ABSTRACT
Do we rely too much on law to shape and judge collective responses to human pain and suffering? Talal Asad suggested, when it comes to torture at least, that ‘perpetual legal struggle has now become the dominant mode of moral engagement in an interconnected, uncertain, and rapidly changing world.’ 1 Arguably such domination is widespread, crossing many forms of human action and interaction. Indeed, my starting premise for this chapter is that modern law and its systems have become instrumental in the recognition (or not) of, and response to (or not) suffering endured as a result of injury deliberately inflicted or because of failures to act. 2
