Tweet
Share
Share
Pin
0 Shares

Abstract

Tran­si­tion­al jus­tice aims at once to restore vic­tims’ dig­ni­ty, build con­fi­dence between war­ring groups and fos­ter the insti­tu­tion­al changes need­ed to bring about a new rela­tion­ship with­in the pop­u­la­tion, in order to ush­er in the rule of law with­out endors­ing prac­tices that amount to total or par­tial impuni­ty. In sit­u­a­tions of post-con­flict, how­ev­er, gov­ern­ments are also faced with oth­er press­ing needs, such as dis­arm­ing fight­ing forces, improv­ing civil­ian secu­ri­ty, com­pen­sat­ing vic­tims and relaunch­ing the econ­o­my of a soci­ety in ruins. This arti­cle explores the rela­tion­ship between these needs and tran­si­tion­al jus­tice mech­a­nisms, and crit­i­cal­ly eval­u­ates their influ­ence on the forms jus­tice has tak­en in post-con­flict situations.