C.Corradetti, N.Eisikovits, J.Rotondi (eds.) Theorizing Transitional Justice (original) (raw)
Related papers
Transitional justice is becoming more and more an interdisciplinary field of study with interesting developments, not only in the assessment of a wide number of casestudies, but also in the evaluation of increasingly more articulated theoretical problems. Undoubtedly, a robust collection of literature has now accumulated also on the more theoretically-oriented side. The present essay, far from aiming at an exhaustive reconstruction of the existing literature, is structured around some conceptual issues that consider the convergence of philosophical, legal and political aspects of transitional phenomena.
Transitional Justice: A Concept with Various Facets
Yearbook of the Faculty pf Philosophy, 2020
Transitional justice is a relatively new concept, especially in academic terms; its theoretical, research and practical fundaments are still being in a phase of embedment but also they are object of various controversies. This article tries to shed more light on the paradigm of transitional justice in the context of the concepts around which it has been build-and in return, which determine its essence, such as transition, law and justice and peacebuilding in the conflict's aftermath or the end of the authoritarian regimes. Bearing in mind the historic and political context in which the concept appeared at first, this research focuses on the etymology, the notion's evolution, the meaning and dilemmas in implementing its key mechanisms. The article makes a critical assessment of the expectations from the transitional justice, which are quite often unrealistic, while it also emphasizes the fact that its mechanisms disregard the root causes and rather pay attention to the 'cure' of the consequences of internal conflicts and authoritarian regimes. The key hypothesis is that today's notion of transitional justice is a brainchild of the liberal paradigm: its utility is seen in promotion of liberal political and economic ideology of liberalism rather than in providing societal conditions for durable positive peace.
Theorizing Transitional Justice
Early literature in the field of transitional justice was dominated by debates over the meaning of justice, with retributivists arguing for the need for criminal prosecutions following mass human rights violations and advocates of restorative justice claiming that non-prosecutorial forms of justice like truth-telling are better suited for post-conflict societies. This debate was eventually settled, at least in the field, by a belief that post-conflict societies require both criminal prosecutions and truth-telling. More recently, the debate over justice has centred on the question of whether the field and practice of transitional justice has prioritized civil and political rights over economic and social rights. While this is a significant development in the field, it points to a more fundamental reality. Debates over justice are interminable. To try to sculpt justice to fit a preconceived definition limits its capacity to respond to the needs of survivors. This realization serves as the starting point for this project-that justice must remain open to re-interpretation for it to maintain its relevance in post-conflict societies. There is, however, a central problem in the field: Transitional justice implies a justice that is in the service of the transition. What this suggests, then, is that the debates over justice, or, the justice question, have been substantially circumscribed by the transition question, thereby limiting the possible definitions of justice. While the justice question has received a great deal of attention, this project suggests that if debates over justice are to indeed remain interminable, the more fundamental concern of the field should be the way the transition question has, in fact, shaped our theorizing about justice.
The Coherence and Utility of the Notion of Transitional Justice
Sometimes, Transitional Justice as a field raises high expectations regarding its potential influence on the state of democracy and adherence to the rule of law in countries in transition. The failure to achieve these expectations, as experiences of different countries show; the definition of transition itself; and the divergent understanding of the notion of transitional justice by various actors might make us question the coherence and utility of this field. This paper discusses the notion of transitional justice in light of the Egyptian revolution that erupted on the 25th of January 2011. Part I will examine the debate around the consistency and usefulness of transitional justice as a field, arguing that it is a distinctive field concerned with providing societies that witness political flux with extraordinary justice, exceeding concepts and mechanisms of justice applied during normal times. Part II critiques different responses of the Egyptian government and civil society following the 25th of January Revolution to the need to achieve justice after decades of widespread and systematic violations of human rights. It will discuss how these responses perceived the idea of transitional justice, and argue that transitional justice should not be merely seen as an action plan. Part III considers how transitional justice constituted an inspirational element used by the democratic movement and civil society in Egypt. It looks at the way this field influenced the thinking of the movement in terms of compliance to international human rights values, by refusing any form of retribution, creating the precedent of holding regime figures accountable and drawing lessons from other countries that witnessed social transition. A conclusion will follow.
Theories of Transitional Justice
Oxford Handbook of International Legal Theory Edited by Anne Orford and Florian Hoffman
This paper seeks to offer an immanent critique of the field of transitional justice as it currently stands through a reconstruction of the field’s repertoire of settled practices and institutional forms, its vocabulary for normative justification and an account of how the machinery of transitional justice practice unfolds. The aim of this reconstruction is to describe how hegemonic approaches get normalized, how distributive questions get displaced, and legitimacy performed. In other words, the aim is to track and trace the value chains that underpin transitional justice. In the concluding section, I take a different turn. I look at heterodox theories of transitional justice that were paths not taken, alive as theory and challenge rather than in institutional form and transitional justice practice. I explore the possibility of mining these ‘failed’ theories of transitional justice as counterpoint to the ‘successful’ ones. This is not an effort to recuperate the field and redeem its future potential but an effort to explore the yield of the lost coinage of subaltern economies to interrogate the dominant currency.