Portant sur la consistance historique de la « justice internationale », cette thèse essaie de repérer et d’analyser certains des grands processus ayant eu part à la formation historique, depuis deux siècles environ, d’une judiciabilité universaliste. Par judiciabilité, elle désigne et se donne pour objet une forme historique d’autorité, à la fois générale et spécifique. Cherchant à réduire l’écart entre sociologies de l’institutionnalisation des cours internationales et sociologies du jugement, elle s’écarte ainsi des perspectives centrées sur telle ou telle juridiction en particulier, des rapprochements opérés entre certaines juridictions en raison d’un horizon normatif commun supposé comme des comparaisons à l’aune d’une éventuelle fonction politique. Par judiciabilité universaliste plus précisément, elle entend une forme d’autorité liée à l’ensemble approximativement systématique des connotations de l’expression « justice internationale », c’est-à-dire à un certain horizon de sens : il en va en l’occurrence de justice et de guerre et de paix, d’apaisement et de réconciliation, d’attentes de consolation, de réforme, voire de délivrance. Fondée sur un présentisme de méthode, privilégiant les expériences de justice internationale les plus intensives, qui se trouvent être aussi les plus récentes, la thèse tente de démontrer deux choses : premièrement, que la consistance historique de la justice internationale ne saurait être saisie sans que l’on s’intéresse à des processus de relativement longue durée - deuxièmement, que dans ce champ de judiciabilité universaliste dont la formation s’étend sur deux siècles se multiplient, outre les enjeux normatifs, les enjeux de vérité. / This dissertation addresses the concrete historicity of “international justice”. It tries to map and analyze some important processes involved in the formation of a universalist judiciability since the 19th Century. By “judiciability”, it highlights a historical form of authority, general as well as specific – the very object of the inquiry. It therefore endeavours to bridge the gap between the sociology of the institutionalization of international courts on the one hand and the sociology of justice in action on the other and departs from analyses focusing on such or such international court, from assumptions of a common normative horizon allowing connections to be made between various courts, and from comparisons between courts and their respective political function, if any. More precisely, “universalist judiciability” refers to a form of authority associated with a particular horizon of meaning, the approximately systematic set of connotations of the phrase “international justice”: it is about justice and war and peace, appeasement, and reconciliation, expectations of solace, reform, or even wordly redemption. Based on a methodological presentism, the dissertation’s primary focus is on the most intensive experiments in international justice, which also happen to be the most recent ones. Two claims are made: firstly, that the concrete historicity of “international justice” cannot be grasped properly if due attention is not paid to relatively long range processes- secondly, that besides normative issues issues of truth have been multiplying in this field of universalist judiciability whose historical formation spans two centuries.

The ongoing digital transformation of our societies impacts all aspects of our lives aswell as the international development and the design for social change. Having said that,in this paper I studied whether the design of participatory ICT4Ds can engage the localend-users/beneficiaries in the processes of knowledge and identity creation, and thus,achieve their self-representation in order to break the colonial-based stereotypes. Moreover, I examined whether the locals’ participation can emancipate design, development,and ICT4Ds from their colonial heritage and the related universalisms, and thus, achievethe construction of a postcolonial pluriversal world.To examine all of the above, I combined the approach of comparative case studies with aseries of interviews. As my research context I investigated the participatory dimensions oftwo ICT4D initiatives, namely UNICEF’s U-Report Yunitok Kenya and Map Kibera, thatoperate also in the Kibera slum in Nairobi, Kenya. Because of this area’s colonial historyand influence I used postcolonialism as my theoretical framework.The results of this study suggest that the design of participatory ICT4Ds can be influentialin the knowledge and identity creation of the Global South and this has the dynamics tocreate a postcolonial pluriversal world. Similarly, locals’ participation seems to have thepotential to emancipate design, development, and ICT4Ds from their colonial heritage.Nevertheless, this study advocates that the postcolonial rejection of universalisms mightbe problematic as it seems that the concept is not inherently negative but it rather hasstrong connotations due to its connection with the colonial history.