International actors and traditional justice in Sub-Saharan Africa :policies and interventions in transitional justice and justice sector aid

Due to a number of important differences between transitional justice and justice sector aid, this book explored how international actors address ‘traditional justice’ in these fields in two distinct parts, which has led to separate analyses. Justice sector aid is often part of broader development cooperation programmes, which may or may not take place in a ost-conflict country. Transitional justice processes are part of conflict-related international interventions, such as peacebuilding programmes, which are often implemented before the wheels of more longterm development cooperation programmes are set in motion. Chronologically speaking, both kinds of programmes – support for transitional justice and justice sector aid – often do not run parallel, although there can be overlaps. It also turns out that the international actors are not necessarily the same. Although in principle the same donor countries are involved, justice sector aid is often provided by bilateral or multilateral development organisations, while transitional justice interventions are more often – but certainly not exclusively – initiatives of specific agencies aimed at post-conflict reconstruction, which are established by several donor countries. Although respect for human rights is heavily emphasised in both domains, policy and interventions regarding transitional justice also need to take international norms regarding the criminal prosecution of international crimes into account. In spite of these differences, this concluding chapter formulates a number of mutual findings and recommendations. First, it discusses common elements at the level of policies, then it identifies a number of trends regarding interventions, and finally it examines the way in which linternational actors handle the tension between traditional justice and human rights

Traditioneel recht en internationale actoren in Sub-Sahara Afrika: beleid en interventies op het vlak van 'transitional justice' en ontwikkelingshulp aan de justitiesector

Dit boek onderzoekt hoe internationale actoren in Sub-Sahara Afrika omgaan met traditionele rechtsinstellingen en mechanismen voor geschillenbeslechting in het kader van transitional justice en ontwikkelingshulp aan de justitiesector. Daartoe werden het beleid en de interventies van internationale actoren in zes landen (Malawi, Mozambique, Rwanda, Oeganda, Sierra Leone en Zambia) ganalyseerd. Donoren blijken geen specifiek beleid te hebben inzake het gebruik van traditionele machanismen in transitional justice en laten zich vooral leiden door het belang van lokaal eigenaarschap en respect voor mensenrechten, hetgeen tot spanningen leidt. In ontwikkelingshulp aan de justitiesector is er al wat meer aandacht voor traditioneel recht, alhoewel dit beperkt blijft tot officiële traditioneelrechtelijke structuren, terwijl interventies inzake onofficieel recht aan actoren van het maatschappelijke middenveld worden overgelaten. Het boek analyseert de problemen die hieruit voortvloeien en formuleert voor elk domein en voor beide domeinen samen een reeks aanbevelingen voor toekomstige interventies

African perspectives on tradition and justice

This volume aims to produce a better understanding of the relationship between tradition and justice in Africa. It presents contributions of six African scholars related to current international discourses on access to justice and human rights and on the localisation of transitional justice. The contributions suggest that access to justice and appropriate, context-specific transitional justice strategies need to consider diversity and legal pluralism. In this sense, they all stress that dialogical approaches are the way forward. Whether it is in the context of legal reforms, transitional processes in post-war societies or the promotion of human rights in general, all contributors accentuate that it is by means of cooperation, conversation and cross-fertilization between different legal realities that positive achievements can be realized. The contributions in this book illustrate the perspectives on this dialectal process from those operating on the ground, and more specifically form Sierra Leone, Mozambique, Malawi, South-Africa, Uganda and Rwanda,. Obviously, the contributions in this volume do not provide the final outcome of the debate. Rather, they are part of it

El Cineclub Universitari: memòria d'Antoni Figuera i Francesc Llinás

Abstract not availabl

Official complementarity : a case study on Northern Uganda

Although in Northern Uganda the same as in Sierra Leone and Rwanda applies regarding multilateral and bilateral donors, there have been important donor interventions before the official transitional justice policy was developed including interventions that reinforced traditional leadership

No return home: the (non-)reintegration of youth ex-combatants in Sierra Leone as a Challenge to the contextualisation of DDR and transitional justice

One of the distinguishing features of the extremely violent conflict in Sierra Leone, which lasted from 1991 till 2002, was the abduction and use in hostilities of children and youths. After the conflict many efforts have been made for their reintegration and rehabilitation. However, seven years after the official end of the conflict, a number of young adults have not returned home and have settled in the large towns. Based on recent field research, the chapter wants to analyze the reasons for this as well as the challenges of considering the cultural context to address them. More in particular, the chapter wants to analyze the relationship between the reintegration efforts and the transitional justice process on the one hand, and the traditional values of justice and reconciliation as well as the broader societal environment on the other hand. Even though children under the age of fifteen could not be prosecuted by the Special Court and de facto none below the age of eighteen have been prosecuted, the question remains whether there is a need for more (not necessarily criminal) accountability of these “youths” with respect to the communities where they committed crimes. The reverse question is whether the issue of the communities’ and mainly the elders’ responsibility for the alienation and discrimination of the youth as a cause of the conflict, as established by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, has been sufficiently acknowledged. In that respect, some other reasons for not returning home will be identified as challenges to the consideration of the cultural context in DDR and transitional justice : the fear of revenge or rejection, the generation conflict and secret society practices

Non-official use of tradition : a case study on Sierra Leone

In Sierra Leone, the government's transitional justice policy was supported by multilateral, bilateral and non-governmental donors. There seemed to be a kind of division of labour: multilateral and bilateral donors principally supported interventions that fit in with the official policy, such as the Special Court and the TRC, while NGOs and foundations seemed more inclined to support informal initiatives, such as the NGO projects mentioned in the chapter, aimed at reconciliation

Justice at the doorstep: victims of international crimes in formal versus tradition-based justice mechanisms in Sierra Leone, Rwanda and Uganda

Sierra Leone, Rwanda and Uganda are only three out of so many countries in Sub-Saharan Africa that suffered from violent conflict during the past two decades. What is particular to all three countries is that many or even most crimes during the conflict targeted civilians. In addition, civilians often joined the armed forces in committing these crimes, after forceful or voluntary conscription or as a result of hate campaigns. This means that victims and perpetrators, even if they did not know each other directly, were often from the same village or region and have to live together after the conflict ends. This chapter focuses on coexistence between victims and perpetrators and therefore on the micro-level of dealing with the consequences of armed conflict. The assumption explored is that in post-conflict situations where victims and perpetrators live together, especially in areas where tradition is often still part of daily life, tradition-based justice pays more consideration to the victims’ rights and needs, compared to formal justice. Interestingly, each of the three countries has developed a different relationship between formal and tradition-based justice mechanisms in the framework of transitional justice, allowing comparison between the ways victims’ rights and needs have been addressed in those varying mechanisms. In the three countries studied, victims who have to live with their perpetrators at the community level, express a need for accountability, truth finding, reparations, participation and encounter. These needs are not fully met by either mechanism. The chapter concludes that formal and tradition-based mechanisms can coexist, alternate and complement each other, but that both systems need to improve their consideration of victims’ rights and needs, with an empowering respect for victims’ agency as individuals and as community members

Tradition in transitional justice : between localisation and globalisation

Donors have no real policy for the use of traditional or tradition-based mechanisms in the framework of transitional justice. Support for such mechanisms is inspired by their peace-building policy in which the search for sustainable peace and local ownership come first, as well as respect for international norms, more particularly the duty to prosecute international crimes and respect for human rights. The analysis will feature three themes: the evolution of donors' understanding of local ownership: donors' fragmented approach to traditional elements without perceiving these in their context; and a legal pluralistic analysis of donors' quest to deal with the tension between tradition and human rights

The policy of international actors on traditional justice in transitional justice

This chapter shows that traditional mechanisms for justice and reconciliation have not come to the attention of donors because of their intrinsic values, but mainly because the concept of local ownership generated attention for local, tradition-based solutions. These were proposed as part of transitional justice either by the government of the partner country (such as the Gacaca courts in Rwanda), or by the civil society actors consulted and supported by donors (such as in Uganda). The fact that traditional mechanisms were not integrated in the official transitional justice policy in Sierra Leone is also a result of this evolution, since state ownership was decisive at that moment (1999)