Suchergebnisse

This paper examines the current security-governance-development nexus, something that is often also discussed under the concept of transitional justice (TJ). The paper analyses how the ambiguous, evolving and expanding nature of the concept of TJ affects the planning, coordination, evaluation and assessment of aid given to conflict ridden, post-conflict or (post) authoritarian societies in order to strengthen their democracy. Special attention is paid to gender justice. Illustrations are drawn mainly from Africa where many TJ processes and mechanisms are currently taking place.

The economic and social dimension of transitional justice has been largely ignored in favour of traditional emphasis on violations of civil and political rights. While early transitional justice processes mainly focused on criminal prosecutions for bodily integrity violations, socioeconomic issues, including economica and social rights (herein ESRs) violations, were seen just as part of background. However, scholarship and practitioners are increasingly calling to include ESRs violations in transitional justice processes. Indeed, economic and social conditions are frequently linked to human rights abuses, often constituting a cause, means or consequence of conflict and authoritarianism. Including the assessment of ESRs violations as an issue for transitional justice might serve the purpose of establishing a more comprehensive understanding of the root causes of past human rights violations as well as to facilitate the pathway to achieve a sustainable peace.

Transitional justice is argued to become less important as national courts assume international jurisdiction. The indicators of emotion's causal role in shaping transitional justice are explored in transitions to democracy & the decay of retributive emotions. Five emotions are asserted to map into legal & administrative reactions that contrast with reasons for interest based preferences in transitional justice. The dilemmas of transmutation of one motivation into another are asserted to be resolved in new democracies. The formation of preferences that generate a demand for or resistance to transitional justice are linked to the location of the agents in the autocratic political system that preceded the transition. Future transitional justice will be shaped by international institutions as national institutions & the preferences of domestic actors become less decisive. References. J. Harwell

Any country which attempts to establish accountability for past abuses of human rights during the process of democratization faces political, judicial, and ethical problems. With regard to politics, the question of which transitional justice measures are appropriate, functional, and feasible has to be decided for every individual case. A judicial approach has to decide which judicial standards to apply and how to justify prosecution. Finally, the ethical dilemmas of dealing with historical injustices have to be understood. There are no ready-made concepts to define guilt and justice. In many cases it is even difficult to tell the victims from the perpetrators. This study examines the different strategies subsumed under the term 'transitional justice' used by emerging democracies to deal with a legacy of human rights abuses. It explores the problems and challenges posed by different mechanisms of reconciliation and societal reintegration. While existing analyses of the contribution that transitional justice measures make to the process of social re-integration stress the importance of consensus among citizens and social groups for the emergence of trust and solidarity, this study suggests also thinking about how conflicts over competing 'truths' can help to build social capital and reconciliation. Noting a global diffusion of international legal norms, which means at least formal universal acceptance of basic rights and judicial procedures, it is argued that international justice cannot be a substitute for transitional justice measures taken by the domestic regime itself. Adapted from the source document.

In the US today, there remain many unresolved issues related to race, in particular issues that are legacies of past injustices toward African Americans. This article argues that, in addressing these issues, we have much to learn from other societies that have undergone political transformations from regimes that systematically abuse human rights to regimes that respect, or at least purport to respect, human rights. These transitions have given rise to the idea of transitional justice, & to well-developed debates about what justice requires during such periods of transition. I argue (in the first section) that transitional justice usually requires the backward-looking measures of prosecution, reparation, & acknowledgement, & I further argue (in the following section) that by this standard the transformation that took place during the civil rights era in the US was unjust, or, at least, remains incomplete. In the final section of the article, I discuss measures that should be considered as ways of completing our transition to a racially just society. Adapted from the source document.

Presentations -- Preface -- Introduction -- Part 1: Conceptions and debates on transitional justice -- Part 2: Prosecutions and diverse paths to justice -- Part 3: The right to truth and the role of memory -- Part 4: Reparations and institutional reform -- Contributors

When democratization took place in 1998 after three decades of authoritarianism in Indonesia, transitional justice became one of the agendas for the country. With the nature of compromised political transition, transitional justice brought together the interest of the elements who wished to challenge the repressive regime, and those who wished to distant themselves from the old regime in order to return to politics. As the result, transitional justice measures were successfully adopted in the beginning of political transition but failed to achieve its goals to break with the old regime and bring justice to victims. Today, after twenty years since reformasi, elements of the politics are consolidated, including those coming from the old regime. Transitional justice is undergoing a period I refer as "post transitional justice". The main character of this state is the extensive roles of civil society. I argue in this paper that civil society, in particular the human rights groups, have important roles since the beginning of the transition in setting the agenda for transitional justice until today when state-centered mechanisms failed and led to post-transitional justice situation. These groups shift strategies to work from below and from the margins, which give strong character for post-transitional justice in Indonesia.

Transitional justice, a movement devoted to bringing accountability to departed political regimes, has been the engine of the international human rights community in the past four decades. But while much has been said about how transitional justice enables successful democratic transitions, some of the movement's legacy is more checkered—from endangering such transitions to rekindling old feuds and undermining the rule of law. Acknowledging this seldom discussed darker side of transitional justice is not an argument against holding an old regime to account for its actions, but rather a recognition of the limits of what justice can do to advance democratization.

AbstractTransitional justice refers to the process of dealing with widespread wrongdoing characteristically committed during the course of conflict and/or repression. Examples of such processes include criminal trials, truth commissions, reparations, and memorials. Technology is altering the forms that widespread wrongdoing takes. Technology is also altering the form of processes of transitional justice themselves. This essay provides a map of these changes and their normative implications.