Resource Library

Throughout 2023, ICTJ’s experts have offered their unique perspective on breaking news around the globe as part of the World Report. Their insightful commentaries have brought into focus the impact these events have on victims of human right violations as well as larger struggles for peace and justice. In this edition, we look back on the past year through the Expert’s Choice column.

On October 7, the world watched in horror as members of the militant group Hamas slaughtered over 1,400 Israelis, most of whom were civilians including children and the elderly, in a premeditated and sophisticated attack. Israel’s response has so far been no less horrific. Incessant waves of indiscriminate airstrikes on Gaza have hit residential buildings, medical facilities, and other critical civilian infrastructure, besieging the entire enclave and leaving more than 5,000 people dead including 2,000 children. Unfortunately, these unspeakable atrocities—the condemnation and rejection for which we have run out of words—are not isolated events happening in a vacuum. They are, in fact, just the latest episodes in a 75-yearlong cycle of violence.

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.

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.

What happens when a state refuses to acknowledge the suffering of victims of mass atrocities? Or when the public celebrates perpetrators as heroes? Earlier this month, a panel discussion hosted by The International Center for Transitional Justice and New York University’s Center for Global Affairs grappled with the impact of denial on justice.

In this op-ed, ICTJ Vice President Paul Seils analyzes the criminal justice agreement announced by the Government of Colombia and the FARC and discusses what aspects of the deal need clarification to ensure that it is capable of delivering the kind of truth and justice that victims of Colombia's armed conflict deserve.

Many in Colombia are also interested in learning from international experiences where criminal accountability measures were applied to pursue justice after massive human rights violations, like in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Cambodia, Sierra Leone and East Timor. With the aim of promoting an exchange of ideas on what lessons could be useful for Colombia, the ICTJ will be holding a conference in Bogotá on November 24th.

In this op-ed, ICTJ Vice President Paul Seils argues that the front line of justice must always be national courts and justice systems. "Citizens must see social institutions at work in their home countries, as it is there that courts can repudiate wrongdoing and reaffirm the most fundamental elements of the contract that binds a society together. It is there that having the dignity of a citizen can have its fullest meaning," writes Seils on International Justice Day.

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.