Accented Universality: Exploring Accountability as a Non-Translatable Concept in Central Asia

Abstract

An éminence grise of human rights – the principle of accountability – has been continuously advancing its normative presence in international law and rights discourses in the last couple of decades. Its transformative promises, on the other side, are hindered by the conceptual dubiety rooted, inter alia, in the non-translatability of the concept to many world languages. The current article attempts to examine how universal aspirations about the principle are appropriated in local contexts of the Central Asian region. In the outset, the research scrutinizes theoretical perplexities around the term and argues for the (obscured) role of law in these discussions. Then, drawing on doctrinal and empirical research in Central Asia, it converses the ways accountability is translated, engaged, and valued as the idea. Findings reveal the heterogeneity of approaches to accountability, and the reiterative relations between the word and the concept, informed by the region’s historical past, political regimes, one’s language and education. The article exposes often omitted pitfalls of the existing multilingual setting of international law and its institutions, which undermine the communicative value of local languages in the region.