scholarly journals Mechanisms of transitional justice in overcoming the consequences of armed conflict

2020 ◽  
pp. 14-18
Author(s):  
Andrii Bahinskyi
Keyword(s):  
Transitional Justice ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
The State ◽  
Truth Commissions ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Sociological Research ◽  
Politics Of Memory ◽  
Transitional State ◽  
Post Conflict

The article examines transitional justice as a set of post-conflict settlement measures. Today, transitional courts, truth commissions, amnesties, and reparations are transitional justice mechanisms that are widely and relatively effectively used to resolve conflicts around the world. Today, the mechanisms of transitional justice are also being improved to meet the needs of victims of armed conflict. Sociological research confirms that the combination of international and local dimensions of responsibility is an important demand on the part of victims of armed conflict.At the same time, the prosecution of perpetrators of crimes committed during armed conflict in modern conditions concerns individual prosecution, which often goes beyond public prosecution. The state retains the obligation to bring perpetrators of crimes to justice, but this can be done through mechanisms of international law.The practice of post-conflict settlement is due to the fact that not all courts are equally effective in punishing those guilty of crimes and criminal prosecution is not always successful. Formal truth-seeking processes involving the investigation of past violations involve truth commissions. Another important mechanism of transitional justice is the politics of memory. The politics of memory as an element of transitional justice encompasses the work of states with a historical past.The combination of transitional state justice measures with the use of ad-hoc institutions allows for the restoration of justice in the most controversial dimensions of armed conflict. Peace is accelerating in the direction of autonomy and expansion of the mandates of transitional justice institutions, organized memory policy, effective cooperation of national and international institutions to determine their jurisdiction in human rights, sociological research on the needs of victims of armed conflict. Evaluation of the effectiveness of transitional justice mechanisms is possible only if their interconnectedness, interaction with civil society and the state are taken into account.

Transitional Justice During Armed Conflict

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cyanne E. Loyle
Keyword(s):  
Transitional Justice ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Truth Commissions ◽  
Judicial Process ◽  
Post Conflict ◽  
Rebel Groups ◽  
Power Shift ◽  
New Finding ◽  
The Government

Armed conflict is ultimately about the violent confrontation between two or more groups; however, there is a range of behaviors, both violent and nonviolent, pursued by governments and rebel groups while conflict is ongoing that impacts the course and outcomes of that violence. The use of judicial or quasi-judicial institutions during armed conflict is one such behavior. While there is a well-developed body of literature that examines the conditions under which governments engage with the legacies of violence following armed conflict, we know comparatively little about these same institutions used while conflict is ongoing.Similar to the use of transitional justice following armed conflict or post-conflict justice, during-conflict transitional justice (DCJ) refers to “a judicial or quasi-judicial process initiated during an armed conflict that attempts to address wrongdoings that have taken or are taking place as part of that conflict” (according to Loyle and Binningsbø). DCJ includes a variety of institutional forms pursued by both governments and rebel groups such as human rights trials, truth commissions or commissions of inquiry, amnesty offers, reparations, purges, or exiles.As our current understanding of transitional justice has focused exclusively on these processes following a political transition or the termination of an armed conflict, we have a limited understanding of how and why these processes are used during conflict. Extant work has assumed, either implicitly or explicitly, that transitional justice is offered and put in place once violence has ended, but this is not the case. New data on this topic from the During-Conflict Justice dataset by Loyle and Binningsbø suggests that the use of transitional justice during conflict is a widespread and systematic policy across multiple actor groups. In 2017, Loyle and Binningsbø found that DCJ processes were used during over 60% of armed conflicts from 1946 through 2011; and of these processes 10% were put in place by rebel groups (i.e., the group challenging the government rather than the government in power).Three main questions arise from this new finding: Under what conditions are justice processes implemented during conflict, why are these processes put in place, and what is the likely effect of their implementation on the conflict itself? Answering these questions has important implications for understanding patterns of government and rebel behavior while conflict is ongoing and the impacts of those behaviors. Furthermore, this work helps us to broaden our understanding of the use of judicial and quasi-judicial processes to those periods where no power shift has taken place.

Moral Subjectivity and Affective Deficit in the Transitional State

2015 ◽  
Vol 59 (4) ◽  
pp. 66-82
Author(s):  
Christiaan Beyers
Keyword(s):  
South African ◽  
Transitional Justice ◽  
The State ◽  
Colonial Era ◽  
Land Claim ◽  
Transitional State ◽  
Social Fact ◽  
Political Resource ◽  
Legal Subjects ◽  
Land Restitution

In the context of transitional justice, how does the reinvented state come to be assumed as a social fact? South African land restitution interpellates victims of apartheid- and colonial-era forced removals as claimants, moral and legal subjects of a virtuous 'new' state. In the emotional narratives of loss and suffering called forth in land claim forms, the state is addressed as a subject capable of moral engagement. Claim forms also 'capture' affects related to the event of forced removals as an unstable political resource. However, within an ultimately legal and bureaucratic process, the desire for recognition is typically not reciprocated. Moreover, material settlements are indefinitely delayed due to political and institutional complications. The resulting disillusionment is counterweighed by persistent aspirations for state redress.

Haunting and transitional justice: On lives, landscapes and unresolved pasts

2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-22
Author(s):  
Cheryl Lawther
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Northern Ireland ◽  
Transitional Justice ◽  
Violent Conflict ◽  
Politics Of Memory ◽  
Human Rights Abuses ◽  
Call To Action ◽  
Post Conflict ◽  
Transmission Of Trauma

This article explores practices of haunting and ghosting after conflict-related loss. This is not to suggest a focus on the occult or the paranormal, but to use these phenomena as a prism through which to understand the intersection between unresolved pasts and the transmission of trauma post-conflict. As Michael Levan notes, trauma lingers ‘unexorcisably in the places of its perpetration, in the bodies of those affected, in the eyes of the witnesses, and in the politics of memory’. The ghost, according to Avery Gordon ‘is the principal form by which something lost or invisible or seemingly not there makes itself known or apparent to us’. In this article I argue for three conceptualisations of haunting when past traumas remain unaddressed: the haunting of lost lives, the haunting of landscape, and the haunting presence of the unresolved past. The article focuses on Northern Ireland, a post-conflict jurisdiction described as being haunted by a ‘conflict calendar in which every day is an anniversary’ and extensive fieldwork with victims and survivors of the conflict. The article concludes by arguing that the presence of ghosts and the experience of haunting represent a ‘call to action’ in the quest to deal with a legacy of violent conflict and human rights abuses.

Back to the Future? Confronting the Role(s) of Natural Resources in Armed Conflict Through the Lenses of Truth and Reconciliation Commissions

2017 ◽  
Vol 19 (4-5) ◽  
pp. 373-400
Author(s):  
Eliana Cusato
Keyword(s):  
Natural Resources ◽  
Transitional Justice ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Truth And Reconciliation ◽  
Sierra Leonean ◽  
Post Conflict ◽  
Truth And Reconciliation Commissions ◽  
The Future ◽  
Conflict Strategies

Abstract Natural resources are critical factors in the transition from conflict to peace. Whether they contributed to, financed or fuelled armed conflict, failure to integrate natural resources into post-conflict strategies may endanger the chances of a long-lasting and sustainable peace. This article explores how Truth and Reconciliation Commissions (trcs), as transitional justice institutions, can contribute to addressing the multifaceted role of natural resources in armed conflict. Drawing insights from the practice of the Sierra Leonean and Liberian trcs in this area, the article identifies several ways in which truth-seeking bodies may reinforce post-conflict accountability and avoid the future reoccurrence of abuses and conflict by actively engaging with the natural resource-conflict link. As it is often the case with other transitional justice initiatives, trcs’ engagement with the role of natural resources in armed conflict brings along opportunities and challenges, which are contextual and influenced by domestic and international factors.

scholarly journals Prospects for the Implementation of Transitional Justice in Ukraine

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oleksandra CHUBINIDZE
Keyword(s):  
Transitional Justice ◽  
Truth Commissions ◽  
Institutional Reforms ◽  
Modern Approach ◽  
Military Conflict ◽  
Post Conflict ◽  
Official Statement ◽  
Legal Model ◽  
Historical Truth ◽  
First Time

The study examines the features of transitional justice. The author gives definitions and goals of this concept. As it was noted by the scientists Ovcharenko and Shcherbaniuk, transitional justice includes judicial and extrajudicial mechanisms, such as prosecution, compensation, truth commissions, institutional transformations, and a combination of the above. For the first time, the content, main elements, and mechanisms of transitional justice are described in detail, which is considered in the context of the simultaneous transformation of Ukrainian society from an authoritarian past to a democratic present and from military conflict to post-conflict. Referring to Arkadiy Bushchenko (2017) transitional justice, as a model of society's transition from authoritarian to democratic, and from armed conflict to post-conflict, is currently the most modern approach to solving the problems that Ukraine has been dealing with since the end of 2013. Therefore, given this understanding, there is a prospect of developing a national legal model for the implementation of the basic principles of transitional justice. With the ultimate goal of the process of reconciliation in society, the concept of transitional justice involves the simultaneous operation of the state in four areas: effective criminal prosecutions, reparations, institutional reforms, and official statement of historical truth.

Transitional Justice

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicolas Michel ◽  
Katherine Del Mar
Keyword(s):  
Transitional Justice ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Truth Commissions ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
Commissions Of Inquiry ◽  
Fact Finding

This chapter examines the different transitional justice mechanisms established to respond to serious international crimes that have occurred in the context of armed conflict. These transitional mechanisms include truth-seeking mechanisms such as truth commissions, commissions of inquiry, and judicial fact-finding. This chapter considers the problems that may arise in the interaction among different transitional justice mechanisms such as protection of the rights of the accused. It also argues that transitional justice requires a coordinated approach among a plurality of mechanisms to assist a society in transitioning from a state of armed conflict in which serious international crimes were committed, to a peaceful and reconciled future.

Rule of Law, Security, and Transitional Justice in Fragile and Conflict-Affected Societies

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anja Mihr ◽  
Chandra Sriram Lekha
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Transitional Justice ◽  
Truth Commissions ◽  
Law Reform ◽  
Security Sector ◽  
The Past ◽  
Post Conflict ◽  
Knowing That ◽  
The Many

States are expected to provide both security and justice for their citizens; one needs the other in order to work well. Yet when both are damaged or destroyed by war, state actors and outsiders alike tend to treat them as competing post-conflict priorities. Over the past twenty years, numerous processes have emerged to promote one or both, including “transitional justice”—from courts and truth commissions to community reconciliation—and programs to restore rule of law, reform the “security sector” (SSR) and disarm, demobilize, and reintegrate fighters into society (DDR). The many actors involved have just as many, sometimes competing, operational priorities, knowing that change is urgent, but necessarily long-term. This chapter examines the interaction of transitional justice, rule of law, SSR, and DDR, identifying key concepts, actors, processes, and challenges in pursuing change in each of these areas simultaneously.

Why Political Appointments to Truth Commissions Cause Difficulties for these Institutions: Using the Crisis in the Transitional Justice Process in Nepal to Understand How Matters of Legitimacy and Credibility Undermine Such Commissions

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 444-470
Author(s):  
Jeremy Sarkin ◽  
Ram Kumar Bhandari
Keyword(s):  
Transitional Justice ◽  
International Standards ◽  
Truth Commissions ◽  
Moral Integrity ◽  
Divided Societies ◽  
The Past ◽  
Post Conflict ◽  
The World ◽  
Justice Process ◽  
Political Appointments

Abstract Over five decades and with dozens of examples of truth commissions to look back on, an undeniable aspect of their legacy is that the world has become far more focused on dealing with the past and uncovering the truth about past atrocities. While there is typically a focus in the literature on the more widely publicized and famous truth commissions, scores of other processes have taken place, especially since the 1990s. Post-conflict or divided societies have designed institutions in ways that achieve specific objectives but at the same time conform to international standards, creating a reputation of being both democratic and accountable. Using the prism of Nepal, this article examines why the process to establish transitional justice mechanisms, and specifically truth commissions, needs to be legitimate and credible for them to be effective and be impactful. It specifically examines issues relating to appointments to such institutions and why such appointments need to be done independently and not overtly politically. It scrutinizes why appointment mechanisms and processes are so important to enhancing the legitimacy and independence of such bodies. The case of Nepal is used as an example to extrapolate conclusions about the problems that affected its processes, and the various crises that have emerged in those processes. The article argues that commissioners ought to be chosen on the basis of their impartiality, moral integrity, and known commitment to human rights and disclosure of the truth. This is essential to ensure that the process is seen to be independent and credible.

ICERD in the post-conflict landscape: towards a transitional justice role

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lydia A. Nkansah
Keyword(s):  
Transitional Justice ◽  
Truth Commissions ◽  
Truth And Reconciliation ◽  
Post Conflict ◽  
Reconciliation Process

The chapter highlights the potential of ICERD to contribute to the process of transitional justice in post-conflict societies. In particular it identifies truth commissions as having largely ignored the potential for ICERD as a transitional tool, and calls on CERD, States Parties and other actors to better understand and carve out a role for ICERD in the truth and reconciliation process.

Politics of Pursuing Justice in the Aftermath of Civil Conflict

2018 ◽  
Vol 63 (5) ◽  
pp. 1165-1192 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nam Kyu Kim ◽  
Mi Hwa Hong
Keyword(s):  
Transitional Justice ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Balance Of Power ◽  
Civil Conflict ◽  
Truth Commissions ◽  
Political Elites ◽  
Negotiated Settlement ◽  
Rebel Groups ◽  
The Government ◽  
Conflict Outcomes

Why do some states pursue transitional justice (TJ) in the immediate aftermath of armed conflict while others do not? What drives a state to select a particular type of justice mechanism over another? Building on the political explanations of TJ, we argue that postconflict justice (PCJ) decisions are driven by the interests and power of political elites shaped by recently ended conflicts. Our empirical analysis shows that conflict outcomes and their subsequent impact on the balance of power between the government and rebel groups are the most important determinants of PCJ decisions. Domestic trials are most likely to emerge out of a decisive, one-sided victory while truth commissions and reparations are most likely to occur after a negotiated settlement. We also find that conflict severity interacts with conflict outcomes to affect PCJ decisions.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document