17 results

In 2021, the Central African Republic created the Truth, Justice, Reparation and Reconciliation Commission (CVJRR) to establish the truth, pursue justice, and restore victims’ dignity, with a view to ultimately achieving national reconciliation. In this fragile country, battered by successive episodes of violence, justice, in its broadest sense, has always been and remains a lifelong demand of victims. After a lengthy operationalization phase, the CVJRR is now finally getting ready to start registering and hearing victims’ testimonies. The first step in this process is statement taking, which requires taking several key factors into account to be successful.

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.

Providing justice to victims of human rights abuses in fragile contexts such as the Central African Republic (CAR) is challenging for reasons related not only to the state’s stability, capacity, and political will, but also socioeconomic inequality in the country. This research report...

A young girl stands in the doorway to her house

In Africa's Great Lakes region, countries face common challenges like bad governance, inequitable distribution of natural resources, and ethnic divisions. As nations like Burundi, Central African Republic and South Sudan work towards peacebuilding and accountability, they should learn from what has worked and what has not in neighboring countries, writes Sarah Kihika Kasande, ICTJ's Head of Office in Uganda.

A new ICTJ report argues that in Africa's interconnected Great Lakes region, each country’s attempt to provide justice for past violations offers lessons for similar processes in others. We gathered civil society activists from across the region to discuss which strategies have worked for them, which have not, and opened up about the greatest challenges they face in securing justice.

As Burundi and South Sudan teeter on the verge of renewed conflict, with warnings of possible genocides, a new report from ICTJ on the African Great Lakes region asserts that there are lessons to be learned from neighboring countries that may be relevant in preventing new conflicts. The report calls for a clear understanding of victims’ needs and demands, a thorough political analysis and identifying realistic opportunities for acknowledgment and accountability, among other measures.

In many countries of the African Great Lakes region, state-led approaches to transitional justice have been created by wide-ranging agreements or policies that have been later forgotten or only partially implemented. Even when implemented, they are often subject to years of delay and/...

South Africa Parliament faces a historic moment. In this op-ed, ICTJ's Vice President Paul Seils remembers the great hope that marked the ICC’s emergence: "No country embodied that hope and that reality more powerfully and more inspiringly than South Africa."

The Africa Union's resolution to collectively support a strategy to withdraw from the ICC looks more like a machination of those who have instrumentalized an argument against the court to protect themselves from the long arm of justice, write ICTJ's top experts on Africa.

South African authorities apparently believe that once the country has officially withdrawn from the ICC, it will be free to invite the likes of Sudanese President al-Bashir to the country. That's not so, writes ICTJ's Howard Varney, who explains why the country's obligations would continue beyond its departure from the court.