Law In Post-conflict Societies Research Articles

Amnesties, Transitional Justice and the Rule of Law

The aim of this paper is to assess an objection to amnesties conferred in transitional justice contexts: that they violate the rule of law. The paper begins by setting out the objection and presenting three possible replies to it. Each is argued to be unsatisfactory. The central contention of the paper, namely that the success of the objection depends on amnesties’ terms and the reasons for which they are introduced, as well as on what conception of the rule of law is operative, is then presented. The argument that amnesties violate the rule of law on account of public international law, or national constitutions containing bills of rights, prohibiting their use without exception is then rebutted. Few amnesties violate the rule of law for this reason. Finally, the paper addresses a further rule of law-based objection to amnesties that is related to, yet distinct from, the objection that amnesties violate the rule of law. According to this second rule of law-based objection, amnesties prevent, or at least hinder, the restoration of the rule of law in post-conflict societies. This objection is countered by demonstrating that amnesties do not always promote the rule of law less effectively than trials and punishment and may even, in some cases, be essential for the restoration of the rule of law.

Using African Truth and Reconciliation Commission documentation for truth telling and reconciliation

Truth and Reconciliation Commissions (TRCs) are established to document violations of human rights and international humanitarian law in post-conflict societies. The intent is to excavate the truth to avoid political speculations and create an understanding of the nature of the conflict. The documentation hence results in a common narrative which aims to facilitate reconciliation to avoid regression to conflict. TRCs therefore do a tremendous job and create compound documentation that includes written statements, interviews, live public testimonies of witnesses and they also publish final reports based on the accumulated materials. At the end of their mission, TRCs recommend the optimal use of their documentation since it is of paramount importance to the reconciliation process. Despite this ambition, the TRCs’ documentation is often politicized and out of reach for the victims and the post-conflict societies at large. The TRCs’ documentation is instead poorly diffused into the post conflict societies and their findings are not effectively disseminated and used.

Using African Truth and Reconciliation Commission documentation for truth telling and reconciliation

Truth and Reconciliation Commissions (TRCs) are established to document violations of human rights and international humanitarian law in post-conflict societies. The intent is to excavate the truth to avoid political speculations and create an understanding of the nature of the conflict. The documentation hence results in a common narrative which aims to facilitate reconciliation to avoid regression to conflict. TRCs therefore do a tremendous job and create compound documentation that includes written statements, interviews, live public testimonies of witnesses and they also publish final reports based on the accumulated materials. At the end of their mission, TRCs recommend the optimal use of their documentation since it is of paramount importance to the reconciliation process. Despite this ambition, the TRCs’ documentation is often politicized and out of reach for the victims and the post-conflict societies at large. The TRCs’ documentation is instead poorly diffused into the post conflict societies and their findings are not effectively disseminated and used.

The World of Work and Rule of Law in Post-Conflict Societies: Lessons from the International Labor Organization's Crisis Response and Reconstruction Program

The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate how critical the world of work is to establishing rule of law in post-conflict societies. It will do so by placing the work of the ILO in the context of traditional rule-of-law theory and practice, discusses the ILO’s labor and employment-based post-conflict programs and activities, and highlights examples of successful activities engaged in by the ILO, trade unions and employer groups that can be models for more traditional rule-of-law activities.

The Wartime Origins of Civil-Military Relations in Insurgent-Ruled States

Why do insurgent victories in civil war sometimes produce states with strong civilian government control over their military forces – for example under the Zimbabwe African National Union (ZANU) in Zimbabwe or the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) in Rwanda – but sometimes do not? Building coherent military command structures that are subordinate to executive government authority is critical for achieving stability and the rule of law in post-conflict societies. However, existing civil-military relations theories that emphasize factors such as economic development, ethnic homogeneity or ideological doctrines are unsatisfactory for explaining variation across states where former insurgent movements govern. To address this puzzle, my dissertation offers a novel institutional theory of civilian regime control in insurgent dominant states. My theory highlights how the wartime institutions that develop during insurgent warfare – such as joint decision-making bodies among politico-civilian and military elites and institutions of local insurgent governance – shape the civilian-military relationships that emerge when these groups take power. To test these arguments, my dissertation draws on archival, interview, and survey-based evidence from Zimbabwe and Cote d’Ivoire. By theorizing how the wartime experiences and decisions taken by insurgent organizations on their path to victory influence post-war systems of government authority over armed forces, this project contributes to our understanding of the causes of civil-military cohesion in conflict-affected states, while also providing insights on the links between armed conflict, state formation, and post-war political order.

CAN EXTERNAL PROGRAMS INFLUENCE INTERNAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE RULE OF LAW? SOME OBSERVATIONS FROM THE EUROPEAN UNION PERSPECTIVE

(Universities of Turku and Helsinki, Finland), PhD (Cambridge, UK), Visiting Professor (part time) College of Europe, Bruges, Belgium. The views expressed in this article are personal. The author wishes thank Morgan Kronk for her assistance in the preparation of the final draft. 1. See Thomas Carothers, The Rule-of-Law Revival, in PROMOTING THE RULE OF LAW ABROAD: IN SEARCH OF KNOWLEDGE 3–13 (Thomas Carothers ed., 2006); David Tolbert & Andrew Solomon, United Nations Reform and Supporting the Rule of Law in Post-Conflict Societies, 19 HARV. HUM. RTS. J. 29 (2006).

Justice on the Ground: Can International Criminal Courts Strengthen Domestic Rule of Law in Post-Conflict Societies?

The author examines how developments in international criminal law — including creation of the International Criminal Court and various hybrid tribunals — can have an impact on rule-of-law building efforts in post-conflict societies. Although trials of atrocity perpetrators primarily and appropriately focus on fairly trying the accused individuals, these processes also have a wider impact on public perceptions of justice and potentially can influence a society’s ability to embrace rule of law norms. The quality of outreach and capacity-building accompanying these trials may well have a decisive effect on whether these proceedings, on balance, strengthen or undermine public confidence in justice and justice institutions in societies recovering from atrocities. This piece stresses the need to supplement international and hybrid criminal trials with more meaningful outreach to the affected populations, and with more systematic domestic capacity-building and empowerment aimed at both formal justice systems and civil society.

The Conflictual Promises of the United Nations' Rule of Law Agenda: Challenges for Post-Conflict Societies

AbstractThe role of UN missions in post-conflict societies has progressed through peace-keeping and peace-making to a more recent emphasis on peace-building. To accompany this new focus, the UN has articulated a rule of law agenda, two central components of which are promoting international norms and standards and facilitating national ownership. This paper explores the self-sanctioned role the UN has awarded itself in promoting the rule of law in post-conflict societies by exploring each one of these two central components and their interaction.Meritorious in their own right, the potential of these two components of the rule of law agenda may position the UN in situations where both cannot be satisfied contemporaneously. In implementing its rule of law agenda, the United Nations will likely come to face the prospect of a local authority seeking to differ from international norms and standards. In such circumstances, the UN's rule of law agenda makes conflictual promises. The choices and prioritization that the UN will be called upon to make in such circumstances will reveal much about how it conceptualizes its role in promoting the rule of law in post-conflict societies. This paper seeks to delineate the nature of the choices confronting the United Nations in pursuit of its rule of law agenda.

Reconciliation and justice as prerequisites for peace-building.

There are relatively few works devoted solely to the ideas of reconciliation and justice in and of themselves. Instead, most of the work on reconciliation concentrates on its relation to Christian theology and morality whereas most of the work on justice in international conflict concentrates on the restoration of rule of law in postconflict societies. The concept of reconciliation as a goal for postconflict societies and its implementation alongside, or in contrast to, the principles of justice has important implications for the movement toward peace-building and the role of psychology in promoting lasting peace and healing for former combatants and civilians.