International law shapes how countries relate to one another, from respecting national sovereignty to addressing armed conflict and protecting human rights. Yet the principles governing these relationships do not always operate equally in practice, raising questions about whose interests are protected, whose experiences influence international rules, whose voices remain on the margins, and whose perspectives occupy the in-between spaces that established centres of power often overlook. These questions informed a colloquium hosted by the University of the Free State’s (UFS) Faculty of Law, which brought African and Central and Eastern European perspectives into dialogue on a changing global legal order.
Titled ‘Lost in Translation: TWAIL–SWAIL Dialogues on Global Legal Order in Flux’, the colloquium examined how historical experiences of colonialism, occupation, and political marginalisation can inform contemporary debates about international law. It also explored liminality, or the in-between positions that challenge conventional distinctions between those who hold power and those positioned outside it. Through research presentations and discussions on historical injustice, reparations, resource sovereignty, and armed conflict, participants considered how different experiences can expose the limitations of established legal frameworks and broaden understanding of the global legal order.
His Excellency Jacek Chodorowicz, Head of Mission at the Embassy of the Republic of Poland in South Africa, emphasised that the international legal order must be defended even as its shortcomings are confronted. Quoting Poland’s Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs, he said: “A global order based on the respect of international law is certainly imperfect, as are all human creations. But despite its flaws, it remains the best tool we have to prevent global chaos.” He argued that reform must take place through debate and negotiation rather than war and destruction.
Examining whose experiences shape international law
The dialogue centred on two approaches that question how international law has developed and whose experiences it reflects. Third World Approaches to International Law (TWAIL) examines the enduring influence of colonialism and unequal power relations on formerly colonised societies. Second World Approaches to International Law (SWAIL) explores experiences of marginality and exclusion in Central and Eastern Europe, including the liminal, or in-between, positions that challenge conventional distinctions between the centre of power and its margins.
Although the approaches share concerns about inequality and the distribution of power, their historical foundations differ. Recognising those differences is essential to understanding what dialogue between them can contribute.
Prof Reddy also drew attention to this distinction, noting that South Africa’s history of colonialism and apartheid cannot simply be equated with Poland’s experience of occupation and political struggle. “The value of dialogue lies not in collapsing differences but in learning from them and expanding our understanding of how law, history, and power intersect,” he said.
Moreover, the relationship between historical experience and international cooperation was illustrated through a photograph featured in Freedom Park’s 2025 exhibition, Threads of Solidarity: European Support for the Fight Against Apartheid. Contributed by the Polish Embassy, the photograph showed South African activists Ahmed Kathrada, Lionel Forman, and Nick Mortensen attending an International Students’ Union conference in Warsaw during the 1950s.
Reflecting on the significance of such connections, Prof Reddy said: “More than a historical record, it reminds us that the struggle against apartheid was never confined to South Africa alone. It was sustained through international networks of solidarity, support, and shared commitments to justice.”
The example highlighted how political struggles and the pursuit of justice can extend beyond national borders. Building on this history, the colloquium considered how international law responds to contemporary conflicts, historical injustices, and questions of accountability.
Chodorowicz connected these concerns to the protection of national sovereignty, drawing on Poland’s history of occupation and its struggle for independence. He also referred to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine as an example of the failure to respect principles enshrined in the United Nations Charter. “The international community must continue to defend the principles of the UN Charter and ensure that international law applies equally to all states,” he said.
He called for reform of the United Nations Security Council, arguing that the global political landscape has changed considerably since 1945 and that Africa and the wider Global South should have a greater role in decisions concerning international peace and security. Greater representation, he maintained, would help strengthen the institution’s legitimacy and make international decision-making more inclusive.
These concerns about power and representation were reflected in the research presented throughout the colloquium. Papers examined the relationship between international law and empire, historical injustice and contemporary legal frameworks, African reparations, resource sovereignty, and the uneven application of international law. Other contributions explored how African perspectives could transform international legal scholarship, whose knowledge is recognised in the field, how artificial intelligence should be regulated in Africa, and how mass atrocities on the continent are interpreted.
Taken together, the presentations and discussions examined how critical scholarship can challenge established assumptions and create space for perspectives that have historically received less recognition in international legal debates.
For the UFS, this exchange also speaks to the role of universities in producing knowledge that engages with local and international challenges. Prof Serges Kamga, Dean of the Faculty of Law, welcomed the colloquium’s multidisciplinary approach and its emphasis on intellectual collaboration across borders. He linked the initiative to the University’s 2023–2028 Strategic Plan, which calls for intellectual engagement across disciplines and geographical boundaries, while remaining attentive to the contexts in which knowledge is produced and used.
Prof Reddy emphasised that African institutions must play an active role in shaping international scholarship, rather than simply adopting frameworks developed elsewhere.
This responsibility is particularly relevant when research examines challenges that affect countries differently, depending on their histories, political influence, and position within international institutions. By bringing scholars into dialogue across regions, the colloquium created an opportunity to interrogate established ideas, exchange perspectives, and explore questions that could inform further research.
Prof Reddy said the value of the inaugural SWAIL dialogue would ultimately extend beyond the event itself. “Its success will be measured not by definitive answers but by the quality of the questions it generates, the partnerships it builds, and the scholarship it inspires.”
The dialogue therefore offered more than an exchange of academic perspectives. It created space to examine how international law is understood and experienced across different societies, while opening possibilities for continued collaboration and scholarship that gives greater consideration to the histories and perspectives shaping the global legal order.