Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorOhana, N
dc.date.accessioned2021-11-22T10:10:45Z
dc.date.issued2021-11-16
dc.date.updated2021-11-20T18:52:29Z
dc.description.abstractThrough an analysis of data obtained from research carried out with the bereaved families of Grenfell Tower and residents of North Kensington, this article demonstrates that the Grenfell community's knowledge on the causes that led to the fire is being systematically excluded by the Inquiry. The article discusses the four main ways in which this is happening. Through its exclusionary practices, the Inquiry is representing a diversion from the principles set by the Hillsborough Independent Panel and the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry and is creating conditions that will impede its ability to fulfil the purpose for which it was established. By linking Foucault's power/knowledge theory and critical trauma studies, it is demonstrated that the Inquiry is reflecting a central dynamic that exists in processes of knowledge production on trauma. The lens of knowledge known to people who have undergone trauma is recognized as a critical research tool in revealing legal mechanisms of knowledge exclusion.en_GB
dc.description.sponsorshipBritish Academyen_GB
dc.identifier.citationPublished online 16 November 2021en_GB
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1111/jols.12326
dc.identifier.grantnumberpf160096en_GB
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10871/127908
dc.identifierORCID: 0000-0001-5591-4895 (OHANA, NATALIE)
dc.language.isoenen_GB
dc.publisherWiley / Cardiff University Law Schoolen_GB
dc.rights©2021 The Author. Journal of Law and Society published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Cardiff University (CU). This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.en_GB
dc.titleThe politics of the production of knowledge on trauma: the Grenfell Tower Inquiryen_GB
dc.typeArticleen_GB
dc.date.available2021-11-22T10:10:45Z
dc.identifier.issn0263-323X
dc.descriptionThis is the final version. Available on open access from Wiley via the DOI in this recorden_GB
dc.identifier.eissn1467-6478
dc.identifier.journalJournal of Law and Societyen_GB
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Law and Society
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/en_GB
rioxxterms.versionVoRen_GB
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2021-11-16
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen_GB
refterms.dateFCD2021-11-22T10:08:27Z
refterms.versionFCDVoR
refterms.dateFOA2021-11-22T10:11:34Z
refterms.panelCen_GB
refterms.dateFirstOnline2021-11-16


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

©2021 The Author. Journal of Law and Society published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Cardiff University (CU). This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Except where otherwise noted, this item's licence is described as ©2021 The Author. Journal of Law and Society published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Cardiff University (CU). This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.