Article Summary of "Justice After Transitions" by Neil J. Kritz
Citation: Jamal Benomar, "Justice After Transitions," in Transitional Justice, ed. Neil J. Kritz, (Washington, D.C.: United States Institute of Peace Press, 1995) pp. 32-41.
This Article Summary written by: Tanya Glaser, Conflict Research Consortium
In many countries new democratic governments are coming to power, replacing older
repressive regimes. The old regimes often have a history of human rights abuses.
Transitional justice refers to the new government's attempts to address injustices
perpetrated under the old regime. New governments face the difficult task of
"achieving a just solution that is acceptable to a long-suffering population and that
steers clear of both witch-hunt and whitewashes."[p.32]
Punishment or Reconciliation
Many people advocate prosecution and punishment as the best response to human rights
abuses. They argue that the failure to prosecute such crimes amounts to a tacit
endorsement. Prosecuting human rights abuses helps legitimate the new government. It
demonstrates the new government's determination to adhere to democratic values and to
respect human rights. Punishment will also deter future abuses. It will remove the worst
elements from the old regime's remaining military and security forces. Prosecution of the
abusers will also facilitate the victims' healing.
Others advocate a policy of amnesty and reconciliation. They note that prosecution has
only worked in cases where the military has lost power. New democracies are usually
fragile. Where the old regime's military is still powerful, attempts to prosecute its
members may spark rebellion. In such cases a policy of amnesty and reconciliation is the
best way to protect the new democracy. Moreover, in many cases both the opposition forces
and the old regime were guilty of human rights abuses.
Benomar surveys a number of attempts to secure transitional justice. He examines the
transition from communism in the former Soviet states, East Germany and Eastern Europe.
These new governments must deal with widespread participation in the previous repressive
regimes. Russia has made attempts to ban communist parties. Czech and Slovak lustration
laws, which ban all members of the communist party from high office in the new government,
have drawn international criticism. Such laws conflict with international norms, which
reject notions of collective guilt. In Chile and Argentina the military forces remain
strong, and civil governments have lacked the power to prosecute military leaders.
However, these nations have made extensive investigations into past human rights abuses.
Truth commissions have publicly revealed the nature and extent of past crimes. African
states of Benin, Niger, and Togo have granted former leaders amnesty in order to
facilitate a swift transition to the new government. After rebel forces defeated the old
regime, the new government in Ethiopia has committed itself to prosecuting past human
rights violations. To that end they have arrested thousands of military and security
officers. The Ethiopian constitution recognizes the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
as Ethiopia's supreme law.
Benomar argues that, given the complexity and variety of situations which new
governments face, there can be no simple rules for implementing transitional justice. He
notes that "the balance of power between the forces that represent the past and the
democratic forces that lead the transition has proven to be the determining factor in the
policy of many governments on this issue."[p. 41] Still, emerging democracies may
learn much from the experiences of others.
|