Resource Library

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.

Sparing almost no corner of the world from its wrath, the COVID-19 pandemic has now spread to every country. In an effort to slow the contagion, governments in most countries have been taking drastic measures requiring all residents other than essential workers to confine themselves in their homes, and shutting down vast sectors of their economies. The impact has been crushing. COVID-19 has profoundly affected every country where ICTJ currently works: Armenia, Colombia, Cote d’Ivoire, Ethiopia, Gambia, Kenya, Lebanon, Libya, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, and Uganda. We recently caught up with ICTJ’s heads of country programs to learn more about the impact the pandemic is having on transitional justice and society more broadly.

In designing transitional justice in Armenia, policymakers, civil society activists, and international actors should remember those who have not had justice for so long: the families of those killed or injured in March 2008, the victims of torture and political detention, the mothers in black seeking the truth about why their soldier sons were killed, the old pensioners who live in cold and hunger, farmers and rural communities who need access to social services, and students and young citizens who saw that their hope for a better future required a revolution.

Recent recognition of the work of Nobel Laureate Nadia Murad has drawn global attention to the issue of sexual violence and gender-based violence in conflict. But, as ICTJ Expert Kelli Muddell argues, the nuances of gender norms and how they impact women, men, and vulnerable populations are still often missing from conversations about victims.

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.

Nepal’s new local government structure – comprised of districts, municipalities, sub-municipalities, and wards formed within the new federal system under the 2015 Constitution – offers the possibility of some individualized redress for victims at the community-level. This article by Elena Naughton was published in the Kathmandu Post on May 6, 2018.

With enforced disappearances on the rise, ICTJ President David Tolbert says the path to prevention is clear: the international community must reorder its priorities and change its approach. The disproportionate attention on counterterrorism takes us further away from accountability and prevention, Tolbert writes. He urges the international community to lead the way in unequivocally censoring governments that use enforced disappearance as a political tactic — and ensuring there can be no impunity for this crime.

A new ICTJ report on truth and memory in Nepal sparked discussion – and calls for victim-centered policies – at national and local launch events.