51 results

In 2021, there were significant developments, some hopeful and some devastating, in the struggle for truth, accountability, and redress in countries around the world. ICTJ experts covered these events in commentaries and feature stories published on our website and in our newsletters. While 2022 is already underway and we at ICTJ are hard at work, we would like to pause a moment to take stock and reflect on the year that was.

This comparative study examines strategies used by local actors to help operationalize reparations for victims of widespread human rights violations, while highlighting the synergies between these efforts and sustainable development. It is based on the fieldwork of ICTJ and its partne...

A women in colorful African dress holds a megaphone to her mouth

JAKARTA, Nov. 15, 2011—Experts and stakeholders from Cambodia, the Philippines, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Burma, Timor-Leste, Thailand, and Nepal, along with international experts are gathering in Jakarta’s Hotel Atlet from November 15–16 to discuss the need for progress on prosecuting serious crimes in Asia.

The resignation and indictment of President Otto Pérez Molina for corruption was a significant victory over impunity in Guatemala. In an interview with journalist Carlos Dada, we discussed how recent developments in Guatemala could impact other countries in Central America, such as Honduras and El Salvador.

In the quest to bring perpetrators of massive crimes to justice, international courts should be considered only as a last resort. Efforts to establish rule of law require the development of national capacity to prosecute the most serious crimes. On 25 and 26 October 2012, leading international actors from the judicial, rule of law, and development sectors will convene at the Greentree Estate in Manhasset, New York for the third Greentree Conference on Complementarity. The meeting aims to examine the needs of and challenges to national prosecutions for the most serious crimes in four countries: Ivory Coast, the DRC, Colombia, and Guatemala.

It may seem trivial for me to write about why those who continue to mark July 17 as "International Justice Day" should finally stop calling it that. Many human rights groups (including ICTJ), United Nations agencies, and governments have been publicly using that phrase since 2010. It is for victims of massive and systematic human rights violations, including abuses that amount to international crimes under the Rome Statute, that it is important to end the misconception that the phrase encourages.

As attested by the arrest on January 3, 2013 in the United Kingdom of Kumar Lama, a Nepali Army Colonel suspected of torture, the government of Nepal’s failure to pursue truth and accountability for conflict-era violations can have serious consequences. Rather than resisting UK efforts to implement its obligations under international law, the Nepali government should develop a full transitional justice programme and redouble its efforts to provide truth, justice and reparations inside the country.

“Despite laws already in place, the number of sexual and gender-based violence [SGBV] cases is still rising, including cases of rape, female genital mutilation, sexual assault, and harassment. This means there is the need for enforcement of such laws,” asserted Didier Gbery, ICTJ’s head of program for The Gambia, at the opening of a workshop this past March on increasing SGBV victims’ access to justice. The workshop was one of two that ICTJ organized in early 2023 to strengthen the capacity of stakeholders in The Gambia to defend SGBV victims and provide them with vital gender-sensitive support.

ICTJ partnered with the Center for Global Affairs at New York University to explore how political will of international and national actors impacts national war crimes proceedings. The panel examined four diverse country scenarios - the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Serbia, Iraq, and Guatemala.

Victims in Nepal have been calling on the government for public consultation to ensure wider discussion, a process that would allow them to share their expectations, help them to comprehend the dense language of the proposed amendments and its many gaps. They needed to understand the dubious phrasing especially on issues of criminal accountability that created suspicion, instead of trust and legitimacy in the process.