Genocide and Transitional Justice

Transitional Justice and Settler States

Transitional justice has become the dominant international framework for redressing mass harm and historical injustices. However, transitional justice is commonly premised on the notion of a recent point of rupture or change from violence and oppression to a ‘new dawn’, and has therefore been less attuned to accommodating the long-term effects of colonialism. Accordingly, the historical experie...

Hybrid Models of Justice and Rwanda's Post-genocide Response

Transitional justice is guided by three main theories of justice: retributive, restorative, and reparative. Currently, the theories are predominantly perceived as mutually exclusive rather than mutually reinforcing. This paper seeks to reconceptualize the way scholars and practitioners comprehend and use the theories by looking at the goals and the unique focus of each theory. Through this anal...

Deeper, broader, longer transitional justice

Transitional justice has an expectation management problem. International law imposes a right to justice and an obligation to defeat impunity from crimes against humanity. Yet there has not been a war where a substantial proportion of criminals against humanity have been convicted. Nor is one likely. The theoretical solution considered in this paper is to broaden, deepen, and lengthen our conce...

Transitional Justice and Reconciliation: Theory and Practice

Reconciliation and Justice after Genocide: A Theoretical Exploration

This article argues that the post-conflict reconciliation process is undermined by the importance given to the retributive form of justice dominating peacebuilding and transitional justice measures. Retributive justice reinforces the division between perpetrator and victim, thus undermining the reconciliation process between antagonistic parties. The so-called objective categories of perpetrato...