Resource Library

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 political crisis in Venezuela seems to have reached a stalemate. In September, the Norway-mediated negotiations between the Maduro government and the opposition came to a halt, leaving both sides struggling for the upper hand. But since it remains difficult for either party to prevail, it is likely that this impasse is a momentary setback rather than an indication that the negotiations are defunct.

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.

In little less than 10 months, Colombia has witnessed the creation of a completely new jurisdiction, the Special Jurisdiction for Peace (JEP). JEP has already opened two cases and three situations in its Chamber for the Acknowledgment of Truth and Responsibility.

In July, the ICC Trial Chamber II rejected victims’ reparations claims in an appeal of the ruling for Germain Katanga, brought by five descendants of the 2003 Bongoro massacre who had suffered psychological harm. In trying to prove causation, the judges considered that the closer the date of birth to the atrocities committed, the greater the likelihood of transgenerational harm. In my view, this linear understanding is flawed. It does not capture the complexity of psychological responses to trauma