Core transitional justice debates in the Middle East and beyond

Abstract

Although the Middle East was relatively immune to emerging global transitional justice norms prior to the 2000s, academic and policy debates about transitional justice have been raging for more than three decades. In this chapter, I provide an overview of the major controversies, utilizing the transitional justice experiences of Middle Eastern countries to illustrate them. I begin by exploring the varied conceptions of justice that underlie these debates. Next, I examine four alleged trade-offs in transitional justice practice: truth vs. (retributive) justice; peace vs. (retributive) justice; local vs. global, largely Western, conceptions of justice; and a focus on civil and political rights vs. economic and social rights. I then explore themes in post-2011 transitional justice in the region. Often, governments have favored retribution, and have politically manipulated transitional justice processes. They also have used transitional justice to forestall genuine political transitions. As a result, it is unlikely that these processes will prove beneficial for society in the long run.