Transitional Justice in Palestine/Israel: Whose Justice? Which Transition? (original) (raw)
2021, Leila Farsakh (ed.), Rethinking Statehood in Palestine: Self-Determination and Decolonization Beyond Partition
This chapter examines the significance of transitional justice in Palestine/Israel. Transitional justice is the process of dealing with past wrongs to shift towards a new democratic regime. While the concept has gained little attention in mainstream debates on Palestine/Israel, it touches upon crucial aspects to ending the conflict, such as dealing with historical injustices, decolonization, and the one-state / two-state solutions. The chapter makes two claims. First, it argues that transitional justice has gained appeal within the Palestinian camp to devise political alternatives to the Oslo peace process. In this case, it is a tool to counter the fragmentation of the Palestinian people, reckon with past wrongs, and provide venues for political reconciliation with Israeli Jews. Transitional justice, however, can further different political ends. This is the second argument. After examining the various ways in which transitional justice is discussed in Palestine/Israel, the chapter identifies deep disagreements on key issues, namely (i) what counts as a historical injustice; (ii) what mechanisms we should employ to deal with historical injustices; (iii) what are the goals we are transitioning to; and (iv) what is the nature of the transition. Disagreement over these issues means that transitional justice can serve different ends: to devise alternatives to the Oslo agreements, to justify measures that are in line with them, or even to negate Palestinian demands for a justice. The chapter concludes with a precautionary note. In the context of Palestine/Israel, transitional justice is a deeply contested concept and its potential as a tool to devise real alternatives to the failed peace process depends on whether or not it is incorporated into a larger political project that seeks to establish equality and justice for all Palestinians.
Related papers
Journal of Holy Land and Palestine Studies, 2021
The growing interest in 'During Conflict Justice' (DCJ) in areas experiencing ongoing, sustained violent 'conflict' has further demonstrated the confluence between transitional justice and liberal peacebuilding approaches. None more so is this evident than in the case of Palestine-Israel where an ongoing process of Israeli settler-colonialism in historic Palestine continues, with the further spotlighting of 'justice' issues that are longstanding and unresolved. This article critiques the application of TJ/DCJ in Palestine-Israel and calls for a radicalisation of its application so as to ensure a platforming of conversation around decolonisation. It does so by critiquing the impact of discourse, specifically the framing of the 'conflict' and focuses on the nefarious role of a liberal peace building agenda in Palestine-Israel, a process that has embedded a deeply unjust and inequitable status quo. An insight into several 'top-down' and 'bottom-up' strategies of TJ/DCJ in Palestine-Israel is provided, with the conclusion reached that; any TJ/DCJ praxis that does not platform meaningful conversation around decolonisation in the region, will ultimately amount to the individualisation of 'justice' whilst failing to address root causes.
2020
This thesis explores the desirability of the transitional justice paradigm and engaging the past to conflict resolution efforts between Israelis and Palestinians. Given the struggle remains one characterised by antagonistic belief systems and national identities, it is submitted that the current conflict-settlement model in the Middle-East is fraught. My PhD demonstrates how transitional justice has the potential to serve as a valuable tool in long-term conflict resolution, and could foster truth-telling, restorative justice and grass-roots reconciliation between the two nations. Ultimately, the PhD designs an unofficial Israeli-Palestinian Truth and Empathy Commission (IPTEC) to address the gross systematic human rights abuses committed by both nations against each other’s civilians.
War Criminology: Exploring Dimensions, Addressing Challenges, 2024
This brief essay aims to share reflections and contemporary debates on the relationships and dynamics between Transitional Justice (TJ) and international prosecution, in the Palestine-Israel context. Even though International Tribunals face increasing critiques on the incapability to provide accountability for alleged perpetrators of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes in the Israeli-Palestine context, they are still used as an arena for legal action from a variety of different actors. This contribution briefly highlights the ongoing debate about the usefulness of Transitional Justice mechanisms regarding the Palestine-Israel context and presents some insights on Universal Jurisdiction. Going back in time, the case proposed is the "Sabra and Shatila case" against Ariel Sharon and other Israeli officials _____________________________________________________ 153 before Belgian courts, filed in 2001 by 23 Palestinian and Lebanese individuals.
2017
The present contribution discusses a project that brought together Israeli, Palestinian, and South African law students for the purpose of considering whether transitional justice approaches can help transform the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. For context purposes, the contribution also includes a brief discussion of the concept of transitional justice, and relevant background about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The project was initiated and coordinated by the author, under the Minerva Center for Human Rights at Tel Aviv University’s Faculty of Law. It was academically supervised by the Center’s director, Prof Leora Bilsky, and implemented through a partnership with Prof Mia Swart of the University of Johannesburg (Faculty of Law) and Prof Mutaz Qafisheh of the University of Hebron (Dean of Law). The project was funded by the German Minerva Foundation, under a special grant for the project Imagining Transitional Justice in Israel/Palestine. The Minerva Foundation was also a sour...
Selective Justice: The Case of Israel and the Occupied Territories
Fordham International Law Journal, 2002
While the focus in transitional justice literature is most often on functional or quasi-functional processes, this Article turns to the rather less explored path of dysfunctional transitions through the lens of the Israeli/Palestinian case. The stop and start nature of the "transition" from a conflict to the post-conflict process has reverted to a situation that the Israeli government has recently described as an 'armed conflict short of war." Against this backdrop, this Article provides insight into the role of law or its absence in transitioning conflict. As there are conflicting Israeli and Palestinian arguments regarding the legitimacy of Israeli occupation (i.e., as a belligerent-occupant or administrator), Part I provides a brief historical overview to clarify and contextualize the current debate. Part II provides an overview of the administrative and legal frameworks that govern the Occupied Territories. I then turn to look specifically at the applicability of international law, with specific reference to the 1949 Geneva Convention IV Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War ("Geneva Convention"), and evaluate some of the Israeli Supreme Court rulings with regard to the Occupied Territories. Part III provides a content analysis of the Oslo Accords and the accompanying agreements. Part IV addresses the question of where we go from here. . The author would like to thank Katherine Hurley for her research assistance in the preparation of this Article, and her colleagues, Joshua Castellino and Ray Murphy, for their review and comments.
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.