Paper 1 (SL) May 2017

Text 2 - Part 1 is a November 2014 screen capture from the website Justice Hub which answers the question “How are ICC Judges Elected?” in two parts. Justice Hub appears to be a website devoted to topics related to Justice as can be seen on tabs at the top, where there are “conversations”, presumably related to Justice and Justice is “explained.”  Since the website is in English and the text in question deals with the election of judges for the International Criminal Court, it seems safe to assume that the website targets professionals who work in international justice or are members of organizations that deliver international justice or are involved in cases related to it. The trending topics on the right involve many countries in Africa, which seem to have international justice issues going on. An example of this is the hashtag “Kenya Cases”.  The website is written in a colloquial and conversational style as can be seen in the phrases “all kinds of rules” “a couple of pictures” which have the effect of creating a feeling of closeness and informality between text and audience and give the impression that the intended audience is under 45 years old. 

The introductory paragraphs explain the upcoming election process and through the use of hypophora “How does that work?” provide the explanation to the task they have undertaken, which is to summarize for their audience the complicated rules and put them together in an infographic with the aid of cartoonists. 

The infographic consists of a collaborative effort between Justice Hub and their “Colleagues from The Cartoon Movement”. The purpose of the text is clearly informative and explanatory and aims at helping the audience “understand what´s going on” as regards the election of “six new judges to replace those whose terms have come to an end after nine years.”  As is stated in the introductory paragraphs on the webpage, the process is complicated because the court “has all kinds of rules to ensure regional, gender and law-system representation.”  What I find very interesting about this text is the criticism that underlies the information provided in the captions; this criticism can be seen in the details provided in the cartoons, which give the text a tongue-in-cheek and ironic tone. If one pays close attention to the cartoons it becomes evident that both Justice Hub and the Cartoon Movement do not seem to take the International Criminal court or its judges very seriously, or if they do, they are emphasizing the need to make changes and improve several aspects.

The caption in the first frame of the infographic informs the reader that “122 countries are party to the Rome Statute”, adopted in 1998.  The 122 countries are represented in the cartoon by 4 middle-aged men. Two of them appear to be Caucasian, one seems to be Asian because of the slanted eyes and the fourth one is dark-skinned and dark haired, probably black or Hispanic.  The four of them have big, somewhat fake-looking smiles on their face, which give the reader the impression that they are making a show of being congenial with one another. It is interesting to ask oneself whether the gender and racial bias that could be inferred by the fact that the countries are represented by men and the last man in the line is black are a criticism to the ICC or exist in Justice Hub and The Cartoon Movement.

The second frame refers to the judges who serve a “non–renewable term of 9 years” and will have to be replaced by “6 new judges” in 2014. Once again, it is possible to detect a tongue in cheek tone provided by the illustration; the introductory text has explained that the court has “all kinds of rules to ensure regional, gender and law-system representation.”  However, there are only 4 women amongst the 18 judges, which clearly leaves women mis-represented; this can be understood as a veiled criticism of the politically correct rules that supposedly “ensure” a representation that actually does not exist, or a gender bias in the illustrator, who assumes that having 4 women in a group of 18 judges is doing a good job of showing “gender representation”.  In relation to “regional” representation, in the group of 18 judges there is only one dark-skinned judge, two that look vaguely Asian, and two or three that could be Hispanic, Mediterranean or Samoan. This results in 50% of the judges being Caucasian; once again, readers are invited to draw their own conclusions as to how serious are the rules that ensure “regional representation.”  Many of the judges look passive, glum and solemn; one has a cobweb on his arm and another one has an oxygen mask, which can be taken as an ironic way of telling the reader that there is urgent need to replace them by more diverse, young and energetic members.  

The top of the third frame emphasizes this idea with the metaphor in “elections are important because they add fresh blood to the ICC” This emphasizes the idea conveyed in the previous frame that shows the judges with cobwebs and an oxygen mask. Humour is created in the illustration accompanying the caption, which shows Justice, symbolized typically as a blind female with scales, getting a blood transfusion as a literal interpretation of “add fresh blood”.

The following caption provides the information that cases are complex and take a long time to be completed.  “There is a need to be more efficient. Bringing in new judges can help,” proclaims the text. Again, the cartoon chooses to depict judges as old and quite helpless and inefficient. A (male) judge is shown on the floor, with emanata in the form of drops of sweat conveying his exhaustion and despair, as he is weighed down by a pile of papers and files. A new and younger (male) judge, presumably the elected one, bends his knees to assist him and take over the files from him.  The cartoon once again conveys the idea that the current judges are old, practically useless, and do not get much done. Interestingly, again, both the judges depicted are men, so one is left to wonder whether the cartoon represents faithfully the gender imbalance in the ICC or if it is Justice Hub and the Cartoon Movement who are sexist and assume that judges have to be men. 

The lower part of the frame provides the last piece of information saying that candidates must be nationals of the state parties to the Rome Statute. There is a map showing which countries are “ICC Members”, in green, which countries “signed but did not ratify the Rome Statute”, in yellow, and which ones “do not recognize the court” so are not members, in red. The choice of colours is stereotypical: green is good, yellow dangerous, red bad.  Interestingly, the US and Russia are in yellow, which means that they signed, but did not ratify the Rome statute, which can be interpreted as their not being too concerned about being members of the International Criminal Court.  Canada, South America, Europe, Australia and many African countries are members. This can be tied back to the “Trending Topics” which refer to many African countries such as Congo, Kenya and Ivory Coast.

To conclude, the infographic as a joint effort between two organizations, Justice Hub and The Cartoon Movement  is effective in making a very arid topic interesting to its audience by the use of cartoons, and it cleverly influences readers’ understanding of the composition of the ICC  and the election process by adopting a slightly critical and tongue in cheek tone in the illustrations, which seem to imply that the court is made up mostly by stuffy Caucasian elderly gentlemen who do not get much done.  Evidently, according to Text 2, this is in need of change.