Search

Begin New Search Topic Reparations Publishing Institution The International Center for Transitional Justice (ICTJ)

11. Moving from Mirage to Reality: Transitional Justice and Prevention in Morocco

Author:
Mustapha Hadji
Publication Date:
07-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
The International Center for Transitional Justice (ICTJ)
Abstract:
This study examines how transitional justice in Morocco has contributed to the prevention of serious human rights violations, mainly related to state violence and repression and social and economic exclusion. Beginning in the 1990s, Morocco’s a constitutional monarchy engaged in a process of liberalization that included efforts to address past grave human rights violations. In the 2000s, these efforts centered on the Equity and Reconciliation Commission (IER), a truth-telling initiative that recommended and helped bring about other transitional justice processes such as reparations, the preservation of memory, and a series of institutional and legal reforms intended to prevent the recurrence of those violations. Despite the political liberalization that was underway, Morocco’s transitional justice efforts were not undertaken in a context of regime change. Morocco’s experience nevertheless suggests that limited political reform can have real but restricted impact on the prevention of human rights violations. As a truth-telling measure, the IER diagnosed some of the wrongdoings of the past and called for reform to prevent their recurrence. Reparations provided important benefits to victims that had improved inclusion, while collective reparations drew attention to regional exclusion and inequality. Beginning in 2011, a new constitution facilitated institutional and legal reforms that had been recommended by the IER, many of which included the protection of human rights. The fact that the regime that was responsible for past human rights violations remained in control of the transitional justice processes—and at the same time it was perpetrating abuses in the name of anti-terrorism—however, has undermined the legitimacy of those processes and constrained their preventive impact. While the Moroccan monarchy may have no desire to return to the widespread repression of the Years of Lead, the persistence of human rights violations, corruption, inequality, and social unrest in the country suggests that a transitional justice approach that is more comprehensive and inclusive and, in the end, more fully implemented has the potential to make a greater contribution to preventing future wrongs.
Topic:
Human Rights, Reform, Memory, Institutions, Reparations, Atrocity Prevention, and Truth and Reconciliation
Political Geography:
North Africa and Morocco

12. A Mixed Approach to International Crimes: The Retributive and Restorative Justice Procedures of Colombia’s Special Jurisdiction for Peace

Author:
Anna Myriam Roccatello and Elizabeth Rojas
Publication Date:
07-2020
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
The International Center for Transitional Justice (ICTJ)
Abstract:
In June 2019, ICTJ hosted an intense week of meetings with various members of the SJP, along with former combatants of the Public Forces of Colombia and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia-People’s Army (FARC-EP), and the victims of Colombia’s conflict. ICTJ Colombia routinely meets with these stakeholders as part of its work, but the aim of this week was to specifically include various international experts on restorative and transitional justice: Professor John Braithwaite, Professor Adolfo Ceretti, Professor Roberto Cornelli, Maria Camila Moreno Múnera, and Anna Myriam Roccatello. This report is the result of these fruitful meeting with the stakeholders in the Colombian peace process. Chapter 1 of this report gives an overview of the SJP’s innovative model, which can be considered a mixed restorative-retributive judicial organ. It also examines the potential value of such a mixed procedural approach, in comparison with the failures of purely retributive justice processes to achieve the specific aims of criminal accountability in a transitional justice context. Chapter 2 examines some of the various challenges for restorative justice in general. For convenience, those challenges have been divided into five categories: victims, perpetrators, judges, communications, and due process. Chapter 3 suggests various principles that the SJP should consider to help realize some of its restorative justice aims, while Chapter 4 suggests some specific procedures that the SJP may implement to achieve those restorative justice principles. Those readers who are familiar with transitional justice, the Colombian peace process, and the SJP may wish to skip Chapters 1 and 2 and move directly to the recommendations in Chapters 3 and 4. Finally, the report concludes with reflections on some challenges of the mixed approach and offers some general suggestions for how to move forward.
Topic:
Reform, Criminal Justice, Institutions, Reparations, and Truth and Reconciliation
Political Geography:
Colombia and South America

13. Truth, Accountability, and Asset Recovery: How Transitional Justice Can Fight Corruption

Author:
Ruben Carranza
Publication Date:
08-2020
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
The International Center for Transitional Justice (ICTJ)
Abstract:
On March 2 and 3, 2020, two weeks before the World Health Organization (WHO) declared a COVID-19 global pandemic, transitional justice and anti-corruption policymakers, experts, and activists from the Gambia, Kenya, South Africa and Armenia met with their counterparts in Tunisia for a two-day conference entitled, “Truth, Accountability and Asset Recovery: How Transitional Justice Can Fight Corruption,” organized by ICTJ with the support of Tunisia’s National Anti-Corruption Commission (INLUCC) and the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany. This diverse group of leaders came together to share solutions to a common problem: How can countries emerging from dictatorship, war, or political transitions hold corrupt ex-rulers accountable, recover their ill-gotten assets, and ensure that those harmed the most by human rights violations and large-scale corruption can achieve justice, obtain reparations, and overcome marginalization? For many countries pursuing transitional justice, including those represented by participants in the conference, the health and economic impact of the pandemic has made it more urgent to find and design solutions that advance accountability for both human rights violations and corruption. In Kenya, for example, citizens questioned the government’s use of $12 million in COVID-19-related aid from the World Bank, “amid reports that the lockdown intended to curb the spread of the virus had worsened poverty, even forcing a mother to cook stones to make her eight children believe she was preparing food for them.” In Tunisia, INLUCC “identified 11 instances of suspected corruption and conflicts of interest” related to a government deal to acquire millions of facemasks. At the conference, participants brought up the role of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) in enabling corruption during dictatorship or in facilitating state capture through privatization. Ninety-seven human rights and anti-corruption groups have jointly reminded the IMF, which has offered loans to pandemic-hit countries even as it continues to set austerity as a condition, that “transparency and accountability are key to making sure the money the IMF is disbursing actually goes to protecting lives and livelihoods.” This report gives an overview of the conference and its five panel discussions. It presents the thematic questions posed in each panel and summarizes the panelists’ statements and the comments and questions from moderators, other panelists, and participants in the audience. By design, the premise of the conference was clear: The practice by mainly global South countries of including accountability for corruption in their transitional justice processes has settled the debate over whether accountability for corruption should be part of transitional justice. In 2008, the Kenya Truth, Justice and Reconciliation Commission began investigating land-grabbing, large-scale corruption, and violations of economic and social rights. Soon after the Arab Spring in 2011-2012, Tunisia took the most significant steps when it established the Truth and Dignity Commission (TDC) with a mandate that covered violent political repression as well as corruption under former President Ben Ali. In its recently released final report, the commission examines the extent of the corruption and how the development policies and austerity measures imposed by international financial institutions such as the World Bank and the IMF enabled it. In 2016, the post-dictatorship government in the Gambia created a truth commission to examine human rights violations as well as a separate commission of inquiry to investigate ex-dictator Yahya Jammeh’s corruption and identify his ill-gotten wealth. The latter commission is now considering using part of those assets to fund reparations. Although corruption was excluded from the mandate of South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission, activists in 2017 created the People’s Tribunal on Economic Crime that linked the continuity of post-apartheid corruption to the failure to address it in earlier transitional justice processes. In 2018, the South African government then created the Judicial Commission of Inquiry into Allegations of State Capture to investigate specific economic crimes during and after apartheid. After the 2018 revolution in Armenia that ended a decade of authoritarian rule in the post-Soviet state, the new government embarked on prosecutions for corruption and human rights violations and is now considering a truth commission that would examine specific cases of corruption and human rights violations since 1991. These processes informed the conference, and the panelists who were directly involved in them discussed the challenges, successes, and lessons learned. This report’s original intent was to highlight the most important lessons from these experiences and promote South-South exchanges on transitional justice and accountability for corruption. However, the unprecedented global pandemic during which the conference took place has given it another equally relevant purpose. As ICTJ pointed out in a recent special report on COVID-19, “The pandemic is bringing to the surface underlying inequalities, including the unequal access to health care.” With this in mind, the author hopes this report will also offer policymakers practical approaches to transitional justice that can help address those underlying inequalities, such as measures aimed at improving access to health care for the most vulnerable, and initiatives to use recovered ill-gotten assets to fund reparations for victims.
Topic:
Corruption, Reform, Criminal Justice, Institutions, Reparations, COVID-19, and Truth and Reconciliation
Political Geography:
Kenya, Europe, Armenia, North Africa, Tunisia, Gambia, and Africa

14. Building Blocks for Reparations: Providing Interim Relief to Victims Through Targeted Development Assistance

Author:
Sarah Kasande Kihika and Eva Kallweit
Publication Date:
09-2020
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
The International Center for Transitional Justice (ICTJ)
Abstract:
The armed conflict in Northern Uganda, stretching across more than two decades, greatly affected the populations of Northern Uganda, which suffered multiple forms of war crimes and gross abuses of human rights. Violations included forced displacement, pillaging, looting and destruction of property, abduction, forced recruitment, slavery, forced marriage, sexual violence, psychological harms, mutilation, killings, torture, and cruel, inhumane, and degrading treatment. These violations have had long-term social and economic consequences for victims, affecting and impairing their functionality, livelihoods, schooling, physical and mental health, social skills, self-esteem, and interpersonal relations in the post-conflict period, with differential impacts on men, women, boys, and girls. This study assesses the opportunities for providing interim relief to victims of conflict-related human rights violations through targeted development programs, pending the establishment of a comprehensive reparations program. Reparations are a response to gross human rights violations, meant to provide redress in its many forms, including compensation to victims. Development assistance differs from reparations in that it is aimed at improving the general socioeconomic conditions of citizens more broadly. This report acknowledges the distinctions between reparations and development, while exploring intersections between the two that could be optimized to address the urgent needs of victims of human rights violations. It identifies substantive and practical considerations that government authorities at the national and local levels should take into account when designing and implementing reconstruction and development programs, and it proposes ways to maximize the potential of ongoing programs to address the immediate needs of victims and mitigate the effects of the abuses they endured. Finally, the study explains how existing recovery and development programs could increase victims’ access, improve their implementation modalities, and address the various challenges and gaps that limit programs’ effectiveness. If they are appropriately designed, local recovery and reconstruction programs can form a foundation upon which reparative approaches can be based and built in the future.
Topic:
Human Rights, Reform, Transitional Justice, and Reparations
Political Geography:
Uganda and Africa

15. Forms of Justice: A Guide to Designing Reparations Application Forms and Registration Processes for Victims of Human Rights Violations

Author:
Ruben Carranza, Cristian Correa, and Elena Naughton
Publication Date:
12-2017
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The International Center for Transitional Justice (ICTJ)
Abstract:
n a number of countries around the world, governments have created state-administered reparations programs for victims and communities that were most affected by massive human rights violations. The success of these programs, which often involve thousands of individuals, depends in part on the state’s ability to reach victims and record their demands for justice in an effective and meaningful way. Reparations programs may be administered by government agencies pursuant to a law or policy or a court judgment. In all cases, a process of identifying, verifying, and registering those entitled to reparations is necessary. This often begins with a reparations application form.
Topic:
Human Rights, Transitional Justice, Humanitarian Crisis, Reparations, and Victims
Political Geography:
Global Focus

16. Justice Mosaics: How Context Shapes Transitional Justice in Fractured Societies - Report

Author:
Roger Duthie
Publication Date:
05-2017
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
The International Center for Transitional Justice (ICTJ)
Abstract:
The contexts in which societies attempt to address legacies of massive human rights violations—by confronting impunity, seeking effective redress, and preventing recurrence—are integral to the concept of transitional justice. Such contexts can vary widely: they can include ongoing conflicts, post-authoritarian transitions, post-conflict transitions, and post-transitional periods. They can also differ in terms of institutional and political fragility as well as levels of economic and social development. Broad policy objectives in such contexts can range from rule-of-law promotion to conflict resolution, peacebuilding, vindication and protection of human rights, democratization, development, and social change. As the term suggests, however, the contexts in which societies undertake transitional justice processes are usually to some degree transitional. This is important because transitions create opportunities for addressing past injustice, while at the same time they retain continuities with the past that pose constraints or obstacles for doing so. The fact that context varies is important because the broader context affects the objectives of transitional justice efforts as well as the processes through which they develop, which in turn affect the specific responses that are most appropriate and feasible in each setting. Here processes refer to the different ways in which ideas and movements develop, promote, and coalesce in demands for accountability, acknowledgment, and reform in the aftermath of massive human rights violations.
Topic:
Reform, Criminal Justice, Institutions, Justice, Reparations, Gender, Truth and Reconciliation, and Youth Engagement
Political Geography:
Africa, Europe, Middle East, Asia, South America, and North Africa

17. Recommendations for Victim Reparations in Côte d’Ivoire

Author:
Cristian Correa and Didier Gbery
Publication Date:
08-2016
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The International Center for Transitional Justice (ICTJ)
Abstract:
After a consultation process that involved the active participation of victims, the National Commission for Reconciliation and Compensation for Victims (La Commission Nationale pour la Réconciliation et l’Indemnisation des Victimes des crises survenues en Côte d’Ivoire, CONARIV) made a series of recommendations on reparations and provided an initial list of victims to the government. Now the government must define a policy that is transparent and fair, based on those recommendations and victims’ input. ICTJ has been working with CONARIV, victims’ groups, and other government entities on reparations since 2012, providing technical assistance, encouraging a process of consultation and dialogue, and learning from victims about their needs and demands. This has included consultations with youth and victims from some of the most affected areas of the country. To help advance the process of defining a credible reparations policy for Côte d’Ivoire, this paper presents a series of proposals for the government and the general public. The aim is to advance discussions on the best strategy to address the rights of victims of serious human rights and international humanitarian law violations committed by the warring parties. Through these recommendations, ICTJ seeks to present the knowledge and experience it has gained over several years working in Côte d’Ivoire with government entities, civil society organizations, and victims’ groups that shared valuable insights on understanding the needs, priorities, and possible avenues for providing reparations. It is hoped that these proposals will help to define a reparations policy for Côte d’Ivoire that effectively addresses the consequences of violence that continue to impede the lives of victims.
Topic:
Reparations, Victims, and Truth and Reconciliation
Political Geography:
Africa and Côte d'Ivoire

18. When No One Calls It Rape: Addressing Sexual Violence Against Men and Boys

Author:
Amrita Kapur and Kelli Muddell
Publication Date:
12-2016
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
The International Center for Transitional Justice (ICTJ)
Abstract:
There is no doubt that the scope of the problem for male victims is large. The World Health Organization has identified sexual violence against men and boys as a significant problem that has been largely ignored by nongovernmental organizations, health care providers, government agencies, criminal justice authorities, and others. The violations can take many forms, including rape, gang rape, sexual slavery, enforced nudity, and being forced to perform sexual acts with others. Very commonly, sexual violence against men is committed in situations of detention. Studies have shown this pattern in contexts such as Chile, El Salvador, Libya, Sri Lanka, Syria, the United States, and the former Yugoslavia. Transitional justice mechanisms—including truth commissions, reparations programs, and criminal trials—are well placed to begin tackling some of these issues as part of efforts to address legacies of violence. Yet, although the problem has been addressed by some transitional justice efforts in certain countries, there is still wide variation and inconsistency in terms of the responses to these violations and attempts to involve male victims of sexual violence in these processes. The risk that male victims will remain invisible and left out of responses to sexual violence is significant, unless their rights and concerns are given a specific focus comparable to that now increasingly given to female victims. A number of factors contribute to the generally lackluster response by both state and nonstate actors involved in implementing transitional justice processes. One is the tendency to conflate sexual violence with violence against women and girls, which contributes to the perception that it is a women’s issue, thus limiting the responses available to victims falling outside of this group, including men and boys. This means that male victims’ experiences of sexual violence continue to be underreported, misunderstood, and mischaracterized in transitional justice processes. Another issue is under-reporting, which is particularly relevant for truth commissions as the statements they receive from victims not only inform their final reports, but also typically contribute to the creation of victim registries and the design of reparations programs, and even prosecutions. In many cases, male victims are reluctant to acknowledge the sexual nature of the violations committed against them. This can happen in order to avoid the social stigma attached to such acts or due to the fear of being perceived as weak, labeled homosexual, or being accused of having “wanted it.” Even in instances where men report acts of sexual violence, those receiving the reports rarely handle the report with the sensitivity and awareness they require. Medical practitioners, for example, may not be adequately trained to recognize, identify, or treat male victims or they may themselves accuse male victims of homosexuality or otherwise perpetuate social misconceptions about these crimes.
Topic:
Criminal Justice, Sexual Violence, Men, Reparations, Gender, Truth and Reconciliation, and Boys
Political Geography:
Africa, Europe, Middle East, Asia, South America, North Africa, and North America

19. More Than Words: Apologies as a Form of Reparation

Author:
Ruben Carranza, Cristian Correa, and Elena Naughton
Publication Date:
12-2015
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
The International Center for Transitional Justice (ICTJ)
Abstract:
It has become more common for political leaders to apologize publicly to victims, their families, and communities, often during a formal national address or other ceremonial event. Such apologies have taken place in the midst of cease-fire and peace processes, made not only by those holding public offi ce, such as heads of state, ministers, judges, and the heads of the police, military, and intelligence services, but also by paramilitary leaders. Apologies delivered by state agents signal the full backing of the state for what is being conveyed. Apologies are not enough as reparation to victims of serious violations. While apologies have value in themselves and can address both moral and physical harm, they should be combined with material forms of reparation. In particular, care needs to be taken to ensure that a disproportionate emphasis on apologies does not diminish the likelihood that other reparative measures, such as restitution and medical care, will be implemented, to help limit the long-term harm caused to victims or address their physical needs. Apologies should, in many cases, refl ect a communal reckoning with crimes of the past. They describe what has been learned and what needs to be done to prevent such events from ever happening again; sometimes they mark either the commencement or the culmination of a long, sometimes divisive period of debate and reflection in a society. In many cases, it is victims and organizations of survivors who provide the main impetus for pursuing an apology and help to decide when and how an apology might best be given. Whatever the catalyst, apologies (and the process for developing them) can help a country to replace, at least partially, partisan recriminations with constructive dialogue and unite the public behind the common goals it needs to achieve to move forward. Th e process of developing consensus around the need for an apology can help societies to face their past, reaffirm values, and meet their obligations to victims as human beings and citizens in the present and in the future. Because official apologies are most often public acts, they usually attract considerable media attention and scrutiny. Therefore, the content, delivery, tone, and proper timing of an apology are crucial. Th e most effective apologies are unequivocal; they are not diluted by qualifying language designed to limit their scope or redirect blame. For victims, it may matter whether an apology is written, handed over on paper, or read or spoken aloud. Likewise, the language spoken, the access to written, spoken, or recorded materials, the venue in which it is made, even the body language and appearance of the person delivering the apology are all significant. Some of the most meaningful apologies have occurred at the place where the violations occurred. Although most offi cial apologies provide a form of comfort to victims, some have been judged harshly for being poorly conceived, insincere, and ineffective. Expressions of regret, for instance, are most frequently statements of sadness and disappointment that fall short of an apology, whereas unequivocal apologies contain a more explicit if not unconditional acknowledgment of responsibility. They acknowledge the specific injustices that occurred, recognize that victims suffered serious harm as a result, and take responsibility for what happened. Effective apologies take into account what victims are likely to feel and think about what is being said. In fact, the most effective apologies are arguably those that have been agreed on with survivors, families of victims, or their representatives, and which address the future and not just the past. Th ey assure victims—and the rest of society—that victims were not at fault for what happened and emphasize common values shared by everyone in society. While apologies on their own cannot fully restore trust nor ever provide the full relief that victims and a society need to heal, they play an important role in giving meaning to reparations and promoting efforts to reform institutions and guarantee non-repetition of violations and can be an important step toward reconciliation, on the journey toward lasting peace.
Topic:
Transitional Justice, Reparations, Human Rights Violations, and Truth and Reconciliation
Political Geography:
Global Focus

20. On the Path to Vindicate Victims’ Rights in Uganda: Reflections on the Transitional Justice Process Since Juba

Author:
Michael Otim and Sarah Kasande Kihika
Publication Date:
06-2015
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The International Center for Transitional Justice (ICTJ)
Abstract:
The government of Uganda has been slow to address and remedy serious human rights abuses committed against civilians throughout the country, despite its commitment under the Juba peace talks. This paper analyzes some of the underlying factors that seem to impede the implementation of transitional justice measures in Uganda, such as waning political support and an overly bureaucratic process, and offers practical recommendations on how to advance the process.
Topic:
Transitional Justice, Criminal Justice, Reparations, Human Rights Violations, and Truth and Reconciliation
Political Geography:
Uganda and Africa