Although relatively new as a distinct field of study, transitional justice has become rapidly established as a vital field of enquiry. From vaguely exotic origins on the outer edges of political science, the study of 'justice' in times of transition has emerged as a central concern of scholarship and practical policy-making. A process of institutionalisation has confirmed this importance. The ICTY, the ICTR, the ICC, hybrid tribunals in Sierra Leone and East Timor and 'local' processes such as the Iraqi Higher Tribunal (IHT) have energised international law and international criminal justice scholarship. The South African TRC was for a time lauded as the model for dealing with the past and remains one of the most researched institutions in the world. It is one of approximately two dozen such institutions established in different transitional contexts over the past twenty years to assist conflicted societies to come to terms with a violent past. At the national level, international donors contribute huge sums of money to 'Rule of Law' programmes designed to transform national justice systems. This collection seeks to offer something quite different to the mainstream of scholarship in this area, emphasising the need for bespoke solutions to different transitions rather than 'off the shelf' models. The collection is designed to offer a space for diversity, prompted by a series of perspectives "from below" of societies beset by past violent conflict which have sought to effect their transition to justice. In doing so the contributors have also sought to enrich discussion about the role of human rights in transition, the continuing usefulness of perspectives from above, and the still contested meanings of "transition".

Examines when, where, why, and how corporate accountability for past human rights violations in armed conflicts and authoritarian regimes is possible.

Despite a more reflective concern over the past 20 years with marginalised voices, justice from below, power relations and the legitimacy of mechanisms and processes, scholarship on transitional justice has remained relatively silent on the question of ‘resistance’. In response, this book asks what can be learnt by engaging with resistance to transitional justice not just as a problem of process, but as a necessary element of transitional justice. Drawing on literatures about resistance from geography and anthropology, it is the social act of labelling resistance, along with its subjective nature, that is addressed here as part of the political, economic, social and cultural contexts in which transitional justice processes unfold. Working through three cases – Côte d’Ivoire, Burundi and Cambodia – each chapter of the book addresses a different form or meaning of resistance, from the vantage point of multiple actors. As such, each chapter adds a different element to an overall argument that disrupts the norm/deviancy dichotomy that has so far characterised the limited work on resistance and transitional justice. Together, the chapters of the book develop cross-cutting themes that elaborate an overall argument for considering resistance to transitional justice as a subjective element of a political process, rather than as a problem of implementation.

In the first project of its kind to compare multiple mechanisms and combinations of mechanisms across regions, countries, and time, Transitional Justice in Balance: Comparing Processes, Weighing Efficacy systematically analyzes the claims made in the literature using a vast array of data, which the authors have assembled in the Transitional Justice Data Base.

Transitional justice has become the principle lens used by countries emerging from conflict and authoritarian rule to address the legacies of violence and serious human rights abuses. However, as transitional justice practice becomes more institutionalized with support from NGOs and funding from Western donors, questions have been raised about the long-term effectiveness of transitional justice mechanisms. Core elements of the paradigm have been subjected to sustained critique, yet there is much less commentary that goes beyond critique to set out, in a comprehensive fashion, what an alternative approach might look like. This volume discusses one such alternative, transformative justice, and positions this quest in the wider context of ongoing fall-out from the 2008 global economic and political crisis, as well as the failure of social justice advocates to respond with imagination and ambition. Drawing on diverse perspectives, contributors illustrate the wide-ranging purchase of transformative justice at both conceptual and empirical levels.

In the last twenty years, the field of transitional justice has gone from being a peripheral concern to an ubiquitous feature of societies recovering from mass conflict or repressive rule. In both policy and scholarly realms, transitional justice has proliferated rapidly, with ever-increasing variety in terms of practical rapidly, with ever-increasing variety in terms of practical processes and analytical approaches. The sprawl of transitional justice, however, has not always produced concepts and practices that are theoretically sound and grounded in the empirical realities of the societies in question.

Dealing with the aftermath of civil conflict or the fall of a repressive government continues to trouble countries throughout the world. Whereas much of the 1990s was occupied with debates concerning the relative merits of criminal prosecutions and truth commissions, by the end of the decade a consensus emerged that this either/or approach was inappropriate and unnecessary. A second generation of transitional justice experiences have stressed both truth and justice and recognize that a single method may inadequately serve societies rebuilding after conflict or dictatorship. Based on studies in ten countries, this book analyzes how some combine multiple institutions, others experiment with community-level initiatives that draw on traditional law and culture, whilst others combine internal actions with transnational or international ones. The authors argue that transitional justice efforts must also consider the challenges to legitimacy and local ownership emerging after external military intervention or occupation.