Resource Library

As the world marks August 30, the International Day of the Disappeared, we are reminded that forced disappearances and transitional justice share a common history. Indeed, processes working in concert that came to form the field of transitional justice were born from the search for truth and justice about the disappeared.

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.

In this opinion piece, Lucia Withers argues that Nepal's elected parties and their representatives should not limit their discussions to the establishment of a truth commission or whether it will provide for amnesties and/or prosecutions. Rather, they should focus on designing policies that are more comprehensive and that would better serve the rights and needs of conflict victims and contribute to broader peace-building efforts.

To mark International Women’s Day, we invite you to read about four countries at the top of our gender justice priorities in the coming year, each with its own history, context, and complex sets of challenges.

During Nepal's armed conflict, more than 13,000 people were killed and 1,300 forcibly disappeared. Today, a new government has voted to create a Truth and Reconciliation Commission, as well as a Commission of Inquiry on the Disappearance of Persons. Many victims have protested the flaws in the proposals; meanwhile, no comprehensive reparations have been provided for those left most vulnerable by conflict. In this interview with ICTJ's Santosh Sigdel, we discuss developments related to ICTJ's work in Nepal.

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.

Though not a state party to the Rome Statute, Cote d’Ivoire accepted the jurisdiction of the ICC through an ad hoc declaration in April 2003, and in December of 2010—in the wake of the post-election crisis—reaffirmed that declaration. It has been more than one year since Cote d’Ivoire began a critical transition from a decade-long civil war that divided the country and led to widespread human rights violations, forced displacement, and loss of civilian lives and property.

Cote d’Ivoire has embarked on a process of addressing the legacy of internal strife that culminated in the post-election violence of 2010. On June 12, 2013, ICTJ will co-host high-level talks on strengthening Cote d’Ivoire’s judicial capacity to prosecute serious crimes proscribed by the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC).

Join ICTJ and the Center for Global Affairs for a conversation on how the ICC and the African Union can move forward, and what the AU position means for effective prosecutions within Africa and elsewhere.

In this op-ed, ICTJ President David Tolbert argues that President Alassane Ouattara should use his second term as president to address widespread atrocities committed in Cote d'Ivoire's recent past.