ABSTRACT
This chapter analyses the relationship between the criminalisation of political expression (CPE) and conflict transformation in the deeply divided societies of Belgium, Canada, Turkey, and Sri Lanka. These cases are instructive because of the case types as Belgium represents a counterfactual case where the state never implemented the criminalisation of political expression, providing an important contrast to the other cases, particularly in terms of why in the context of a deeply divided society the state might not implement the criminalisation of political expression. Canada acts as a crucial case because although the state criminalised political activity during the October Crisis this did not lead to an escalation in the conflict due to the nature of informal criminalisation. Turkey and Sri Lanka embody typical cases whereby the states in both cases implemented the criminalisation of political identity, activity, and violence. Considering the four cases over the course of their conflicts demonstrates how criminalising political expression operates as a reactive and evolving process responding to particular conflict contexts as they arise, as well as being shaped by these contexts as well. The chapter concludes by summarising the relationship between CPE and conflict transformation for the levels of structure, issue, and actor.
