Passing on the torch of memory: Transitional justice and the transfer of diaspora identity across generations

This chapter examines the importance of transitional justice as a measure to provide remedy for children in cases of massive societal violence, such as armed conflicts, international crimes, or atrocities. It presents different transitional justice initiatives and how they have engaged children, briefly reviewing child-sensitive approaches to criminal accountability, truth-seeking initiatives, reparations programs, and institutional reforms. It recommends that children and young people be consulted and engaged when transitional justice mechanisms and processes are implemented, while protecting their best interests at all times. It highlights the importance of educational reform as a key institutional reform in furthering transitional justice. The chapter proposes that educational reform be positioned as a key instrument for transitional justice, as it plays an important role in children’s recovery, contributing to their cognitive and psychological development while concomitantly advancing social cohesion and long-term peacebuilding.

Kenya, a country with about 45 ethnic groups, is politically and ethnically polarized. The ethnic card is regularly exploited to further polarize society, especially during the election periods. In the aftermath of elections, the political interest in promoting ethnic conflict transformation through transitional justice processes has not succeeded in uniting ethnic groups. Studies have predominantly focused on conflict resolution and transitional justice interventions at the state level. Transitional justice initiatives that focus on dialogue, forgiveness, retribution, reconciliation and healing at the community grassroots level are often overlooked. This chapter assesses the efforts of the Catholic Church and communities in Uasin Gishu County to promote peace initiatives through the church's Amani Mashinani (Peace at the Grassroots) model. The chapter begins with an overview of Kenya's ethnic violence and transitional justice efforts. It then pays attention to the nature and causes of electoral violence that manifests through conflicts between the ethnic groups living Uasin Gishu County, particularly during the election periods. Subsequently, the chapter explores the role of the Catholic Church within a transitional justice framework that deploys processes that encompass dialogue, forgiveness, reconciliation, reparation, social cohesion and healing to address election-related violence. Lederach's analysis of peace from below will be linked to the objectives of this transitional justice framework, so as to illustrate how the Catholic Church and its Amani Mashinani model can play a role in promoting non-formal transitional processes through the redress of the harm endured as a result of election-related violence. The chapter concludes by highlighting the factors that hinder the full realization of transitional justice through grassroots models and offers suggestions on how these can be countered.

In the post-conflict context, the need to (re)build security institutions that are accountable, rights-respecting, and transparent is the subject of resounding rhetorical tribute in both academic and policy discourse. Yet in practice, ambitious goals of instilling respect for such norms and standards have often been sidelined in favour of more expedient ‘train-and-equip’ components of the Security Sector Reform (SSR) process. At the same time, post-conflict initiatives relating to SSR and accountability measures arising out of transitional justice have rarely interacted in theory or in practice. The gaps between SSR policy ideals, on the one hand, and actual SSR practice, on the other — together with the disconnects between SSR and transitional justice initiatives — represent a lost opportunity for the promotion of long-term positive peace. For the most part, though SSR policy ideals strongly resonate with international legal norms, SSR policy and practice have not been heavily driven by a sense of international legal obligation in this regard, nor has SSR programming been seen as a potential means by which states might come to satisfy broader international human rights obligations. In this chapter, I argue that while international legal norms and obligations do not dictate the fine-grain details, they nevertheless help to establish parameters that should guide SSR practice in significant ways going forward, potentially helping to bridge some of the aforementioned gaps. Emerging norms of accountability and the responsibility to protect, for example, together with the importance of guarantees of non-repetition, suggest that the SSR process must become more rights-based and justice-sensitive, predicated on the promotion of both state and human security, both in theory and in practice. At the same time, there is a delicate balance for actors in a process that, historically, has often been heavily funded and, at times, driven by outsiders. International law includes pillars relating to accountability and protection against human rights abuses, but also respect for principles of sovereignty and self-determination. In this regard, well intentioned but heavy-handed agenda setting by international interveners in the security sector is potentially problematic, and the possibility for frictions may be only heightened if international law is imagined to dictate SSR policy in too rigid, technocratic, or detailed a manner. The oft-repeated policy ideal that the SSR process should be ‘locally owned’ could be seen to reflect these international principles, together with the genuine practical limits to what outsiders can do without very strong local political will.

This chapter focuses on one such critique: a lack of adequate engagement of transitional justice with colonial violence, with a focus on the case of Tunisia. It advances debates on the limitations of transitional justice in addressing violations perpetrated in the service of colonialism and post-colonial structures through an analysis of transitional justice in Tunisia, and its success and limitations in dealing with colonial violence. The chapter starts with an overview of the literature on transitional justice and colonial legacy. It concludes with a discussion of lessons drawn from the Tunisian experience for transitional justice efforts in other post-colonial countries. In light of the recent attention given to colonialisation in settler colonial contexts, scholars have also emphasised the need to address the colonial legacy and its impact on post-colonial societies through transitional justice initiatives in non-settler colonies. Transitional justice has been an ever-expanding field of study over the past three decades.

The Philippines is not typically the focus of transitional justice (TJ) scholarship. Yet, it has had to deal with violent legacies pertaining to each generation of TJ and has installed several TJ initiatives in response to this. This has given rise to a densely populated TJ landscape, spanning different periods and regions and including both formal and informal initiatives within various TJ pillars. In spite of this plethora of initiatives, the Philippines can hardly be called a ‘successful’ case of dealing with violent legacies – with the recent election of Bongbong Marcos as the most striking example thereof. In this article I argue that this can be understood in light of the absence of a genuine TJ ecology: there has not been an encompassing approach in which various kinds of initiatives interact with each other based on intersecting normative objectives. I argue that the case of the Philippines holds broader lessons regarding the importance of a more ecological understanding of TJ.

The legacies of mass violence can, if left unaddressed, fuel future conflicts. Transitional justice seeks to address the legacies of large-scale past abuses. Despite the sensitive nature of transitional justice and recognition that initiatives can adversely influence conflict-affected contexts, there has been limited attempt to extend the application of conflict sensitivity to transitional justice. Conflict sensitivity is an approach and tool to help aid actors to understand the unintended consequences of aid and to act to minimise harm and achieve positive outcomes. Transitional justice initiatives can exacerbate tensions by replicating existing tensions; introducing resources that become a struggle for control; or challenging power and vested interests. This article argues that conflict sensitivity should be applied to transitional justice; and identifies tools and factors that could contribute to conflict sensitive transitional justice. They include promoting: broad-based participation; resonance with local actors; social cohesion; public outreach; collaboration with other sectors; and appropriate sequencing.

This article suggests that the ongoing denial by the USA federal government of historical human rights infractions against African Americans and people of African descent led to a proliferation of local transitional justice efforts. Drawing from a university-driven transitional justice project, this article offers an analysis of local initiatives and highlights one of its six transitional justice collaborations. The university project sought to decolonize its structure and approach, drawing on methods of cultural humility, desire-based research and deep listening. This article responds to the success and challenges of decolonizing a transitional justice project within academia. Findings suggested that local initiatives face obstacles due to enduring legacies of harms and silenced histories, necessitating communities to substantiate their claims. Capacity issues and funding are challenged due to centuries of disinvestment. The article offers lessons learned for potential ally organizations who seek to advance transitional justice where government-sponsored redress continues to be denied.

'Transitional Justice initiatives have long been criticized for an allegedly narrow focus on gross and consistent violations of fundamental civil and political rights and not enough attention to abuse of economic, social and cultural rights. But the problem is not whether but how to apply truth, justice, reparations and institutional reform to fundamental – and often ancestral – inequalities in each transitional society. This volume contributes thoughtful and rigorous research to that fundamental question. It constitutes a challenge to the way transitional justice is executed in our time, but also a tribute to the power of the idea that there are indeed concrete and practical means to realize the idea of justice in societies emerging from conflict.'

Whenever a society faces the difficult process of substantial political transition after a period of gross human rights violations, the issues of justice, reconciliation, truth and reparation appear on the agenda. They form the key concepts of the emerging global paradigm of transitional justice. This booming field is faced with several unresolved and contested issues one of which is a criticism based on local and cultural particularities. In this article it is argued that it is useful to draw lessons from the universality-diversity debate in international human rights law and confront them with local and cultural challenges that arise in the transitional justice context. It seems that the ideal of inclusiveness that remains hard to realise in human rights law, despite theoretical consensus, might have better chances of being put in practice in transitional justice initiatives.

Journal Article Justice, Reconciliation, and Ending Displacement: Legal Empowerment and Refugee Engagement in Transitional Processes Get access Anna Lise Purkey Anna Lise Purkey * Assistant Professor, Sociology and Legal Studies, St Jerome's University, University of Waterloo. DCL 2015, McGill University Faculty of Law; LLM 2008, University of Toronto Faculty of Law; BCL/LLB 2005, McGill University Faculty of Law, Email: anna.purkey@mail.mcgill.ca. Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar Refugee Survey Quarterly, Volume 35, Issue 4, December 2016, Pages 1–25, https://doi.org/10.1093/rsq/hdw015 Published: 29 November 2016

This article will describe the contribution of women survivors of human rights violations in promoting transitional justice initiatives at the local or community level in Indonesia. In their marginal position, both as women and victims of human rights violations, the women survivors show their agencies to face social, political, cultural and structural barriers. The initiatives and participation of women survivors in Central Sulawesi, Aceh, and Yogyakarta Province, have contributed to the emergence of transitional justice models at the local level, such as apologies for victims, health assistance programs, scholarships, and truth-telling. These transitional justice initiatives at the local level not only fill the gap in the accountability that should be borne by the state, but they also strengthen the implementation of transitional justice mechanisms organized by the state or government, both at the local and national levels.

The Boko Haram insurgency has inflicted profound disruption on communities in northeast Nigeria, with Gujba Local Government Area (LGA) among the most severely affected. Although transitional justice (TJ) initiatives have been introduced to address human rights violations, youth participation has remained limited and largely symbolic. This article examines the specific roles that young people occupy in TJ processes in Gujba LGA and proposes a strategic communication framework to enhance their substantive engagement. A mixed methods design was employed, with quantitative data from a structured survey of 300 youths (187 male, 113 female) and qualitative insights drawn from 13 key informant interviews. Findings reveal that while 40% of respondents have ever attended TJ events, attendance is typically confined to community reconciliation (60%), with minimal involvement in policy workshops (25%). Youth contributions frequently remain logistical or testimonial rather than consultative. Demographic analysis indicates higher participation among those aged 20–24 and individuals with post-secondary education, whereas farmers and young women face pronounced barriers. Drawing on framing and diffusion theories, the article outlines a seven-step advocacy campaign encompassing tailored messages in local languages, multi-channel dissemination (radio, town criers, mobile messaging) and culturally sensitive formats (women only sessions, youth led media). Preliminary pilot data suggest that targeted messaging can raise awareness from 35% to over 60% and increase active speaking roles among participants by 30%. The proposed framework offers policymakers and practitioners a replicable model for transforming youth from passive observers to active stakeholders in TJ, thereby strengthening the legitimacy and effectiveness of post conflict recovery processes.

The Boko Haram insurgency has inflicted profound disruption on communities in northeast Nigeria, with Gujba Local Government Area (LGA) among the most severely affected. Although transitional justice (TJ) initiatives have been introduced to address human rights violations, youth participation has remained limited and largely symbolic. This article examines the specific roles that young people occupy in TJ processes in Gujba LGA and proposes a strategic communication framework to enhance their substantive engagement. A mixed methods design was employed, with quantitative data from a structured survey of 300 youths (187 male, 113 female) and qualitative insights drawn from 13 key informant interviews. Findings reveal that while 40% of respondents have ever attended TJ events, attendance is typically confined to community reconciliation (60%), with minimal involvement in policy workshops (25%). Youth contributions frequently remain logistical or testimonial rather than consultative. Demographic analysis indicates higher participation among those aged 20–24 and individuals with post-secondary education, whereas farmers and young women face pronounced barriers. Drawing on framing and diffusion theories, the article outlines a seven-step advocacy campaign encompassing tailored messages in local languages, multi-channel dissemination (radio, town criers, mobile messaging) and culturally sensitive formats (women only sessions, youth led media). Preliminary pilot data suggest that targeted messaging can raise awareness from 35% to over 60% and increase active speaking roles among participants by 30%. The proposed framework offers policymakers and practitioners a replicable model for transforming youth from passive observers to active stakeholders in TJ, thereby strengthening the legitimacy and effectiveness of post conflict recovery processes.

In 1979, during an anti-racism march in the city in Greensboro, North Carolina, KKK and Nazi Party members opened fire on demonstrators, killing five and wounding eight. On the cusp of the 25th anniversary of these killings, efforts by community members culminated in the convening of the first Truth and Reconciliation Commission (GTRC) in the US. Drawing on a unique collection of public testimonies and private interviews with GTRC staff, we use a novel relational approach to array and compare discursive accounts offered in these distinct settings. We find that narratives offered in private were more varied, yet also cohesive in locating blame in social actors. Public testimony, in contrast, was more consolidated and singular, placing the majority of culpability on social structures. Based on these significant distinctions, we draw out implications for future research and policy around transitional justice initiatives.

Since the establishment of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) in 1993, and especially since the changes of regime in Serbia and Croatia in 2000, a complex and controversial story has developed around the variety of measures that have been generated to produce accounts and promote understandings of the past, identify violations of humanitarian law and penalize their perpetrators, and satisfy international demands for accountability. These initiatives have operated in fits and starts, often in response to conditionality imposed from outside, sometimes in bad faith and frequently in half measures or through processes that remain incomplete. However, what is being asked of the former Yugoslav states is a process which, in its depth and speed, has no close parallel in history. They are expected to participate in both domestic and international criminal proceedings that use an eclectic mixture of procedures and practices and to produce gestures of penance which embody a genuine transformation in popular consciousness – all this without destroying political and legal institutions nor permitting them to remain as they were when their states were complicit in deeds that they now have to punish. Considering that these states have experienced neither a decisive military defeat nor a complete political transformation, the fact that transitional justice initiatives have occurred on a meaningful scale at all is in itself noteworthy.1