The research team have held regular face to face meetings for those in Edinburgh, and via email and skype for those based elsewhere, to ensure the integration of work priorities. Prior to COVID we were also able to hold face to face meetings for all the team in the UK and Sri Lanka. We also used shared Outlook Onedrive folder and Nvivo projects in order to effectively share and analyse data. COVID-19 restrictions in the last year of the project restricted face to face meetings, research and the collaborative way we had been writing, resulting in some delays and changes.
The team made considerable progress over the project. Background literature was analysed and gaps identified. We identified key sources, carrying out interviews and conducted archival research for all four case studies, as well as carried out considerable amounts of writing, publication and dissemination, including organising an international conference on the Intimate Life of Dissent. Archives have been consulted, oral history interviews carried out and ethnography undertaken in the UK, the US, Russia and Sri Lanka.
Case Study 1 on Britain showed the relationship between claims of conscience and the history of debates about freedom in the middle of the 20th century, showing the limits and potentials within particular attempts to protect freedom of conscience and their legacies for human rights and humanitarianism.
Case Study 2 on Sri Lanka explored the ways in which conviction and conscience were woven through the work of dissident activists. Through ethnography and oral history interviews in Sri Lanka and the wider Diaspora, we asked why did some people, rather than others, feel the need to take a stand against the violent political forces sweeping through their communities?
Case Study 3 on Russia examined the legacy of prisoners of conscience, dissidents and the materialisation of memory. After tracing the genealogy of freedom of conscience, we focused on the ways in which post- Soviet Russian memory activists engage in archival research and collect diaries and documents from relatives of the Soviet political prisoners, providing a way for claims of conscience and the condemnation of unconscionable acts to be made public.
Case Study 4 on human rights showed how the significance of conscience was also hardwired into Amnesty International’s original mission, yet, over the following sixty years, much of the international human rights movement appears to have become significantly less interested in the issue.
We held 4 workshops and conferences, produced an edited book and 2 essay collections, wrote 14 journal articles and book chapters, produced another 12 papers, wrote three monographs, gave 57 conference, seminar and other presentations, held a major public exhibition and curated an extensive digitised online archive of artefacts of conscience, in addition to other blog posts, and media outputs. We have presented our findings to nearly 2000 academics, 150 members of civil society and over 700,000 members of the general public.