amateur right lawyer but I'm interested in law and I'm interested in trials and I'll just try to create my own trial and of course I've been speaking to lawyers and to experts but because I'm an amateur I can have this bluntness I can just do it and try to change it from within because I don't have all the rules and all the all the details in mind and that's something good but on the same time I need someone that tells me well what you're now going to do is very problematic or here I see a lot of potential you should just go deeper so I think one of I mean my critical point after your trial was that it was not embedded enough and that it's very important that if you're serious about your political aims that you really start to collaborate from the beginning yes thank you Lara so for me the question also was in your project Europe on trial putting Europe on trial is different than work you do Miriam it's more of a symbolic accuse of a whole community and this is a question now to you both because we see the atrocities that are happening at European borders we know about them and can we put Europe on trial? First of all that for you Miriam um yeah there are a couple of that actually realized into actually real legal actions and um but I would say no you cannot put Europe on trial because in law a lot of times you do need to argue for you need to have a very fine argument on attributing responsibilities and I think as law is made up I don't think law would have to be this way but at the moment as it is made up there are a number of barriers to arguing this um but still I think sort of on how we try to go about this is to say we want to stay within the boundaries of law and sort of the the variety of legal arguments you can use but then you know push the law step beyond that and um sort of to be do it to say because we do want to be seriously in the sense of that this is a case that everyone really needs to look into seriously that you know the judges cannot just dismiss and say oh this has just been made for publicity but again to be still thinking is how can you go a step further with that um which is interesting because art can actually do this also yes and I think I really like what Lara just said because I think also this idea of creating um a space where you can think about something alternatively you know where you can say you know the future could be different um and I think this is very much also how how I would see um our cases you know because it's it's um we actually also have the same debate so of course you know critical lawyers say oh you know what do you think what is you know is law ever changing reality is not using the law meaning reinforcing the whole system and reinforcing power structures and to some extent it is and then the question is so it can law ever be emancipatory can you ever use it for something different and then I would say well you know why I'm also not really sure I'm not one case even if it's one is not going to change everything and I also think it's exactly this you know you need to work in broader alliances it cannot be just the experts on law it must be political actors must be people on the ground people must be the claimants need to have I think um at best you know what their political goal is actually also beyond this why do they want to go to court what is it that they want to claim there not just to hope to get justice because our justice system is you know a different code and often not you know giving justice but so you know but that you can work with what you why you're bringing this forth um and and I think so one example is um the case we've been doing with Pakistani workers that have lost family members in a large factory fire in Pakistan in 2012 and they went to the court of Dortmund in Germany um and claiming compensation from the retailer that had ordered the genes that their children were producing and that died then in the fire and I think this moment you know there's everything the law says we're all equal which in reality they are not equal but this you know this woman and those other like Saida Khatun um and the other three claimants they are able to go to court and say one moment imagine what would the world look like if every Pakistani worker could go to the court of Dortmund and claim their rights for every rights violation if that was standard and then if it was standard that actually kick does bear responsibility that they actually do have to care what is happening and that they do need to make up for the costs that their production causes the real costs no not just the little money they pay for the product and and I think sort of you know you have this also in this in this courtroom and it's of course asking this question and say it could be different and she could win now it's it's we've laid out even legal arguments why this would be possible to do and we know why you know judges refrain from doing this and don't want to do this and how the company defends but I think it's also this creating something that you can think differently about relationships about justice and about how how powerful actors should be held to account and I was thinking because it's interesting that we see that a lot of cases lately so I would be interested to know how you feel about that Miriam but in my opinion for my perspective I have to think that the court became at certain places and moments these last years more and more politicized and it has been used also by activism almost this feeling of like well that's a conventional protest doesn't help that much in our mediatized world etc. so what can be other ways so if we look at the Urgenna case in the Netherlands for example where the Netherlands was sued because they don't actually live up to their own promises if it comes to climate change the Shell case that's quite interesting and I know that in the Netherlands there is this huge debate of oh this is very problematic, artrias politica and you know the court should be neutral and now it gets politicized but I actually feel no but that's exactly the place it should be because it is politicized because it's about how do we want to live to what rules and values and so in that sense I was also very intrigued in this difference like the court creates the truth in court we speak the truth and in theater it's fiction but in a way these are very much close to each other because a lot of and that's also with asylum cases the case courts or trials create precedence so of course we're looking every time that there is a revolutionary outcome then other people can understand I mean exactly what Maria was just saying I can say well okay so then I'm heard so now there's a basis Shale doesn't have the right to pollute and make people sick etc on such a skill not one single person and that changes reality drastically so you spoke right now both of the emancipatory potential of these kind of fusions but we spoke about that Lara before we had this conversation now what do you think could be and also you Miriam what could be the problematic of such an artistic approach or where we don't really know where's the fiction, where's the reality do you have opinions on that I want to move a bit I have of especially opinions about when can courts also be problematic and I think one remark you know this idea that courts are neutral is in itself well law is always political no and courts are political and I think if people then say oh this is getting politicized it just means that the hegemony of a certain political thinking is being challenged right and that makes everyone feel uneasy but it's not like I mean everything you know I don't know civil law all kind of family law it's all actually political so that's one and then what can be problematic I think about court proceedings and I agree with you there is a more of a tendency to say we are using courts and I think this is good to some extent that people in especially from countries where you know production takes place typically in the global south that they feel we're just doing this let's go we let's go to the Netherlands and try this I think it's important because it's sort of bringing back their voices no to Europe and it makes it a bit our you know pollution and all the exploitation a bit less avoidable obviously if we really believe that the courts will solve this we're only hoping for the right judgment and then things will be fine which is not true for one the right judgments often don't come so what do you do then so I think that's and so what is problematic about arts I think I don't see there's much about it I think it's mutually reinforcing and I think sometimes what I do feel we don't ask you know probably you know setting up a fictionary court is easier to some extent because you don't have to stick to all those technicalities and stupid rules but at the same time I don't want to sort of I think it needs to be both because we need to use the real law and challenge the real law no so I think it's simply not it's not in either or and so that's why I think it's how to use both tools to mutually reinforce yeah no I very much agree very much agree by the way in Kaija you were saying that there's can we put Europe on trial but a year after our project and of course it doesn't have any direct relation but this case lies now at the ISC the International Criminal Court by two lawyers that accuse the European Union also for their deals with Libya and the relationship to Libya if it comes to the many death from the military so that was good news on the same time of course this now takes years to investigate if it's really a case and then it hasn't even started the process so I think that's a good example in a way like why we didn't want to wait for that and we felt there was a people's consciousness or people's moral position that needed to be addressed so let's not only wait for the institution but let let's first already take responsibility or try to take responsibility so that is also why it's not a classical trial but it's a people's tribunal where the people were actually that were sitting there were both representing the accused as citizens of Europe and the ones voting also so it's kind of making a judgment about yourself or your community what can be problematic about art one of the things that was very difficult within Europe on trial is the people that were working with us from we are here and from the refugee shelter because of course they stand there and they in a way finally have a space where they can speak in their tempo in their words and they can be heard on the same time this project couldn't in any way offer them a different reality and so I asked them to go through their pain through their wounds have this hope this excitement of the possibility to be heard and then there's nothing they just go back to their same shitty situation where they don't even have a roof above their head during the day they need to be on the streets I mean I can go on and go on about how difficult that life is and how unfair and I think that's why I wouldn't do this again without stronger partners because you need to be after care and you need to offer some sort of perspective and you need to invest if you're serious about it and you ask them to trust you and to share their stories you need to offer them something and I think this was a very precarious project on a lot of levels there wasn't enough money resources and that's not then it becomes a dangerous thing and I think we handled it well but ideally parallelly you should invest in a real case course, right? Absolutely. Lara, you just spoke about the people you worked with and in your next project the state of justice you are looking at working together with Samuel and I would just really ask you what are the stories of injustice you're working with on the personal level because we just spoke very meta about everything but can you share maybe this new work coming up? So in a way it's a kind of part two of Europe on trial but then completely different approached I think the whole situations if it comes to refugees and asylum policy didn't got better, right? It only got worse if you ask me which creates a lot of questions around how to deal with that as an artist or curator whatever within artistic means as a political citizen because in a way I'm even more angry and very bitter I find us in very dark times so where do I find some sort of hope or idea that it makes sense what I do and then I think again this question about where do you place it because what does it mean to so maybe sorry more concrete it's still working with here to support and we are here and they have observed these last years that there is a huge group of minors or teenage Eritrean boys and girls coming to Europe and they are often in extremely vulnerable situations they've been traveling for years because it's really hell what they go through to even reach the Mediterranean then the boat then arriving in Italy or Switzerland very bad circumstances then they travel to the Netherlands for example and they again have to wait and a lot of these cases are being denounced so they're not acknowledged which is strange if you ask me but moreover they're often not treated as minors and that's of course a legal thing so if they can prove that they are under 18 they enter into different law and in a different framework and often they cannot prove this because they don't have a birth certificate and they have to ask family members to witness but they're far and in dictatorship and stuff so it's very complicated and often they traveled so long that they were 14 or 15 when they left home but the moment that they reached let's say the immigration office they maybe turned just 18 they were treated very differently or 19 or 20 but in a way they are completely traumatized teenagers still and this is not at all acknowledged in how they are treated and I work with one of them Samuel and we're trying to create a monologue based on his dossier on his story but on the same time on many similar stories because it's really a bigger problem for him that's also very important to underline not about him as an individual and the monologue is constantly playing with who's speaking so who's speaking here is this the boy on who the case is based Samuel is it the actor that performs it is it the author who wrote it is it the many other similar cases that are happening and therefore it's trying to raise many questions about how it's possible that such a case in Europe it's called the state of justice but we're kind of working with this metaphor of a failed court so for us the law system completely fails the asylum system completely fails on people like him and if you look at him and he is a beautiful, young, very light presence and he would never say a text like I've written for him and I deliberately play with this huge discrepancy between all the hope that he has an 18 year old have and all this huge dark things that happen to him and he's still standing there but he's standing there in this stage in Europe, in Ghent and of course that raises also questions so okay what does it mean in our art bubbles we watch those stories, we debate them and then what so that's something I'm also very much busy with like how can I again for this project find partners but also can art not only create a place for reflection for discussion, for analysis but a place to act because I think we're all very power, we constantly feel very powerless and there are a lot of people who want to help or do something that they just don't know how can we use our artistic imagination to just really make space to act even if it's a small gesture to somehow balance this complete discrepancy between all this things we know about the extreme injustice our system and I think Miriam expressed it really beautiful and there is huge confrontation so our entire system in the global north is based on exploitation constantly, historically, presently and that's just very hard to live with so we are in this schizophrenia where we're trying to forget often that that's the case but I think it would almost be some sort of collective therapy if we could somehow place this knowledge that we have together with action because that's really what we are longing for I think we want to change but we feel very powerless and we're not that powerless I hope still Yes for me I always try to end or find an end to conversations like this with a sense of hope and you spoke about the artistic imagination of projects like you're doing tonight later we will show in this series the Congo Tribunal which you both know and a project by Milo Rao and the IAPM which tries to recreate justice in a theatrical trial and as you're both closely connected to this project I would really like to hear your opinions on this project and maybe also yeah the hope it may give or yeah so please Miriam Well I think the hope it gives and I think that probably is it's quite well I think also the research and analysis that there is a great importance for people that have experienced violence, trauma injustice to speak about this and to get some sort of acknowledgement even if not necessarily you know much follow so I think this being able to speak about it and have witnesses that actually hear this I think has in itself a value and I think that's at least what I when I talk to people I always get also that sense I know for Seida Hatun she was of course disappointed that the court didn't allow her case to go forward but I know it meant a lot to her to be in Germany and to speak to people and to meet people and to also to see that there are also people that care no so obviously it doesn't and you're right we need to think more about how can something still improve and change in the situation but I think lives can also be touched through this and I think also people can I think they've always had dignity but probably they can experience their own dignity in a deeper sense or in a different sense no and but what I like about the Congo Tribunal is and I think that's really you can say this is the advantage of using art is that it was able to I think it is able to show connections and to make the audience understand the problems the conflicts that evolve in Congo and how they're connected to us in a much broader sense than well I felt because you can experience this more I think that's even better than reading an article in a newspaper in a journal and definitely better than in a court case because I think in court you need to be so you're also creating a narrative obviously but it must be so narrowed down to what is important to fit the criteria of this law and how do you prove this no so there it's quite and so you always narrow the story down and I think we're always struggling with this and we feel like well we want to make people understand the context of this you know what is really and I think this is what this film really beautifully shows and I feel like yeah I personally felt like I understand so much better really how things work and why people are trapped and also on how power works in this yes no I very much agree that I think there's something very important probably that's maybe something you could better judge Miriam but probably also the fact that it was an art movie helped politically making it possible because it just so that's one advantage of the fact that we think art doesn't have any power and you know every nice country wants to do something with art and show that well we have a critical voice one of the good things of that is that of course well it's just an art project you know why bother and then actually very political things can happen and that can have also an impact later and I think this aspect that Miriam just said about storytelling and that you can take a freedom therefore for example for me it's extremely important to work with artists and spoken word artists also in in fictional art so to say or in assemblies is that I think there's something about the speech act that can have much wider reach and that that's very important in a way I would love to look at cases and procedure judicial procedures with artists if it comes to dramaturgy if it comes to rhetorics because I think there's something that can be more accessible and then the political aspects can be also much more part of the debate and then already you would have probably much more porous walls between what's happening in court and what's happening in society and I think that's that's very important and I think the Krongo Tribunal does that very beautifully I think it's a beautiful example of how an art project can have real impact not only for the people being hurt etc but there was this governor that really resigned so I mean that's huge it does also raises questions like it means that Milo Rao as a white swiss male director needed to during the procedure make friends with all sides with both parties right he had to gain the trust from both sides in order to make the procedure happening I find that interesting and problematic and it still keeps me busy in a way he needed to gain the trust of that governor and he was able to and it was actually very important because that made it possible for the people there to really share their rage right to the people because that's often what happens I think in our art projects is like why are the people responsible not sitting here we don't get the people from the big corporations we don't get right wing voters in our spaces right so we talk about them but we want to speak to them in their face we want to and it's important and I think that's so it's both let's say something I admire extremely within the convent or you know project and I also still keep on questioning what it means morally and maybe there's something about this outsider's position that Milo had that made that made that possible maybe having privilege also means that okay you need to sometimes step over your own ideological position for greater good yeah that would be let's say the very no I agree with that and then I have a question if it comes to the way the project has been crediting and the way the project has been placed into the world I sometimes feel that we are still very much an art system that creates this kind of Milo Rao artist doing this whereas it's so clear and then we come back to alliances that many people worked on it many Congolese people many organizations many lawyers Miriam was involved so many others so I mean I feel sometimes that we these kind of projects could also be emancipatory in that sense this was not a single man's project even though he's super important and he should be there it's a collective project and that made it possible and it made it also possible to have this huge impact and then I think the consequence of the hearings that still continue and I just saw today that video I was thinking this is so important it didn't stop with that project it's still continuing the hearings are continuing the project was given to other people to continue that should become a second movie because this first movie is maybe very much let's say the sensation the interest and it's extremely important movie but then the hard struggle starts right okay and now how to continue and that's happening and I would love a movie with the same amount of attention for that process as well thank you regarding to the time I remember one last public audience question it's a little bit gone now from my view but it was about the question of timing and you said so maybe because we're also timing our conversation now maybe the last questions to that how late are we so like we're doing all of this and but yeah what is the idea of timing in the art or the practice you do and what has to do you understand the question or should I rephrase that well well timing I can think of two two aspects of this so one is I thought like oh that's so interesting because we talk a lot about this question so you know how do you create impact with a case because there are many cases and you can all have all great arguments and you may still not have much of an impact in the wider political debates that might be very yeah and so timing and when you file the right case is important so already by the way you know legally it's important that you don't miss your stupid statute of limitations period time you know so it must be on time but also you know to have a wider impact it must be the right case at the right moment and I don't think it always is no I think this can be sometimes we feel like well this you know in this current political debate it will not be picked up in the right way it can be understood wrong and so on and so on I think it's on that in a narrow sense timing and I don't know if you meant timing in the sense of course if you think this in you know in terms of climate justice or the climate crisis we're in yeah well if you if you listen and believe the scientists obviously we have no time but then I also feel like well this is not a political we can't work with this politically you know because we can't we cannot pretend I mean the world will probably become devastated and everything will be terrible but we can't live on the assumption we only have seven years and what then you know so so I would say that in that regard if you think this more you know we need to continue fights and as you as Lara also said it's a lot of times it's it takes long time and it takes much time and probably a lot of changes have happened in history also too late for many people too late right so in that regard yes it's important to have a sense of urgency and the same time I feel if you create too much urgency it takes away political thinking because we you know it because yeah if there's not enough time then should we stop doing what we do today I mean you know it feel like it paralyzes also to some extent you know I understand yes you can also drive people with urgency into political action but I feel like it's not the best concept if you think in timing in terms of urgency can very much relate again to what Miriam is saying so I can only add things I think timing is within political art or within a case extremely important indeed like Miriam saying so if you study why certain momentum certain moments became very political or resulted in a mass protest for example it has to do with timing but the complicated thing is that you cannot always predict that also so that's of course I think the beautiful and frustrating thing with democracy we are all together co-creating it and we're not marrying that so you can direct from top down so timing cannot be completely directed from above you can have an intuition this is a good moment it touches upon topics that are but I mean I was very surprised with the Europe on trial project that it didn't raise much more I mean we had tension sure but it could have been much more and I was very surprised also because we were living this after summer refugee crisis thing and it was very much in people's minds so why didn't it became a bigger thing not big enough in my taste very difficult to understand yeah many reasons probably and I think this whole thing of attention we're in this kind of attention society all competing for attention all competing for the attention of journalists completely feeling dependent on journalists in order to have some sort of impact which is also terrible so sometimes it also helps me to think you know what you do something because you feel it's urgent connected to other people's emergencies and you feel well at least for us this makes sense and it would be beautiful if it you know the bomb burst and it gets you know infected and so many other people will come along and if not it doesn't mean it was useless because in the end I agree with me I'm like you can wait forever or the right moment but we're anyway too late and indeed that doesn't help so I think this feeling of we're too late already which I think very strong for certain for some of us is more paralyzing although it's still I mean it can be effective I think because a lot of people are still so much busy with short term it's not imaginable how that is still possible so it's not a completely useless concept but we need to make it productive and things cost time we're in democracies slow processes and there are reasons for that also so I don't know I tell myself again that some struggles took very long but in the end did make a change yeah I while you were speaking I had to remember one one thing I like to room like one example from history I find very interesting that is the Nuremberg trials and then the Frankfurt trials in the 60s right so in the Nuremberg trials obviously where the birthplace of individual responsibility for grave crimes was put out for the first time and it had very little and so it's groundbreaking absolutely important but it had very little resonance in the German public and it did not create a different narrative as to you know it was Hitler and a couple of that other people very up and none of us you know everyone else has nothing had nothing to do with this and so and then obviously it took until the mid 60s that the Frankfurt trials could start and obviously they happened also not it was not just Fritz Bauer as a prosecutor putting this case together obviously you can it was Frankfurt it was a particular point in time you know you had the Frankfurt school you had you know the Social Democratic government of Hesse and so it took all those circumstances and that trial really had an important influence on the German debate and perception of everyone's and more well basically ordinary people's responsibility no and so I think that's but and obviously in between Nürnberg and Frankfurt there was people worked on this Fritz Bauer has been working for this for a long time and he was not alone no so and so I think again also not alone larger constellations and I think that is where I find like well you know at a certain point in time where can have or for me it was you know law and legal procedures can really have an impact on a wider and really change realities I would say but obviously you know it's it's not planable as you've put this also out well you know and we can't know exactly always no thank you Miriam Lara Miriam I took a lot from this conversation and I'm very happy that you both met today and thank you to the audience for asking these very also important questions at 7pm Berlin time we will show this before mentioned Congo Tribunal for all Facebook watchers please switch to www.adk.de www.adk.de where you can watch the movie afterwards we will have a conversation with the human rights lawyer Selene Cicena who's involved in the Congo Tribunal Harald Welzer the sociologist the choreographer Nora Cipa-Maira and it will be hosted by Dorothe Vena curator and film critic so thank you all for watching thank you for being here Miriam thank you for being here Lara and see you soon thank you thank you