The rule of law, the local turn, and re-thinking accountability in security sector reform processes

Abstract

ABSTRACT Despite calls for the development of ‘second-generation’ approaches, security sector reform (SSR) processes in conflict-affected contexts remain dominated by state-centric strategies with weak records of improving security governance or human security. SSR’s current impasse, we suggest, is best captured in the tension between an ongoing commitment to the rule of law and a growing recognition that sustainable peace must be grounded in local traditions and practices. Our argument is that re-thinking the place of the rule of law within SSR as a long-term aspiration, rather than a short-term fix, requires reconsidering accountability in security governance. In contexts where the rule of law is weakly institutionalised, and where myriad forms of security provision co-exist, how (and by whom) can security actors be held accountable? We seek to identify varieties of extra-legal accountability arrangements that exist in conflict-affected contexts, and ways in which external actors may support – without coopting – such arrangements.