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


© David McIntyre, InThinking
http://www.thinkib.net/englishalanglit 1




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.

© David McIntyre, InThinking
http://www.thinkib.net/englishalanglit 2




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.

© David McIntyre, InThinking
http://www.thinkib.net/englishalanglit 3