Search

In dealing with counterterrorism detainees after 2001, the United States breached its obligations under the UN Convention Against Torture (CAT) and other sources of international human rights and humanitarian law. Although the current administration has turned away from some former policies, areas of concern still exist.

Colombia currently faces a transformed, fragmented form of violence centered on territorial and social control rather than the traditional insurgency. This briefing paper argues that state security strategies remain misaligned, relying on outdated military approaches and metrics. To avoid long-term democratic instability, it recommends shifting toward governance-based security, effective civil oversight, strong judicial capacity, and a comprehensive understanding of territorial control.

Colombia currently faces a transformed, fragmented form of violence centered on territorial and social control rather than the traditional insurgency. This report argues that state security strategies remain misaligned, relying on outdated military approaches and metrics. To avoid long-term democratic instability, it recommends shifting toward governance-based security, effective civil oversight, strong judicial capacity, and a comprehensive understanding of territorial control.

Counterterrorism detainees held in U.S. custody were subject to widespread abuses, including prolonged, arbitrary detention, physical and sexual abuse, enforced disappearance by way of the secret transfer of prisoners to undisclosed locations (“extraordinary rendition”), and other cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment or torture.

Despite earlier efforts to envision a national transitional justice policy, Ukraine remains overly cautious about establishing one. This report provides a robust substantiation of why Ukraine should revive its holistic transitional justice policymaking. In the first part, it debunks the most prevalent myths about transitional justice in Ukraine. In the second, it presents key legal, policy, and survivor-centered arguments for Kyiv to revive a comprehensive transitional justice vision. 

The AU–EU 2025 Experts’ Seminar on Transitional Justice convened African and European practitioners to advance reparations as a central pillar of transitional justice. Discussions highlighted legal obligations, victim-centered and transformative approaches, and persistent challenges in design, financing, and implementation. Drawing on comparative experiences, participants underscored the need for inclusive, community-led, and gender-responsive programs; innovative funding mechanisms; and strengthened AU–EU cooperation to deliver meaningful redress, accountability, and sustainable peace.

Negotiating Justice: Guidance for Mediators provides guidance on grappling with justice issues in peace negotiations. Co-published with the Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue, the report seeks in particular to provide peace process actors with basic facts of law, guidance on amnesties and international criminal justice, as well as lessons for incorporating approaches to accountability.

On August 20, 2009, Afghans went to the polls for the third time since the U.S.-led military intervention in 2001. Accountability and justice were underlying themes in the election, as made clear by many of the issues that attracted public attention. Nonetheless “calls for justice” remain weak compared with the persuasive culture of impunity that has institutionalized itself over the last eight years.

While Afghanistan goes through tremendous transition, it is important for justice and reconciliation actors to build transitional justice and gender initiatives based on experiences in other postconflict contexts.

Background on the rise in instability and deterioration in security in Afghanistan since the overthrow of the Taliban in 2001. ICTJ summarizes the actions of the Karzai government in implementing transitional justice reforms based off findings of the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission (AIHRC) in 2004.