Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Five pillars of transitional justice
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Five pillars of transitional justice
Transitional justice refers to the processes that address state crimes during a society’s transition from violent conflict or authoritarian rule (Anderlini, Conaway & Kays, 2004). Such mechanism aims at bringing closure of conflicts, healing the wounds of individuals and society, preventing human rights violations from repeating, and rebuilding confidence in the new judicial and political system (Anderlini et al., 2014).
Among East Asian new democracies, South Korea is arguably the most successful case in dealing with the previous regime after the democratic transition. In the historical 1996 trial, two former presidents were convicted of treasons for launching the December 12 coup of 1979 and ordering the brutal repression of the Kwangju
…show more content…
Such mechanisms aimed at bringing closure of conflicts, healing the wounds of individual and society, preventing human rights abuses from repeating, and instilling trusts in the new judicial and political systems (Anderlini et al., 2004). Despite being on the opposite ends of the spectrum, the pursuit of justice and reconciliation are both an end to the cycles of conflicts (Anderlini et al., 2004). While retributive justice lays stress on punishment of wrongdoings, reparations and compensations (Elster, 2006), reconciliation could refer to remorse, apology, a political form of consensus, or a long-term process of psychological rebuilding within the community (Anderlini et al., …show more content…
Victims and citizens have the right to know the truth (Han, 2005). Criminal and administrative investigations serve as a legal response that provide spaces for truth inquiry, so that retribution and restoration could be carried out based on confirmed facts (Elster, 2006). In this sense, recognition, at least to a certain extent, of past wrongs is an indispensable part of transitional justice (Han, 2005). Social knowledge of the past is simultaneously reconstructed as the former regime being rejected (Anderlini et al., 2004). In other words, law and legal processes have a profound impact on shaping collective memory, which further contributes to reaching political consensus under the new politics (Teitel,
According to Graham, reconciliation is both “… a goal in the sense that it aims to restore relationships or to promote agonism or mutual tolerance, respect, and dignity […] [And] it is a process because it requires multiple modes, steps, stages, and transformations across all levels of society and amongst all stakeholders in a conflict” (Graham 2015). Through reconciliation and the related processes of restorative justice, parties to the dispute explore and overcome the pain brought on by the conflict and find ways to build trust and live cooperatively with each other. Restorative justice seeks to have a positive impact on offenders by confronting them with the consequences of their actions and delineating their responsibilities, giving them both the opportunity to repair the damage caused to the victim and to work on finding a solution to their problems (Umbreit, Bradshaw and Coates, 1999). According to Philpott, there are six components of political reconciliation: building socially just institutions and relations between states, acknowledgement, reparations, punishment, apology, and forgiveness (Philpott
How has guilt and anger affected avenues of reconciliation between the subsequent generations of perpetrators and victims?
Does justice exist in America? Yes, justice does exist in America, but for whom is the question real question. In America all citizens should feel equal to one another but that is not the case. Rather than feeling equal to one another, the blacks and whites of the country feel hatred to one another. In American justice is served but it is mainly for whites and not blacks. The word justice is defined as the quality of being fair and reasonable. Unfortunately in America, justice is not always equally served due to racism in the modern society.
“Restorative justice is a process whereby parties with a stake in a specific offence collectively resolve how to deal with the aftermath of the offence and its implications for the future” (Munchie, 2004).
Mallinder, Louise. "Can Amnesties and International Justice Be Reconciled?" The International Journal of Transitional Justice 1.2 (2007): 208-30.
In order for one to understand the criminal justice system, it is important to study both the criminal law of one’s own country as well as surrounding countries. By engaging in comparative criminal justice studies, one can expand this knowledge through the discovery of similarities and differences in the structure of criminal justice agencies of various nations or states. There are a multitude of factors which could contribute to the differences in each nation’s criminal justice system. By studying the ways in which other countries operate their criminal justice system, it may be possible to learn ways in which we could better our own system. In order to do this, we can study the ways in which various court systems operate around the world. In doing so, we will examine countries with both a different and similar judicial system to ours and discover the differences in how each operates. In furtherance of understanding the criminal justice system, we will
The criminal justice system is always criticized for a range of issues concerning the injustices that has taken place throughout history and even today. Many political leaders and social activists have sought to reform the criminal justice system; however, some have realized that there are systematic barriers that inhibit reformation. Political ...
...onse crime control measures would be adopted resulting in an autocratic criminal justice system in which individual rights are frequently infringed in order to punish the guilty. When this is too much, due process would be used again, and so the vicious cycle begins and continues. The outcome is one that is consistently failing to satisfy the needs of the system and the public. It is for this precise reason, along with the others mentioned within this essay, that render a single, simple and straightforward answer to not only be inadequate, but actually counter-productive as it fuels the inimical cycle. Instead, a flexible approach in which a union of both principles may produce a hybrid model most effective in removing the simplicity and shortcomings of the individual models and thus settling one of the main conflicts of interest within the criminal justice system.
In her, “Between Vengeance and Forgiveness,” Martha Minow discusses, not only the tandem needs of truth and justice that arise and intersect in the wake of conflict but also the duality existing between the notions of vengeance and forgiveness that surface as needs, particularly in a society recovering from violence. The central question of Minow’s work explores the idea that there may be a need for middle ground between vengeance and forgiveness. For the purposes of this work, in delineating first the needs of victims and then the needs of society at large in the wake of violent conflict situations, it may be asserted the Minow’s middle ground abides at the intersection of acknowledgment of harms and retribution for harms committed. To demonstrate
It aims to describe an arrangement of the major political and social institutions of a society such as the constitution, legal system, economy, family, and so on as being fair. Fairness is also at the core of restorative justice. Unlike the retributive system restorative justice is concerned with reforming. Not just the offender but the wrongdoing itself. As previously mentioned, the victim is not primary subject of the retributive system the law or state is. This is an unfair assurance of power by the state over the victim, to the point they where the victim may even feel re-victimized. The State assess what was lost, the state gets to talk at the trial, the victim rarely gets a chance to even see the offender before the trial. By keeping the participants of the trial apart the likelihood of proliferating long lasting resentment, and emotional trauma increases. Dining both parties closure and healing. Rawls believes the state should only be the facilitator of these communications between the parties not key participant in the
When Mary Catherine Parris was told that I would be talking to her about restorative justice, her response was, “Is that a real thing?” (personal communication, September 23, 2015). Through this assignment I realized that restorative justice is not talked about within the criminal justice system. For both of the individuals I spoke with, the idea of restorative justice seemed like a joke. In trying to persuade them both that restorative justice is a real thing, I was met with very similar beliefs and comments from both individuals. They both believed that restorative justice would not work and believed that some aspects of the approach were completely useless (M. C. Parris, & R. Clemones, personal communication, September 23, 2015). The responses
Pros of the restorative justice system are that it brings parties together in crime. Instead of a short term goal, the restorative justice system takes a long-term approach to reducing crime and violence using different kinds of methods. In restorative justice programs, offenders work with others affected by their criminal actions. Restorative justice promotes instilling positive behaviors in young criminals and teaching long-lasting changes in behavior to prevent future crimes. There also could be negative consequences from the restorative justice system. For restorative justice to work, criminals and their victims must communicate about the crime and its consequences. Since violent crimes often leave victims feeling helpless and vulnerable, encouraging communication can result in increased anxiety and fear. Additionally, communication might breach confidentiality for victims of violent crimes, such as rape and assault, because they must discuss the outcome of the crime and how it has impacted
As the purpose of restorative justice is to mend the very relationship between the victim, offender, and society, communities that embrace restorative justice foster an awareness on how the act has harmed others. Braithwaite (1989) notes that by rejecting only the criminal act and not the offender, restorative justice allows for a closer empathetic relationship between the offender, victims, and community. By acknowledging the intrinsic worth of the offender and their ability to contribute back to the community, restorative justice shows how all individuals are capable of being useful despite criminal acts previous. This encourages offenders to safely reintegrate into society, as they are encouraged to rejoin and find rapport with the community through their emotions and
Restorative Justice is an approach to the justice system that focuses on the needs of both the
Every country has a form of criminal justice system. This system consists in a different series of organizations that work together to defend, sentence and punish those that did not follow the law or have been involved in any type of crime. In most of the countries, the system is similar be-cause is based on law enforcement agencies, attorney generals, judges, courts of law and prisons. All of these organizations work together to contribute towards the better enhancement of the working cooperation within the criminal justice system. However, these procedures won’t al-ways be fully applicable in certain countries.