Resource Library

Ruben Carranza, director of ICTJ’s Reparative Justice Program, just returned from The Hague where he and Guy Mushiata, legal officer for ICTJ in Democratic Republic of Congo, led a seminar for the International Criminal Court (ICC) and Trust Fund for Victims about the mechanics of reparations programs. [Download](/sites/default/files/ICTJ-Reparations-ICC-Carranza-Podcast-03-30-2011.mp3) | Duration: 8mins | File size: 4.7MB

Earlier this month, South Africa’s Department of Justice and Constitutional Development proposed draft regulations relating to reparations for apartheid-era victims. In an ICTJ podcast, Dr. Marjorie Jobson, National Director of the Khulumani Support Group assesses the draft regulations and puts forth ideas on how to better address victims’ needs. [Download](/sites/default/files//sites/default/files/Jobson_ICTJ_Podcast_05302011.mp3) | Duration: 7mins | File size: 4MB

The United Nations Human Rights Council recently established a mandate for a Special Rapporteur on the promotion of truth, justice, reparation, and guarantees of non-recurrence. In this podcast Caitlin Reiger, director of international policy relations at ICTJ, discusses the objectives, qualities, and implications of this mandate on the field of transitional justice. [Download](/sites/default/files/Reiger_ICTJ_Podcast_10192011.mp3) | Duration: 7:34mins | File size: 4.33MB

Ceremonies throughout Bosnia and Herzegovina today mark 20 years since the beginning of the conflict that saw the worst atrocities in Europe since World War II. In this podcast Refik Hodzic, our communications director and a Bosnian justice activist and journalist, discusses the obstacles Bosnia is facing in achieving a reckoning with its troubled recent past. [Download](/sites/default/files/Hodzic_ICTJ_Podcast_04062012.mp3) | Duration: 10:17mins | File size: 5.88MB

The trial of Thomas Lubanga before the ICC has the potential to set a critical precedent regarding the right to reparations. In our latest podcast ICTJ's Director of Reparations Ruben Carranza discusses recommendations ICTJ submitted to the ICC concerning the implementation of reparations. [Download](/sites/default/files/Carranza_ICTJ_Podcast_06132012.mp3) | Duration: 16:56mins | File size: 9.69MB

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.

ICTJ President David Tolbert looks back on transitional justice developments over the span of 2012, talks about the impact of ICTJ's work, and looks ahead to transitional justice developments to come. [Download](/sites/default/files/Tolbert_ICTJ_Podcast_12202012.mp3) | Duration: 30:19mins | File size: 17,760 KB

Years after the Truth and Reconciliation Commission issued its final recommendations, victims of apartheid-era crimes are still fighting for adequate reparation and rehabilitation. Will the government of South Africa listen? In the latest episode of ICTJ’s podcast, we speak with ICTJ Senior Program Adviser Howard Varney, who explains why the vast majority of victims still await justice. [Download](/sites/default/files/Howard_Varney_ICTJ_Podcast_12212012.mp3) | Duration: 24:29mins | File size: 14,351 KB

The latest episode of ICTJ Forum features ICTJ's Marcie Mersky, who joins host and Communications Director Refik Hodzic for an in-depth analysis of news in Guatemala and Nepal, and looks ahead to the next year of transitional justice developments around the world.

In the latest ICTJ podcast, Reparative Justice Program director Ruben Carranza joins us for a discussion on Tunisia, where reparations are at the forefront of the country’s discussions of transitional justice. In this conversation with Hannah Dunphy, Carranza explains why economic injustices were at the heart of Tunisia’s revolution, the difficulties of designing compensation programs for victims, and what to watch in the unfolding debate around reparations. [Download](/sites/default/files/ICTJ-Podcast-Tunisia-Reparations-June-2013.mp3) | Duration: 20:18 mins | File size: 13.9 MB

Ever since the armed conflict in Lebanon broke out in the mid-1970s, the main demand of the families of the missing and disappeared has been to secure the right to know the truth and the right to an effective investigation, verification of facts, and public disclosure of what happened. These families persisted in their demands over the decades, against the odds and despite social, political, and cultural forces pushing for collective amnesia. Their perseverance, along with civil society’s invaluable efforts, shined a continuous light on the issue of the disappeared, igniting a public debate that parliamentarians could no longer ignore. Last month, they voted in favor of the Law for the Missing and Forcibly Disappeared Persons in Lebanon.

In the United States, the debate over a national reparations program for slavery and Jim Crow has until now encountered political opposition. However, transitional justice approaches at the community level are increasingly surfacing to address racial injustice. A handful of 2020 presidential candidates have come out in support of reparations for slavery. Recently, Georgetown University took center stage in this debate when its student body voted in favor of a student-led initiative to establish a fee that will fund education and health care programs for the descendants of 272 enslaved persons sold by the university in 1838.

As subscribers, you enjoy timely commentary on what’s happening in transitional justice around the world written by one of our experts exclusively for our monthly World Report newsletter. In this month’s edition, we bid farewell to 2019 by looking back on the experts’ choices of the past year.

The United Nations Security Council has considered transitional justice on several occasions in the past and included many of its components in country-specific resolutions, and also stressed the links between transitional justice and the other items on its thematic agenda including women, peace and security, and children and armed conflict, and it has made explicit reference to transitional justice as a key part of efforts to sustain peace. Yet, on February 13, the Security Council held its first open debate focusing solely on transitional justice.

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.

Côte d’Ivoire descended into chaos following the October 2010 elections. One of the enduring lessons from this tragic experience could be that elections should never give a reason to set one’s country on fire. Like it or not, however, presidential elections in Côte d’Ivoire have become a malaise that grips the country every five years. And while the 2015 presidential elections were carried out peacefully, the recent October 2020 elections unfortunately were not. The tensions and violence that accompanied it, though far less devastating, brought back macabre memories of the 2010 post-election carnage that left 3,000 people dead and forced more an a million to flee their homes.

The democratic transition in Ethiopia is taking a worrisome turn. The sweeping reforms introduced by Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed in 2018 after decades of repressive rule and three years of deadly protests raised hopes for a more just and free society, one in which power is distributed equally among the country’s many ethnic groups. Worryingly, the failure to reach an inclusive political agreement on the way forward has triggered intercommunal violence and conflicts that have left hundreds of people dead and more than 2.7 million displaced throughout the country.

Ten years have passed since Tunisians took the streets to demand “Employment, Freedom, and National Dignity.” The revolution’s loud, courageous voice against corruption, extreme inequality, and repression echoed around the globe and inspired the “Arab Spring.” Today, Tunisians are still proud of their revolution. However, they continue to strive for goals, yet unattained, that the political class does not even seem to understand. It was thus not surprising to see large protests on the 10th anniversary, demanding concrete action and new public policies to advance social justice and better integrate marginalized regions and populations.

It only takes a quick skim of the daily news to see how the world has yet again failed Afghan civilians. Afghanistan has not had many good years in the past four decades of war, but the past 15 months have been decidedly fraught. The current chaos and spiking violence are proof that, despite what the US government has proclaimed, the “forever war” rages on. Peace and meaningful, victim-centered justice remain elusive.

Hailed as one of the only success stories to emerge out of the Arab Spring, Tunisia is now facing a significant challenge to its democratic progress. On July 25, Tunisia’s president, Kais Saied, enacted Article 80 of the Tunisia Constitution giving him emergency powers to protect the country from imminent threats. He then used these powers to suspend parliament, lift parliamentary immunity, and fire the prime minister as well as the ministers of justice and defense.

Afghanistan is a tragic example of how a country in transition can dramatically reverse course on the arduous path toward peace and democracy and return to an abyss of violence and repression at breakneck speed. In the span of a few short weeks, the Taliban regained control over the country. When they finally entered Kabul, the internationally backed Afghan government collapsed. Now in charge, the Taliban has lost no time in demonstrating their goal to re-impose the same extremist and oppressive rule, despite initial declarations affirming a commitment to peace and human rights.

When reflecting on peace agreements and their implementation, it is tempting to begin by saying that these processes are generally slow and complex. While that may be true in many contexts, it contributes little to the discussion about what has happened in Colombia since the government signed a final peace deal in November 2016 with the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, or FARC-EP—the oldest and largest guerrilla group in the county—that ostensibly ended 50 years of war.

On November 25, 2021, The Gambia’s Truth, Reconciliation and Reparations Commission (TRRC) presented its 17-volume final report and recommendations to President Adama Barrow, after multiple delays. The final report includes a record of serious human rights violations committed under Jammeh’s repressive regime and recommendations for pursuing justice. Despite the challenges, steps have already been taken that offer hope that the TRRC’s recommendations will take effect.

On Thursday, January 13, 2022, the Higher Regional Court in Koblenz, Germany, convicted Anwar Raslan, a senior official in the Syrian government, for crimes against humanity. The landmark trial, the first ever to prosecute a member of Bashar al-Assad’s regime for such crimes, highlights a crucial component without which Raslan would never have been convicted: the role of victims in achieving justice.

After seven years of waiting for the UN-backed Special Criminal Court (SCC) in the Central African Republic to begin operations, victims of the country’s civil war had hoped to finally see the first tangible step toward justice on April 25 when the first trial opened in the capital Bangui. The trial was initially set to begin on April 19, 2022, but was abruptly postponed when the defense attorneys failed to show up in an apparent boycott over their wages. When the defense lawyers returned to court on April 25, they immediately requested an adjournment, which was granted, and the trial was postponed again until May 16. It is very likely that this incessant postponement will further deflate already diminished confidence among victims in the SCC’s ability to deliver justice.