Search

Begin New Search Topic Truth and Reconciliation Political Geography Europe

1. Reflections on Victim-Centered Accountability in Ukraine

Author:
Kelli Muddell and Anna Myriam Roccatello
Publication Date:
02-2023
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The International Center for Transitional Justice (ICTJ)
Abstract:
Since Russian invaded Ukraine in late February 2022, the world has witnessed innumerable war crimes and other human rights violations, including indiscriminate attacks against civilians, summary executions, torture and ill-treatment, sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV), unlawful detentions, and forced deportation. In response, officials in Ukraine and members of the international community have launched multiple—and unprecedently expansive—efforts to investigate and prosecute these atrocities. Most, however, narrowly focus on criminal prosecution and often overlook the immediate needs and perspectives of victims. This paper examines the various actions that have been taken or are under consideration to investigate and prosecute war crimes and other human rights violations in Ukraine. It explores the myriad challenges they face and how tools from the field of transitional justice can be applied in tandem to deliver justice and reparation to victims and lay the foundation for a more inclusive and democratic Ukraine. The paper makes the case that criminal accountability is but one dimension of justice. For Ukrainians most acutely affected by the war, such as victims of torture and SGBV, as well as broad sectors of the civilian population whose lives have been upended and who now find themselves in desperate need, justice in fact entails a number of remedies including humanitarian assistance based on acknowledgment and repair. The authors further argue that the ongoing initiatives to investigate crimes committed in the war offer an opportunity. Specifically, the vast amount of documentation that government, civil society, and international actors have been gathering for use as evidence in criminal proceedings can be harnessed to advance other justice-related objectives. For instance, this information could serve a truth-seeking process that aims to establish a victim-centered historical record of the war and could inform the design of a more coordinated and forward-looking assistance program, including a much-needed reparations program.
Topic:
Reform, Criminal Justice, Accountability, Institutions, Peace, Justice, Reparations, Gender, Truth and Reconciliation, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Europe and Ukraine

2. Civil Society-Led Truth-Seeking Initiatives: Expanding Opportunities for Acknowledgment and Redress

Author:
Eduardo González Cueva, Jill Williams, and Félix Reátegui Carrillo
Publication Date:
04-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
The International Center for Transitional Justice (ICTJ)
Abstract:
This study reviews civil society-led truth-seeking initiatives in different regions of the world drawing on their experiences, methodologies, and contributions. It identifies lessons learned and best practices and presents practical options for activists considering similar endeavors. The report is inspired by and builds on the work of transitional justice practitioners, including at ICTJ, who deploy wide-ranging modalities to advance truth seeking, including oral history, artwork, theatrical productions, reenactments, museum exhibits, memorials, films, and documentation projects. The right to the truth is a fundamental component of redress for victims of massive human rights violations. Institutional silence, suppression of complaints, and refusal to acknowledge such violations further perpetuates them by protecting and enabling those responsible. In many contexts, government-supported truth commissions are not possible. Moreover, total reliance on state-sanctioned formats can result in one-size-fits-all approaches to truth seeking, devoid of creativity or potential. In the absence of political will, civil society actors have responded to demands for truth by devising and carrying out truth-seeking efforts independently, using a wide array of tools and methods. Civil society-led truth-seeking initiatives provide a practical channel by which communities can respond to demands for redress when the state fails to deliver on its obligations to protect victims’ rights. While truth-seeking initiatives can take many forms, they generally share three main objectives: (1) establish the facts about human rights violations that remain disputed or denied and validate different interpretations and analyses of those facts; (2) protect, acknowledge, and empower victims and survivors; and (3) inform public policy, promote institutional reform, and contribute to social and political transformation. Through an examination of case studies from the United States, Colombia, Scotland, and West Papua, the report highlights common considerations and procedural questions that civil society groups should consider when designing and implementing a truth-seeking mechanism. These considerations can help inspire and guide civil society actors as they lead truth-seeking efforts in the United States and around the world.
Topic:
Reform, Transitional Justice, Youth, Criminal Justice, Memory, Engagement, Reparations, Gender, Atrocity Prevention, and Truth and Reconciliation
Political Geography:
Europe, Asia, Colombia, South America, North America, and United States of America

3. Measuring Results and Monitoring Progress of Transitional Justice Processes

Author:
Mateo Porciuncula
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
The International Center for Transitional Justice (ICTJ)
Abstract:
Transitional justice processes are complex, politically contested, and not necessarily linear. Because of this, they present unique theoretical and practical challenges for measuring results, which include challenges for gathering data, registering unintended outcomes, reporting progress, providing feedback to interventions, and extracting useful information to establish impact or counterfactuals. Based on a desk research and a series of discussions with practitioners, policymakers, and academics, this report considers the following: The different roles monitoring and evaluation systems can play and the questions they can answer at different stages of a transitional justice process. This report recommends conducting assessments early on to inform design and to build feedback loops into ongoing processes. Key features of transitional justice processes, including their complexity, their political nature, and the difficult contexts where they are usually implemented. Combining qualitative and quantitative methods and designing monitoring and evaluation approaches that allow for capturing rich contextual data and unexpected results. Power dynamics, exclusion, and language, particularly in fragile contexts and when dealing with vulnerable populations. Monitoring and evaluation approaches that are conflict sensitive, victim centered, and participatory. The Sustainable Development Agenda as a framework for measuring results of transitional justice. While a politically legitimate and useful conceptual framework, there is room for improvement as current indicators are not best suited to contexts where a large proportion of the population has experienced human right abuses. Overall, stakeholders in transitional justice should take a “user-centered” approach to measuring progress and results, one that puts the people that a process is meant to serve at the center. In doing so, they can focus on collecting what matters, establishing feedback loops, and learning from and continually improving their interventions.
Topic:
Reform, Transitional Justice, Youth, Criminal Justice, Memory, Institutions, Gender, and Truth and Reconciliation
Political Geography:
Africa, Europe, Middle East, Asia, South America, and North America

4. 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

5. Advancing Global Accountability: The Role of Universal Jurisdiction in Prosecuting International Crimes

Author:
Howard Varney and Katarzyna Zdunczky
Publication Date:
12-2020
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
The International Center for Transitional Justice (ICTJ)
Abstract:
Recourse to universal jurisdiction as a justice mechanism for victims of international crimes has become increasingly popular in recent years. This is especially so given the small appetite for criminal accountability in countries where violations take place and the considerable shortfalls of the international justice system. Although universal jurisdiction faces serious challenges at the conceptual, legal, political, and practical levels, it often remains the only avenue for victims to pursue justice and address the “impunity gap.” This study considers the rationale for universal jurisdiction and describes the challenges and controversies it faces today. It explores similarities and differences between domestic laws that give effect to universal jurisdiction and considers the leading role played by nongovernmental organizations in generating such cases at the domestic level. In particular, the study focuses on the use of universal jurisdiction with respect to serious crimes committed in Syria and provides examples of cases brought before various domestic courts. It also explores the relationship between accountability initiatives for Syria at the international level. The future of universal jurisdiction as a viable mechanism of global justice is also considered. While this form of justice has made significant advances in recent years, it still faces considerable headwinds. The paper concludes with a set of recommendations aimed at entrenching universal jurisdiction as a globally recognized means of justice. The pursuit of universal jurisdiction has opened the door to the possibility of justice in contexts where it was previously thought impossible. A sufficiently high number of countries have introduced universal jurisdiction into their domestic systems. While there is no turning back, this approach to justice is far from generally accepted and has suffered setbacks. This is particularly the case at the political level, with the reach of universal jurisdiction being clawed back. Much work remains to be done to establish universal jurisdiction as a recognized and viable means of global justice.
Topic:
Reform, Criminal Justice, Accountability, Universal Jurisdiction, and Truth and Reconciliation
Political Geography:
Africa, Europe, Middle East, South Africa, and Syria

6. Assessing the Prospects for Transitional Justice in Georgia

Author:
Howard Varney
Publication Date:
02-2017
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
The International Center for Transitional Justice (ICTJ)
Abstract:
After the 2012 parliamentary elections, there have been various attempts to address this past. These included the introduction of amnesties, the rehabilitation of torture victims, a proposed commission on miscarriages of justice; the creation of a unit for land restitution in the Office of the Prosecutor; and criminal proceedings against former senior officials. However, none of these measures proved effective. The proposed commission on miscarriages of justice was criticized and abandoned. Efforts at prosecutions were seen as politically motivated and lacking due process. Institutional reforms effected so far have not realized the desired results. Victims have received little or no support or acknowledgment. Towards the end of 2015, the International Center for Transitional Justice (ICTJ) was invited to Georgia to consider whether current conditions were conducive to a serious exploration of the past and the implementation of substantive transitional justice steps to reckon with its past conflicts and human rights abuses. ICTJ conducted interviews with key stakeholders and discussed a range of ideas with them. Interviewees pointed to the need for concerted steps to address the past, but highlighted the lack of political will as an inhibiting factor and noted that, outside of victim communities and organized civil society, the wider public prioritized economic prosperity over addressing past injustices. Nonetheless, victims of torture and property violations continue to push for restoration of property, guarantees of non-recurrence, and institutional reform. Based on this research and findings, this report assesses the prospects for transitional justice in Georgia and makes recommendations in this regard. Th is assessment takes place some seven years after ICTJ last carried out an assessment in Georgia. 2 In 2009 ICTJ stopped short of recommending formal transitional justice steps on the grounds that conditions were not conducive at that stage. Th is report makes recommendations for several steps for the consideration of Georgians. It does so on the understanding that while conditions may not necessarily be perfect, waiting longer may have a deleterious impact on the country. Indeed, ICTJ finds that it is time for concrete and meaningful steps to be taken to address the past as a contribution to reform and nation building.
Topic:
Elections, Transitional Justice, Accountability, and Truth and Reconciliation
Political Geography:
Europe, Caucasus, and Georgia

7. 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

8. 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