222 results

Why pursue transitional justice in the aftermath of massive human rights violations? “The Case for Justice” provides a window into the debate about the relevance of transitional justice in today’s world.

As we mark July 17, designated International Justice Day by the states parties of the International Criminal Court (ICC) just over two years ago, we should not limit our focus to the work of the court or criminal justice as such. Pursuing justice in the aftermath of atrocity presents an opportunity to do three crucial things: reaffirm a society’s shared values about basic ideas of right and wrong; restore confidence in the institutions of the state charged with protecting fundamental rights and freedoms; and recognize the human dignity of the victims of atrocities that have taken place.

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.

Following post-election violence in 2007–2008, Kenya faced a need to hold accountable those most responsible for the fighting that resulted in more than 1,000 deaths and widespread property destruction and displacement. But national judicial mechanisms proved reticent to do so, and in 2010, the situation was adopted by the ICC, who in January of 2012 announced indictments against four suspects.

In collaboration with the Brookings-LSE Project on Internal Displacement, ICTJ’s Research Unit examined how transitional justice can be used to address the range of injustices associated with displacement and thereby serve as part of a comprehensive approach to the resolution of displ...

The ICTJ Program Report is a new online feature that presents ICTJ’s work and impact around the globe. Through monthly in-depth interviews with our experts, the ICTJ Program Report will offer a view of ICTJ’s work on reparations, criminal justice, truth and memory and other transitional justice developments in countries where we work. To launch the series, we speak with Paul Seils, ICTJ's vice president and the head of our Program Office.

The decision on reparations by the International Criminal Court (ICC) in the case of Congolese warlord Thomas Lubanga sets a historic precedent, but it should not be celebrated until victims in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) are fully compensated through an inclusive and participatory process. The Lubanga decision stated that reparations “go beyond the notion of punitive justice, towards a solution which is more inclusive, encourages participation and recognizes the need to provide effective remedies for victims.” Yet Ruben Carranza, director of ICTJ’s Reparative Justice program, is cautious about celebrating before the process is complete.

When 26-year old Tunisian street vendor Mohamed Bouazizi incinerated himself on December 17, 2010, his act resonated across an entire region and sparked what is known as the Arab Spring. His cry echoed across the world because it was a universal call for justice, basic fairness, and equal treatment. Indeed, it was a call for the rule of law. In a new op-ed, ICTJ's President David Tolbert calls upon the UN General Assembly to prove its commitment to justice and the rule of law.

On August 9, 2012, UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion of truth, justice, reparation, and nonrecurrence Pablo de Greiff presented the first annual report to the Human Rights Council. The report provides an overview of key activities undertaken by the Special Rapporteur between May 1 and July 25, reviews the foundations of the mandate and outlines the strategy for its implementation.

Forced disappearance is a crime against humanity. The decisions made by politicians and officials authorizing such practices in different countries cannot be justified legally or morally. They must be held to account and be shown for what they are: enemies of a civilized society.