The evolution of funding for the International Criminal Court: budgets, donors and gender justice

In this article, we introduce a new dataset on financial support for the International Criminal Court (ICC) and examine how this support has changed over its two decades of existence. We first consider how the ICC’s overall budget has changed over time. Then, we explore the evolution of support from individual donor governments. In addition, given former Prosecutor Bensouda’s emphasis on the effective investigation and prosecution of sexual and gender-based crimes, we examine the extent to which ICC funding is consistent with its apparent commitment to gender justice. Our research contributes to debates about the cost of justice, donors and norm diffusion, South–North clashes over the definition and delivery of justice, and gender mainstreaming within costly international justice processes. We argue that the level of funding state parties and other bodies allocate to particular forms of justice is a better proxy for their commitment to justice than their rhetoric, and conclude that the patterns of funding seen at the ICC support the claim that the Court remains, to a significant extent, a tool of powerful states

Syrian diaspora mobilization for prospective transitional justice in the absence of transition

Mobilization for transitional justice typically “deals with the past,” focusing on retrospective attempts to deal with injustices. Little attention has been afforded to such mobilization when prospects for transition and justice are remote. The Syrian diaspora persistently mobilizes for what we call prospective transitional justice despite unfavorable circumstances. This article asks why. First, they have a sense of moral obligation to do so. Second, framing claims in terms of transitional justice and human rights is perceived as the best strategy to transform Syrian society. Third, transitional justice discourse is an avenue through which diaspora organizations secure institutional survival.publishedVersio

The Quantitative Turn in Transitional Justice Research: What Have We Learned About Impact?

In recent years, scholars have increasingly turned to quantitative research methods to understand the impact of transitional justice (TJ) on societies emerging from periods of violence and repression. This research often seeks to influence policy diffusion by making bold claims based upon large datasets of TJ events that span space and time. However, the policy advice from the first wave of quantitative research is inconsistent if not contradictory. In this article, we outline a range of methodological issues that help to explain the different conclusions reached by these studies, including sampling strategies, model construction, and the measurement of key variables. Furthermore, these studies have often failed to provide compelling theoretical or empirical bases for a causal relationship between TJ mechanisms and dependent variables such as democracy and human rights. We suggest several ways in which quantitative scholars could produce findings with broader credibility. Although we support the use of quantitative methods to understand the impact of TJ mechanisms, greater methodological care is needed in supporting policy recommendations

Global Transitional Justice Norms and the Framing of Truth Commissions in the Absence of Transition

As global transitional justice norms strengthen, governments face increasingly pressure to enact formal transitional justice mechanisms to resolve domestic conflict. This article examines how Bahrain, Morocco, and Sri Lanka attempted to exploit these norms to appease demands and stave off international transitional justice intervention by employing truth commissions. Governments framed truth commissions and their responses to their investigations as sufficient to address the past. To varying degrees, though, domestic audiences and the international community refused to accept this framing. As such, truth commission investigations and their reports failed to resolve the respective conflicts. Rather, they prolonged attention on governments’ past and present misdeeds. For governments, the risk this strategy backfires is higher when human rights violations have been more extensive and extreme, when governments construct a more obviously biased truth‐seeking process and display little interest in enacting recommendations, and when governments have failed to cultivate strong ties with Western powers

Truth Commissions and Transitional Societies : The Impact on Human Rights and Democracy

xv+223hlm.;23c

Syrian diaspora mobilization: vertical coordination, patronage relations, and the challenges of fragmentation in the pursuit of transitional justice

The 2011 Syrian uprising saw the rise of several Syrian diaspora organizations seeking transitional justice (TJ). In this article, we ask why these organizations have been unable to present a coherent and unified TJ agenda. We show how a sequence of mechanisms (transnational brokerage, vertical coordination, and patronage relations) have led to fragmentation in the pursuit of justice. The analysis is divided into two sections. First, we discuss the onset of patronage relations made possible by brokered alliances and vertical coordination. Fuelled by differing conceptions of justice and confidence that the regime would quickly fall, organizations proliferated and fragmented. Second, we show how the entrenchment of patronage relations has largely precluded horizontal coordination, even as groups shifted strategy in the wake of changing conditions in Syria. We then argue that collaborative efforts among diaspora groups have largely failed to overcome the rigid patronage relations established early in the mobilization phase

Syrian diaspora mobilization: vertical coordination, patronage relations, and the challenges of fragmentation in the pursuit of transitional justice

The 2011 Syrian uprising saw the rise of several Syrian diaspora organizations seeking transitional justice (TJ). In this article, we ask why these organizations have been unable to present a coherent and unified TJ agenda. We show how a sequence of mechanisms (transnational brokerage, vertical coordination, and patronage relations) have led to fragmentation in the pursuit of justice. The analysis is divided into two sections. First, we discuss the onset of patronage relations made possible by brokered alliances and vertical coordination. Fuelled by differing conceptions of justice and confidence that the regime would quickly fall, organizations proliferated and fragmented. Second, we show how the entrenchment of patronage relations has largely precluded horizontal coordination, even as groups shifted strategy in the wake of changing conditions in Syria. We then argue that collaborative efforts among diaspora groups have largely failed to overcome the rigid patronage relations established early in the mobilization phase

Syrian diaspora mobilization for prospective transitional justice in the absence of transition

Mobilization for transitional justice typically “deals with the past,” focusing on retrospective attempts to deal with injustices. Little attention has been afforded to such mobilization when prospects for transition and justice are remote. The Syrian diaspora persistently mobilizes for what we call prospective transitional justice despite unfavorable circumstances. This article asks why. First, they have a sense of moral obligation to do so. Second, framing claims in terms of transitional justice and human rights is perceived as the best strategy to transform Syrian society. Third, transitional justice discourse is an avenue through which diaspora organizations secure institutional survival