Transitional Justice is an emerging field of political science concerned with the rebuilding of a country after destruction (such as genocide) through judicial and non-judicial, alternative means of justice. These alternative means incorporate everything from changes in the criminal code to post-conflict development.
We host a number of events such as roundtable discussions, documentaries, and hosting speakers that are all centered on educating and discussing the causes, effects, and aftermath of conflicts around the world.
We have many exciting events coming up this semester including a discussion on the current conflict in Congo, a partnership with Invisible Children UWO to show a screening of Tony, as well as a roundtable discussion on transitional justice in Latin America.
But what exactly is transitional justice?...
After atrocities such as genocide, disappearance, torture, civil conflict and other gross violations of human rights have taken place, states are left with a puzzling and difficult questions: what to do with the perpetrators of such acts of violence
For many years, leaders of rebel groups and states were simply left alone, without consideration of punishment or having to pay for their harmful actions. Tyrants such as Idi Amin (Uganda) or Jean Claude Duvalier (Haiti), simply left their own countries, moved to countries that were willing to house them and faded into obscurity. It was only in the 1990s, during the genocides of Rwanda and Bosnia, that scholars and practitioners began to sort out how to deal with violent histories. It was becoming clear that someone should be made to answer for such horrible crimes. But who should be held to account, and for what, posed a dilemma. Transitional justice deals with these questions and more.
Transitional justice focuses specifically on reforms to the justice sector, working toward the re-establishment of the rule of law and assisting in the rebuilding of the system of courts that is required in a functioning democratic society
Martha Minow’s three distinct paradigms of Transitional Justice:
Retributive justice, restorative, reparative.
- Important to remember that not one solution will be acceptable to everyone. For example, a court sentence cannot restore a missing limb or money won't bring back a dead child.
- All three of the paradigms must be used together, not necessarily in equal terms but certain aspects of each much be intertwined to achieve successful results.
Retributive Justice
Traditionally a western concept. Justice equated with legal prosecutions and the rule of law
Rational behind it:
- Wrong actions need to be publicly acknowledged
- Punishment for perpetrators’ actions
- Remove the perpetrator from the circumstances in which he/she committed the crime and to rehabilitate him
- If someone is being punished, others will be deterred from committing the particular crimes
Restorative Justice:
Justice is about restoring both the victim and perpetrator back into harmony with the community
- Seeks to dignify and empower the victims
- Unlike retributive mechanisms such as court cases, that focus only on the perpetrator, victims and wider community often play a central role
Examples:
Canada: Aboriginal communities use healing circles instead of the courts to deal with community members who have committed crimes against the community
Sierra Leone: Ceremonies used to cool the hearts of former child soldiers upon their return to their home
Truth Commissions
Look at widespread human rights violations that took place during a specified period of time on a temporary basis, by the state, often in conjunction with opposition forces and/or the involvement of the international community.
The goal to inquire about past events includes:
- the collection of details from victims by questionnaires
- public testimonies
- produces a report of a detailed or summary accounts of exactly what has taken place
- reports are widely publicized like in Argentina the report on the Disappeared, is a best-selling book
Benefits of truth commissions over retributive mechanisms:
- Much broader focus than trials; focus on widespread abuses and suffering of hundreds or thousands
- Have an educative effect (some may be unaware of the atrocity
- Not a one size fits all
- Can focus on truth or may focus on reconciliation
- Suit the conditions of their country
- Less costly alternative
- Requires far less infrastructure and personnel than trials
Reparative Justice
Making right the things that went wrong. Idea of repair. The goal is to provide a remedy for the suffering and loss that occurred.
Methods:
- Apology
- The perpetrator himself can simply say sorry
- Or, if sufficient time has passed and the perpetrator cannot, a representative of the perpetrator may apologize. For example, Canada apologized in 1992 for the hanging of Metis leader Louis Riel in 1885 for his role in the Northwest Rebellion.
Benefits:
- The wrong that the victim has suffered is acknowledged by the perpetrator
- Can allow the victim to move foreword and let go
- An apology can reduce the feelings of anger of hurt
- Victim may feel a sense of vindication at being recognized
- The trauma of the incident may also be diminished
Restitution:
- A token paid in compensation for loss or injury
- A sum of money is awarded as payment or repair for the harm that was caused
- No amount can fully compensate and no wrong can be righted. But it attempts to right the wrongs
For example, Japanese living in Canada after Pear Harbour were suspected of aiding authorities and were placed in internment camps with their property seized. In 1950, $1.3 million was awarded to 1434 Japanese Canadians for their property and then in 1988, $21, 000 for interning them.
