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.

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.

Transformation – Overcoming the Limits of Liberal Peace and Transitional Justice in Deeply Divided Societies: Reconciliation in Liberal Peace Theory

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-16
Author(s):  
Or Avi-Guy
Keyword(s):  
Transitional Justice ◽  
Political Stability ◽  
Power Sharing ◽  
Institution Building ◽  
Institutional Reforms ◽  
Transformative Justice ◽  
Divided Societies ◽  
Political Reality ◽  
Post Conflict ◽  
Liberal Peace

This article explores the tension between the theoretical conceptualisations of liberal peace, transitional justice and reconciliation by focusing on power sharing as a liberal peace institution-building mechanism. Power sharing is based on the premise that identities in conflict in deeply divided societies are difficult, if not impossible, to change. The article outlines the limitations of liberal peace by demonstrating how the implementation of power-sharing arrangements creates a political reality in which conflict patterns are further entrenched, thus hindering the prospects of conflict transformation. In order to address the limitations of liberal peace, the article draws on models of transformative justice to highlight the growing need for a new conceptualisation of reconciliation as a political and transformative concept, in which both justice and reconciliation are recognised as intrinsic goals for post-conflict societies. Thus, the re-establishment of political structures and institutional reforms is envisaged not only as a tool to promote political stability, but as a means of facilitating transformation in conflict patterns in the political and social spheres.

Transitional justice and the International Criminal Court – in “the interests of justice”?

2007 ◽  
Vol 89 (867) ◽  
pp. 691-718 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dražan Đukić
Keyword(s):  
Transitional Justice ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Radical Change ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Truth Commissions ◽  
Prosecutorial Discretion ◽  
Post Conflict ◽  
Treaty Interpretation

AbstractTransitional justice encompasses a number of mechanisms that seek to allow post-conflict societies to deal with past atrocities in circumstances of radical change. However, two of these mechanisms – truth commissions and criminal processes – might clash if the former are combined with amnesties. This article examines the possibility of employing the Rome Statute's Article 53 so as to allow these two mechanisms to operate in a complementary manner. It considers three arguments – an interpretation of Article 53 in accordance with the relevant rules on treaty interpretation, states' obligations to prosecute certain crimes and the Rome Statute's approach to prosecutorial discretion – and concludes that Article 53 is ill-suited to accommodate truth commissions in conjunction with amnesties.

scholarly journals The International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia: The Promise and Reality of Reconciliation in Croatia

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara Parker
Keyword(s):  
Transitional Justice ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Local Level ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
International Community ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
Truth Commissions ◽  
Post Conflict ◽  
State And Local

The international community is increasingly interested in promoting post-conflict reconciliation in a variety of forms, with trials and truth commissions featured most prominently. The contemporary academic discussion over transitional justice (and the practice of transitional justice itself) is largely focused on whether and how these types of large-scale national transitional justice mechanisms contribute to reconciliation. This article examines the promise and reality of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) to contribute to national reconciliation. Ultimately, the ability of state-wide policies to contribute to reconciliation rests on the active participation of local level actors. This requires political backing at the state and local level beyond that of just the international community. More attention needs to be paid to domestic cultural factors in the initial decision to implement state-wide transitional justice procedures, and bottom-up mechanisms must be built into any large scale approach to reconciliation.

scholarly journals Restorative Justice in Transitional Sierra Leone

2011 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 157 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lydia Apori Nkansah
Keyword(s):  
Sierra Leone ◽  
Transitional Justice ◽  
Truth And Reconciliation Commission ◽  
Truth Commissions ◽  
Truth Telling ◽  
Truth And Reconciliation ◽  
Sierra Leonean ◽  
Post Conflict ◽  
The People ◽  
Conflict Reconciliation

Intense debate surrounds truth commissions as to their mission, perceived roles and outcomes. This paper seeks to contribute to the understanding of truth commissions in post-conflict settings. It examines the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) for Sierra Leone, the first truth commission to be engaged concurrently with a retributive mechanism, the Special Court for Sierra Leone for transitional justice. The study finds that the TRC provided an opening for conversation in Sierra Leonean communities to search for the meanings of truth about the conflict. In this way the communities simultaneously created an understanding of the situation and set reconciliation directions and commitment from the process of creative conversation.  This notwithstanding, the TRC did not have the needed public cooperation because the people were not sure the war was over and feared that their assailants could harm them if they disclosed the truth to the TRC. The presence of the Special Court also created tensions and fears rendering the transitional environment unfriendly to the reconciliation and truth telling endeavors of the TRC. The study has implications for future truth commissions in that the timing for post-conflict reconciliation endeavors should take into consideration the state of the peace equilibrium of the societies involved. It should also be packaged for harmonious existence in a given transitional contexts, particularly where it will coexist with a retributive mechanism.

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.

scholarly journals Transitional justice discourse in post-conflict societies in Africa: introduction

2021 ◽  
Vol 9s2 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Elias O. Opongo
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
Transitional Justice ◽  
Former Soviet Union ◽  
Truth Commissions ◽  
Truth Telling ◽  
African Countries ◽  
Post Conflict ◽  
Conflict Resolution Strategies ◽  
New Vision ◽  
Democratic Spaces

Post-conflict reconstruction has emerged as one the major issues of concern in Africa in the last three decades. Since the end of the Cold War following the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, many African countries embraced multiparty systems that expanded democratic spaces. With this came the claim to justice and consciousness on the need to reconstruct a new vision of the nation, a vision that is based on social cohesion. This led to calls for democratisation in a number of African countries as well as in Latin America, Eastern Europe, and, in particular, former Soviet Union countries. In Africa, the approach taken by different countries varied from elaborate transitional justice processes that involved truth commissions to national dialogue processes that called for political compromise without putting into place any formal transitional justice process. The articles in this supplementary issue on transitional justice discourse in post-conflict societies in Africa draw attention to diverse contextual issues on post-conflict reconstruction in the continent. These articles bring together divergent discourses, experiences, theorisations, and interpretations of transitional processes while calling for a new way of assessing truth-telling processes within the purview of legal frameworks, gender and cultural sensitivities, peace sustainability, and conflict resolution strategies in Africa. The articles open up debate on the extent to which transitional justice processes contribute to peace and sustainability in Africa, and what could be done to improve this important post-conflict reconstruction initiative.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document