Goals and processes: the Arab world and the transitional justice impact literature

Abstract

This article uses the cases of Iraq, Algeria and Morocco to highlight some of the limitations of the transitional justice impact literature, which often assumes direct, linear relationships exist between transitional justice mechanisms and a variety of outcomes. In several respects, these countries' experiences differ from the expectations of recent studies. Although not equally flawed, in each case, transitional justice has been used to legitimise the current regime and, particularly in Iraq, to exact revenge against the ancien regime. Simultaneously, the demands of victims have largely been given short shrift. Viewing transitional justice in these countries as a process, as has been suggested, may be useful theoretically, but does not necessarily give more reason for optimism. The article offers provisional conclusions regarding these cases and discusses what lessons they provide for the impact literature and for the post-2011 Middle East. In particular, retributive measures appear to have particularly negative consequences in unstable conditions or in contexts where real political transition does not occur.