Core contributions from John Hagan’s scholarship on genocide are at stake in this article. First, this article examines, for the Rwandan genocide, the applicability of Hagan and Wenona Rymond-Richmond’s multi-level causal model of genocide, developed in Darfur and the Crime of Genocide. Asking how causal factors and processes highlighted in that model play out in scholarship on the Rwandan genocide, it moves toward answering the question of external validity versus historical specificity. Second, the article examines, again with a focus on Rwanda, the relationship between social scientific explanation and judicial thought. While it highlights—in line with the first author’s previous work—how judicial narratives address or select out core factors highlighted in the Darfur model, the article focuses—in line with Hagan’s Justice in the Balkans—on the question of what knowledge social science can nevertheless gain from court proceedings. An analysis of a sample of cases processed by the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda identifies overlaps with social science analyses, but it also highlights distinctions.

中文翻译：

---

达尔富尔模型、卢旺达和卢旺达问题国际法庭：约翰·哈根的种族灭绝社会学（续）

本文涉及约翰·哈根关于种族灭绝的学术贡献的核心贡献。首先，本文研究了 Hagan 和 Wenona Rymond-Richmond 的种族灭绝多层次因果模型对于卢旺达种族灭绝的适用性，该模型于达尔富尔和种族灭绝罪。询问该模型中强调的因果因素和过程如何在卢旺达种族灭绝的学术研究中发挥作用，它转向回答外部有效性与历史特殊性的问题。其次，文章再次以卢旺达为重点考察了社会科学解释与司法思想之间的关系。虽然它强调（与第一作者之前的作品一致）司法叙述如何解决或选择达尔富尔模式中强调的核心因素，但本文的重点是——与哈根的观点一致巴尔干地区的正义——关于社会科学仍然可以从法庭诉讼中获得什么知识的问题。对卢旺达问题国际刑事法庭处理的案件样本的分析发现了与社会科学分析的重叠之处，但也强调了区别。