Resource Library

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.

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.

ICTJ recently released its 2011 annual report, covering the period from September 2010 through August 2011. Our tenth anniversary year, it has also been a period of transition for ICTJ and for transitional justice, as we responded to new opportunities in North Africa and the Middle East, and refocused on our future by embarking on a new strategic planning process.

This joint report released today by the International Center for Transitional Justice (ICTJ) and the Institute for Human Rights Study and Advocacy (ELSHAM-Papua) provides important insight into the ongoing debate on steps required to achieve a sustainable peace in Papua. The report reviews Papua's recent history within a transitional justice framework, and provides expert recommendations on truth seeking, justice, reparations, institutional reform, and enforcing the rights of women victims.

In societies confronting the legacies of war, tyranny, or entrenched injustice, the experiences of indigenous people have often been marginalized. ICTJ has published a handbook offering guidance on planning truth commissions and commissions of inquiry that safeguard the interests of indigenous communities and address violations against them.

The conviction of former Liberian president Charles Taylor for crimes against humanity and war crimes committed in neighboring Sierra Leone finds both West African countries and the region grappling with his terrible legacy. And while the people, and especially Taylor’s victims, in Sierra Leone welcome it as an important step in the country’s effort to overcome the consequences of the brutal civil war, Liberians are still a long way from seeing accountability for the suffering they endured.

Five years since the end of Nepal's brutal civil war, victims are losing patience waiting for truth, justice, and reparation. Last year ICTJ completed a six month research project to analyze the effects of the the government's Interim Relief Program and determine the steps still required for Nepal to fulfill its obligation to provide reparations to victims. The findings have been published in a report titled “ From Relief to Reparations: Listening to the Voices of Victims .”

Following a restive year, Indonesia's human rights record is one of the situations under review during the 13th session of the UN Human Rights Council Universal Periodic Review (UPR) process in May–June 2012.

As Nepal’s parliament enters the final discussions on a draft Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) bill, questions remain regarding the relationship between amnesty and reconciliation provisions within the bill.

As ICTJ co-hosts a discussion on complementarity on the margins of the Assembly of State Parties (ASP) of the International Criminal Court (ICC), the principle of ensuring accountability for serious crimes has seen a major breakthrough at a recent high-level meeting at Greentree. The meeting brought together international justice actors, development practitioners, UN representatives, and national rule of law actors to discuss the practical implementation of complementarity and how to strengthen domestic systems seeking to investigate serious crimes.

A report released today by ICTJ, together with the Indonesian Association for Families of the Disappeared (IKOHI) and the Coalition for Justice and Truth (KKPK), calls on the government to fulfill its obligations to provide reparations to thousands of victims of gross human rights violations.

This year’s Annual Emilio Mignone Lecture on Transitional Justice, coordinated by ICTJ and the Center for Human Rights and Global Justice at the NYU School of Law, focused on the intersection between transitional justice and international development.

View the live broadcast of tonight's Annual Emilio Mignone Lecture on Transitional Justice, from 6:00pm–7:40pm. Try Ustream's free video streaming desktop app

ICTJ hosted its third Intensive Course, Truth-seeking and the Challenge of Sustainable Peace, on September 26–30. Based on concrete field experience, the participants explored the relationship between truth-seeking and peace in societies that have experienced or are still experiencing armed conflict.

As ICTJ celebrates ten years of existence and contribution to the development of the field of transitional justice, we are poised for a future of continued engagement with partners and communities seeking to overcome legacies of mass violence and repression. Ten years on, we now work in a world increasingly aware of the of the costs of failing to systematically transition from conflict and human rights abuse to the rule of law and equal rights for all citizens, and on the other hand, of the increasing complexity of doing so.

Women played a crucially important role in brokering peace in Solomon Islands but they still face significant barriers to inclusion in transitional justice initiatives. ICTJ has been working closely with women groups to facilitate their formal contribution to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC).

The appearance of Hosni Mubarak in the opening of his trial this week reassured millions of Egyptians that their revolutionary struggle was not in vain. But the truth about Mubarak’s ability to participate in his trial is still unclear. With the public doubting the court’s seriousness, Mubarak’s appearance could have been a political decision aimed at boosting confidence. If this is the case, the judiciary risks appearing politicized in the eyes of Egyptians.

The International Criminal Court (ICC) must better communicate what is driving its actions to the public of the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) and elsewhere around the world if it is to develop confidence in its capacity to act as a guardian of international criminal law.

As the number of victims of violence against demonstrators in Syria, Yemen, Bahrain and elsewhere in the region rises, a question emerges for the government of Bashar al-Assad of Syria, but also those of Ali Abdullah Saleh of Yemen, Hamad bin Isa al-Khalifah of Bahrain and the vacillating international community: Can impunity for such crimes be permitted in this day and age?

Some habits die hard. This is especially true of ways of thinking. Despite significant changes in national and international law and practice in the last thirty years—the period that corresponds with the emergence of transitional justice as a field—the recent upheaval in the Middle East and Northern Africa region has provoked proposals that hearken back to a period that we may have thought long gone.

The allegations of war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in the final phases of the conflict in Sri Lanka, made in the Report of the Secretary-General’s Panel of Experts on Accountability in Sri Lanka released on April 25, must be thoroughly investigated. This is the first comprehensive UN report examining the events in the Vanni region between January and May of 2009 and it alleges that “tens of thousands of civilians” were killed. The Government of Sri Lanka, but also the relevant international bodies, cannot claim credibility if these findings are ignored.