The Rule of Law Center has shaped the field of "transitional justice" through research that examines these issues in comparative perspective, publications, grant-funded work, and substantive policy advice.

Elements of this work include:

  • Assistance and advice to individuals, organizations, and governments working on transitional justice issues around the globe. ROL has responded to requests for materials or assistance on this topic from over 20 countries, including South Africa, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Russia, Malawi, Rwanda, Ethiopia, Cambodia, Guatemala, the Czech Republic, and Afghanistan.
  • Ongoing research, consultation, and workshops focusing on such issues as a comparative analysis of transitional justice in several nations, compensation of victims, the use of non-criminal sanctions to deal with past abuses, and the relationships between truth commissions, international tribunals, national trials, and amnesty programs. In 1995, the Institute published Transitional Justice: How Emerging Democracies Reckon with Former Regimes, a three-volume collection edited by Neil Kritz that brings together the collective experience of numerous countries and cultures over the past 50 years.
  • A documentary film on truth commissions that shows how countries that have experienced massive human rights violations have sought to address the legacy of the past. Since 1983, truth commissions have been established in over 20 countries, in all parts of the world. Confronting The Truth documents the work of truth commissions in South Africa, Peru, East Timor, and Morocco. Taking testimony from victims and perpetrators, and conducting detailed investigations, truth commissions create a historical record of abuses that have often remained secret. They also identify patterns of abuse, and the structural and institutional weaknesses, societal and cultural problems, and weak legal systems that made the violations possible.
  • Developing options to pursue transitional justice in Iraq, including approaches to de-Ba'athification, the development of the Iraqi Special Tribunal, and the development of materials to facilitate discussion of truth and reconciliation processes. In March 2004, the Institute, in cooperation with the Institute for International Criminal Investigation, convened a conference in Amsterdam that brought together Iraqis involved in establishing the tribunal with experts on international criminal law and on the practical operations of special tribunals from nine countries. A Special Report based on the principal views and insights shared at the conference was released in June 2004.
  • Afghanistan: USIP is working with the Afghan government, the United Nations, international donors and NGOs to develop policy recommendations for ensuring that candidates with links to illegal armed groups are not permitted to run for office in Afghanistan's next elections. USIP is also working with international and national NGOs to develop sound documentation practices that will enable victims to exercise their right to learn the truth about past human rights abuses. Recognizing the central importance of Islam in Afghan life, USIP works with Islamic institutions and legal scholars to develop thinking about how Islamic legal principles address the rights to knowledge, accountability, compensation, and forgiveness in relation to mass abuse. And through its Grants Program, USIP provides funds to local Afghan organizations to implement their own innovative ideas for how to mobilize grass roots constituencies to express their demands for justice.
  • Nepal: In response to the need for more information on international practices and experiences about transitional justice, USIP organized a series of roundtable sessions in Nepal in July 2007 to discuss transitional justice options pursued by other countries after conflict. Based on its consultations, USIP contributed technical advice to the government on its draft truth commission legislation, and will continue to do so as the process of designing the commission moves forward. USIP has produced a Nepali-language version of its new documentary, Confronting the Truth. As the government conducts it own nationwide consultations on attitudes toward a truth commission, USIP will work with Nepali partner organizations to foster discussion on how experiences with truth commissions in other countries may inform Nepal's own truth and reconciliation commission planning process. A report was produced as a result of these efforts, titled Transitional Justice in Nepal: A Look at the International Experience of Truth Commissions (USIPeace Briefing, September 2007).
  • Uganda: At the urging of the Ugandan government, a USIP delegation visited Uganda in December 2007 to conduct consultations with a wide range of stakeholders regarding the justice mechanisms outlined in the recently negotiated agreement to conclude the 20-year civil war in Northern Uganda. The delegation met with government officials and negotiators, the LRA negotiating team, judges and other legal officials, the chairman of the Amnesty Commission, civil society organizations, religious and tribal leaders, members of the chief mediator's team for the talks, and victims of the conflict, in Kampala and in Gulu. USIP remains engaged in providing advice and analysis of the Ugandan justice situation as the results of the peace negotiations unfold. Read more about these efforts: The Justice Dilemma in Uganda (USIPeace Briefing, February 2008).
  • Bosnia and Herzegovina: ROL provided advice on forming a national truth and reconciliation commission, which would complement international and national war crimes trials and help lay to rest radically divergent claims regarding abuses committed against members of different ethnic groups during the war, which remain a source of significant tension in the country. At the request of the speaker and deputy speakers of the Bosnian parliament, Neil Kritz also served as facilitator and technical resource for eight-party talks on the subject over a period of several months. In addition, as the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) began to transfer cases to a newly established state-level War Crimes Chamber, ROL facilitated outreach meetings for judges and prosecutors of the chamber with victims groups and members of civil society to develop an understanding of both the potential and limitations of criminal justice in redressing war abuses, and to stimulate discussion about complementary mechanisms to the Chamber.
  • Hosting meetings on the Special Court for Sierra Leone and on the country’s truth and reconciliation commission. Neil Kritz served on a UN panel of experts to develop guidelines for the relationship between these two bodies.
  • Truth Commission Digital Collection: USIP maintains an extensive online collection of information regarding truth commissions and commissions of inquiry in countries around the world, including descriptions of the commissions, as well as the original statutes creating these bodies and the reports produced by them.

 

 

Related Publications

Five Things to Know About the Afghan Peace Talks

Five Things to Know About the Afghan Peace Talks

Monday, September 14, 2020

By: Vikram J. Singh; Scott Smith; Scott Worden; Belquis Ahmadi; Johnny Walsh

The intra-Afghan negotiations that began on Saturday represent a watershed moment in the war: the first direct, official talks between the Taliban and the Afghan government. These historic talks commenced 19 years and one day after al-Qaida's 9/11 terrorist attacks drew the United States into Afghanistan's civil war. Just getting the Afghan government and the Afghan Taliban to the table is an accomplishment. The main reason the talks materialized is the U.S.-Taliban agreement signed in February of this year; that agreement delivered a timetable for the eventual withdrawal of foreign troops, which met the Taliban’s years-long precondition for opening talks with the Afghan government.

Type: Analysis and Commentary

Peace Processes

Afghan Government: ‘Optimistic’ on Opening Talks with Taliban

Afghan Government: ‘Optimistic’ on Opening Talks with Taliban

Friday, August 28, 2020

By: USIP Staff

Afghanistan’s government is optimistic that the delayed peace talks with the Taliban can start soon, acting Foreign Minister Mohammed Haneef Atmar told an online audience. Atmar’s comments are the latest sign that one reason for the five-month delay, disputes over the two sides’ release of prisoners they have been holding, may be nearly resolved. Taliban attacks on government forces have continued, and civilian casualties have remained high, as the two sides have wrestled over conditions for starting the talks as envisioned in a February agreement between the United States and the Taliban.

Type: Analysis and Commentary

Peace Processes

Assessing Afghanistan’s 2019 Presidential Election

Assessing Afghanistan’s 2019 Presidential Election

Wednesday, August 26, 2020

By: Colin Cookman

Afghanistan’s current electoral system structures Afghan political dynamics, shapes election-day outcomes, and influences competition between organized interest groups in Afghanistan. Drawing on a unique set of results data from the September 2019 presidential election and past elections, this report analyzes where and how prospective Afghan voters were able to participate in the 2019 polls, the decision making behind and adjudication of disputes over which votes would be counted as valid, and how the available results compare with political trends evident in prior elections.

Type: Peaceworks

Democracy & Governance

Afghan Peace Talks: Prisoner Release Paves Way for Direct Negotiations

Afghan Peace Talks: Prisoner Release Paves Way for Direct Negotiations

Thursday, August 13, 2020

By: Dipali Mukhopadhyay; Johnny Walsh; Scott Smith

Afghan President Ashraf Ghani on Sunday said that his government would release the last batch of Taliban prisoners, ostensibly removing the final hurdle to direct negotiations with the insurgent group. Intra-Afghan negotiations were originally slated for March 10 as part of the U.S.-Taliban deal signed in late February, but were delayed due to disagreements over prisoner releases. The Afghan government and Taliban had committed to releasing 5,000 and 1,000 prisoners respectively, but the final 400 Taliban prisoners had been accused or convicted of major crimes, including murder. Ghani only made the decision to release those prisoners after he called for a consultative assembly, or loya jirga, to advise on the decision. USIP’s Afghanistan experts explain why Ghani convened the loya jirga, what to expect in the early stages of talks, and what role the United States can play.

Type: Analysis and Commentary

Peace Processes

View All Publications