Transitional Justice in the Asia-Pacific (5 page)

BOOK: Transitional Justice in the Asia-Pacific
7.34Mb size Format: txt, pdf, ePub
Table 2.
Political Transitions Involving Transitional Justice in the Asia-Pacific, 1980–2010
Sub-Regions
Transition from Authoritarianism
Transition from Authoritarianism and Civil War
Transition from Civil War
No Transition
Northeast Asia
South Korea
Southeast Asia
Philippines,
Cambodia,
Thailand,
Indonesia (Aceh)
Burma, Laos,
East Timor
Vietnam
South Asia
Pakistan, Nepal, Bangladesh
Afghanistan, India,
Sri Lanka
Oceania
Solomon Islands,
Papua New Guinea (Bougainville)
Fiji

Certainly, this volume does not aim at collecting a comprehensive list of all transitional countries in the Asia-Pacific region. We chose a representative sample of cases from the Asia-Pacific region rather than aiming for comprehensiveness. The main reason for the choice is because, as many of the cases are relatively unknown, we believe that in-depth analysis of these cases is required to delve further into the historical contexts in which transitional justice have taken place and explain some detailed processes and practices that have been undertaken.

The Collection

Chapter 1, by Kathryn Sikkink and Leigh Payne, serves two main purposes, the first empirical and the second theoretical. First, it serves to situate the study of transitional justice practices and processes implemented in the Asia-Pacific region in a global context. Drawing on transitional justice database projects undertaken at the Universities of Minnesota and Wisconsin, it presents global and regional transitional justice trends from 1980 to 2010 and compares transitional justice practices in the Asia-Pacific region to those of other regions. In doing so, the chapter seeks to highlight what is distinctive about the practice of transitional justice in the Asia-Pacific. Second, the chapter also considers the impact that trials, truth commissions, and amnesties have on human rights and democracy.
It demonstrates that when trials and amnesties are used together, with or without truth commissions, they have a positive impact on both human rights and democracy. In doing so, this chapter provides a further theoretical framework to be utilized in the case study chapters of the book.

The remainder of the book is devoted to the detailed analysis of the cases of Sri Lanka, Aceh, Cambodia, East Timor, South Korea, and the Solomon Islands. In Chapter 2, Chandra Lekha Sriram puts the current situation
in Sri Lanka in historical and comparative perspective. She discusses earlier commissions of inquiry and prosecutions that have taken place for human rights abuses in Sri Lanka before considering options for domestic and international accountability in the current domestic political climate. She notes that to date, the only proposed response to human rights abuses committed during Sri Lanka's civil conflict is a commission of inquiry created by the government to examine the crimes committed by the
Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), thus leaving the widespread human rights violations committed by government forces unaccounted for. From an international perspective, the possibilities for accountability are similarly limited. Although there is some international interest in potentially pursuing the case of Sri Lanka at the International Criminal Court, Sri Lanka is not a state party to the Rome Statute and thus this option seems unlikely. The case of Sri Lanka, it seems, it marked by the absence of serious transitional justice practices and appears likely to remain so for some time to come.

In the case of
Aceh, Indonesia, examined by Edward Aspinall and Fajran Zain in Chapter 3, transitional justice has taken a markedly different path although there too it has failed to meet the expectations of many. In this case, the
Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) for peace in Aceh provided for a wide range of transitional justice mechanisms, including the granting of amnesties to former combatants, the establishment of a Truth and Reconciliation Commission and the establishment of a Human Rights Court. As Aspinall and Zain argue, however, despite this promising start, transitional justice has stalled in Aceh with virtually no progress in any justice-related area. In particular, the proposed
establishment of a TRC for Aceh has faced stiff opposition and obstacles at every turn. They thus conclude that in the absence of strong political support for transitional justice it is likely that Aceh will become like several other post-conflict societies, such as Mozambique, where ongoing peace processes continue but without truth or reconciliation.

By contrast, the case
of East Timor, examined by Lia Kent in Chapter 5, has experienced a wide range of transitional justice mechanisms, from the establishment of the Serious Crimes Special Panels, a hybrid tribunal to prosecute human rights violations, to the
Commission for Reception, Truth, and Reconciliation (CAVR) and the joint East Timorese/Indonesian
Commission for Truth and Friendship (CTF), as well as various grass-roots initiatives. As Kent argues, however, despite implementing such a wide range of transitional justice mechanisms, ‘there remains a profound sense of community disappointment with the lack of justice in relation to the violence of the past.’ In particular, she notes that the failures to prosecute senior members of the Indonesian military, to provide material assistance to survivors, and to assist in the recovery of bodies, coupled with a disjuncture in local and international understandings of ‘justice’ have significantly limited the success of transitional justice in East Timor. However, the story she tells is not an entirely negative one. Rather, Kent demonstrates that ‘new and unforeseen possibilities are emerging from the CAVR and CTF’ processes and within local justice initiatives that are helping to redefine how justice is being pursued in East Timor.

In Chapter 4, Kirsten Ainley examines the other example of a hybrid domestic-international tribunal operating in the Asia-Pacific,
the Extra-ordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC). She argues that although the ECCC was ostensibly set up to help ‘heal’ the trauma inflicted by the Khmer Rouge, its establishment ‘represents less a victory for advocates of transitional justice than…a reflection of the interests of the Cambodian government.’ In particular, Ainley argues that the ECCC represents the coincidence of power and principle, where the power of the domestic government has come together with international principles
surrounding the pursuit of accountability for serious human rights violations. Thus, despite the efforts of its offices devoted to victim participation and outreach, the ECCC's activities have fallen well short of the expectations of the victims in whose name it was established.

In Chapter 6, Renée Jeffery turns to the case of the Solomon Islands, a case in which amnesties, domestic human rights trials, and a truth and reconciliation commission have operated. She notes that in the aftermath of the civil conflict in the Solomons, two dominant approaches to post-conflict justice emerged. The first, implemented by the Regional Assistance Mission to the Solomon Islands (RAMSI), favored a rule of law approach according to which large numbers of militants on both sides were arrested and processed through the criminal justice system resulting, in many cases, in the imposition of lengthy periods of imprisonment. The second, ‘reconciliation’ approach, favored local, grass-roots, traditional, and indigenous justice processes and were routinely implemented by community groups, women's organizations, and churches. Jeffery argues that in the absence of a formally planned transitional justice process, these two approaches to post-conflict justice have come into serious tension with proponents of each accusing the other of hampering their justice efforts. She examines those tensions and analyzes the extent to which the Solomon Islands’
Truth and Reconciliation Commission, designed in part to provide a bridge between the rule of law and reconciliation approaches, has been able to quell this new set of tensions.

In contrast to the negative or, at best, mixed, appraisals of the transitional justice mechanisms implemented in Sri Lanka, Cambodia, Aceh, East Timor, and the Solomon Islands, the story of South Korea Hun Joon Kim tells in Chapter 7 is one of success. He notes that since demo-cratization in 1987,
South Korea has adopted three types of transitional justice measures: criminal prosecutions, truth commissions and investigatory committees, and reparations. Focusing on three of South Korea's ten truth commissions, Kim argues that ‘truth commissions have had a positive impact on Korean society as a whole by improving human rights and enhancing democracy.’ He notes key changes in Korean society that
have followed the truth commissions, including the issuing of formal apologies, the revision of history textbooks and official histories, and the excavation and reburial of victims. Kim concludes that by pursuing this course of action, South Korea has served to strengthen the core values of democracy: justice, human rights, and the rule of law.

In the Conclusion, we turn to questions of
success and failure in implementing transitional justice mechanisms. We note that, with the exception of the case of South Korea, the assessments made of the pursuit for accountability for past human rights violations in the region make for sobering reading. Failures of design, capacity, and, in particular, political will, appear to mark efforts at transitional justice in the Asia-Pacific far more than stories of successful outcomes. We consider whether this is a fair assessment by providing a comparative overview of the successes and failures of transitional justice in the cases examined in the book. We argue that although there are grounds on which to be critical of the pursuit, or lack thereof, of accountability for human rights violations in the region, the Asia-Pacific has made significant efforts to address the wrongs of the past. These efforts have brought a measure of justice, however imperfect it may be, to bear on human rights violations committed in the region. We argue that this is a significant and positive outcome that provides the foundations on which further attempts at transitional justice might be built in the future.

1
Naomi
Roht-Arriaza
, ‘Civil Society Processes of Accountability’ in M. Cherif
Bassiouni
(ed.),
Post-Conflict Justice
, Ardsley, NY: Transnational Publishers, 2002, p. 97.

2
Ellen
Lutz
and Kathryn
Sikkink
, ‘The Justice Cascade: The Evolution and Impact of Foreign Human Rights Trials in Latin America,’
Chicago Journal of International Law
, Vol.
2
, No. 1 (2001), pp. 1–34; Chandra Lekha
Sriram
, ‘Revolutions in Accountability: New Approaches to Past Abuses,’
American University International Law Review
, Vol.
19
, No. 2 (2003), pp. 310–429; Hunjoon
Kim
,
Expansion of Transitional Justice Measures: A Comparative Analysis of its Causes
, PhD Thesis, (2009), University of Minnesota.

3
Transitional Justice Database Project, at
http://sites.google.com/sites/transitionaljusticedatabase/home
(accessed 20 May 2011).

4
Ruti G.
Teitel
, ‘Transitional Justice Genealogy,’
Harvard Human Rights Journal
, Vol.
16
(2003), p. 69.

5
Jon
Elster
,
Closing the Books: Transitional Justice in Historical Perspective
, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004, p. 1; Neil J.
Kritz
(ed.),
Transitional Justice: How Emerging Democracies Reckon with Former Regimes
, Washington D.C.: United States Institute of Peace, 1995; Paige
Arthur
, ‘How “Transitions” Reshaped Human Rights: A Conceptual History of Transitional Justice,’
Human Rights Quarterly
, Vol.
31
, No. 2 (2009), pp. 329–331.

6
Samuel
Huntington
,
The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late-Twentieth Century
, Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1991, p. 7.

7
Richard H.
Solomon
, ‘Preface’ to Neil J.
Kritz
(ed.),
Transitional Justice: How Emerging Democracies Reckon with Former Regimes
, Vol.
3
, Washington D.C.: United States Institute for Peace, 1995, p. xxiii.

8
John Paul
Lederach
,
Building Peace: Sustainable Reconciliation in Divided Societies
, Tokyo: UNU Press, 1994, p. 14; Michael
Barnett
, Hunjoon
Kim
, Madalene
O’Donnell
, and Laura
Sitea
, ‘Peacebuilding: What Is in a Name?,’
Global Governance
, Vol.
13
, No. 1 (2007), p. 44.

9
Teitel, ‘Transitional Justice Genealogy,’ p. 69.

10
Mark
Freeman
,
Truth Commissions and Procedural Fairness
,Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006, p. 10.

11
United Nations Human Development Report, 2000, p. 89, at
http://hdr.undp.org/en/media/hdr_2000_ch5.pdf
(accessed 3 March 2011).

12
Robert
Keohane
and Ruth
Grant
, ‘Accountability and Abuses of Power in World Politics,’
American Political Science Review
, Vol.
99
, No. 1 (2005), p. 29.

13
Rachel
Kerr
and Erin
Mobekk
,
Peace and Justice: Seeking Accountability After War
, Cambridge: Polity, 2007, p. 4.

14
Howard
Zehr
, ‘Restorative Justice: The Concept,’
Corrections Today
, Vol.
59
, No. 7 (1997), p. 68.

15
Many traditional, customary, and indigenous justice practices also incorporate retributive elements alongside those commonly deemed ‘restorative’.

16
Louis B.
Sohn
and R.R.
Baxter
, ‘Responsibility of States for Injuries to the Economic Interests of Aliens,’
American Journal of International Law
, Vol.
55
(1961), pp. 545–546; Jo M.
Pasqualucci
, ‘Victim Reparations in the Inter-American System: A Critical Assessment of Current Practice and Procedure,’
Michigan Journal of International Law
, Vol.
18
, No. 1 (1996–1997), p. 25.

17
Ruben
Carranza
, ‘Plunder and Pain: Should Transitional Justice Engage with Corruption and Economic Crimes?,’
International Journal of Transitional Justice
, Vol.
2
, No. 3 (2008), pp. 310–330.

18
Burt
Galaway
and Joe
Hudson
, ‘Introduction’ to Burt
Galaway
and Joe
Hudson
(eds.),
Restorative Justice: International Perspectives
, Monsey: Kugler, 1996, p. 2; Allison
Morris
, ‘Critiquing the Critics: A Brief Response to Critics of Restorative Justice,’
British Journal of Criminology
, Vol.
42
, No. 3 (2002), pp. 596–615.

19
Rama
Mani
,
Beyond Retribution: Seeking Justice in the Shadows of War
, Cambridge: Polity, 2002, p. 7.

20
Huntington,
The Third Wave
, pp. 211, 213.

21
Aryeh
Neier
, ‘What Should be Done About the Guilty?,’
New York Review of Books
, Vol.
37
, No. 1 (1990), pp. 32–35; Diane F.
Orentlicher
, ‘Settling Accounts: The Duty to Prosecute Human Rights Violations of a Prior Regime,’
Yale Law Journal
, Vol.
100
, No. 8 (1991), pp. 2537–2615; Naomi
Roht-Arriaza
, ‘State Responsibility to Investigate and Prosecute Grave Human Rights Violations in International Law,’
California Law Review
, Vol.
78
, No. 2 (1990), pp. 449–514.

22
Gary J.
Bass
, ‘War Crimes Tribunals’ in Keith E.
Whittington
, R. Daniel
Keleman
, and Gregory A.
Calderia
(eds.),
The Oxford Handbook of Law and Politics
, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008, p. 237.

23
Huntington,
The Third Wave
, pp. 215, 231.

24
Huntington,
The Third Wave
, p. 228.

25
Guillermo A.
O’Donnell
and Philippe C.
Schmitter
,
Transitions from Authoritarian Rule: Conclusions about Uncertain Democracies
, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1986, p. 29.

26
David
Forsythe
,
Human Rights in International Relations
, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006, p. 97.

27
Anthony
D’Amato
, ‘Peace vs. Accountability in Bosnia,’
American Journal of International Law
, Vol.
88
, No. 3 (1994), p. 500.

28
Anonymous, ‘Human Rights in Peace Negotiations,’
Human Rights Quarterly
, Vol.
18
, No. 2 (1996), p. 258.

29
David
Scheffer
, ‘International Judicial Intervention,’
Foreign Policy
, No.
102
(1996), p. 38; See also Payam
Akhavan
, ‘Justice in the Hague, Peace in the Former Yugoslavia? A Commentary on the United Nations War Crimes Tribunal,’
Human Rights Quarterly
, Vol.
20
, No. 4 (1998), pp. 249–458; Felice D.
Gaer
, ‘UN-Anonymous: Reflection on Human Rights in Peace Negotiations,’
Human Rights Quarterly
, Vol.
19
, No. 1 (1997), pp. 1–8; Juan E.
Mendez
, ‘Accountability for Past Abuses,’
Human Rights Quarterly
, Vol.
19
, No. 2 (1997), pp. 272–275.

30
Naomi
Roht-Arriaza
, ‘The New Landscape of Transitional Justice’ in Naomi
Roht-Arriaza
and Javier
Mariezcurrena
(eds.),
Transitional Justice in the Twenty-First Century: Beyond Truth versus Justice
, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006, p. 7.

31
Chandra Lekha
Sriram
, ‘Revolutions in Accountability: New Approaches to Past Abuses,’
American University International Law Review
, Vol.
19
, No. 2 (2003), pp. 301–429; John
Dugard
, ‘Dealing with Crimes of a Past Regime: Is Amnesty Still an Option?,’
Leiden Journal of International Law
, Vol.
12
, No. 4 (1999), p. 1007; Leila Nadya
Sadat
, ‘Redefining Universal Jurisdiction,’
New England Law Review
, Vol. 
35
, No. 2 (2000–2001), pp. 241–263; Darryl
Robinson
, ‘Serving the Interests of Justice: Amnesties, Truth Commissions and the International Criminal Court,’
European Journal of International Law
, Vol.
14
, No. 3 (2003), pp. 481–505; Anja
Seibert-Fohr
, ‘The Relevance of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court for Amnesties and Truth Commissions,’
Max Planck Y.U.N.L.
, Vol.
7
(2004), pp. 553–590.

32
Kenneth
Roth
, ‘The Court the US Doesn't Want,’
New York Review of Books
, Vol.
45
, No. 18 (1998), p. 47; M. Cherif
Bassiouni
, ‘The Universal Model: The International Criminal Court,’ in M. Cherif
Bassiouni
(ed.),
Post-Conflict Justice
, Ardsley, NY: Transnational, 2002, pp. 820–821.

33
Jack
Goldsmith
and Stephen D.
Krasner
, ‘The Limits of Idealism,’
Daedalus
, Vol.
132
, No. 1 (2003), p. 55.

34
Jack
Snyder
and Leslie
Vinjamuri
, ‘Trials and Errors: Principle and Pragmatism in Strategies of International Justice,’
International Security
, Vol.
28
, No. 3 (2003/2004), pp. 5–44.

35
Leslie
Vinjamuri
and Jack
Snyder
, ‘Advocacy and Scholarship in the Study of International War Crimes Tribunals and Transitional Justice,’
Annual Review of Political Science
, Vol.
7
(2004), p. 353.

36
Kathryn
Sikkink
and Carrie Booth
Walling
, ‘The Impact of Human Rights Trials in Latin America,’
Journal of Peace Research
, Vol.
44
, No. 4 (2007), pp. 434, 438, 440.

37
Hunjoon
Kim
and Kathryn
Sikkink
, ‘Explaining the Deterrence Effect of Human Rights Prosecutions for Transitional Countries,’
International Studies Quarterly
, Vol. 
54
, No. 4 (2010), p. 939.

38
James D.
Meernik
, Angela
Nichols
, and Kimi L.
King
, ‘The Impact of International Tribunals and Domestic Trials on Peace and Human Rights after Civil War,’
International Studies Perspectives
, Vol.
11
, No. 4 (2010), p.1.

39
Diane F.
Orentlicher
, ‘“Settling Accounts” Revisited: Reconciling Global Norms with Local Agency,’
International Journal of Transitional Justice
, Vol.
1
, No. 1 (2007), p. 12.

40
Alice H. Henkin, ‘State Crimes: Punishment or Pardon (Conference Report)’ in Neil J. Kritz,
Transitional Justice: How Emerging Democracies Reckon with Former Regimes
, Vol. 1: General Considerations, pp. 184–188.

41
David
Weissbrodt
and Paul W.
Fraser
, ‘Report of the Chilean National Commission on Truth and Reconciliation,’
Human Rights Quarterly
, Vol.
14
, No. 4 (1992), pp. 610–622; Thomas
Buergenthal
, ‘The United Nations Truth Commission for El Salvador,’
Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law
, Vol.
27
, No. 3 (1994), pp. 497–544; Mark
Ensalaco
, ‘Truth Commission for Chile and El Salvador: A Report and Assessment,’
Human Rights Quarterly
, Vol.
16
, No. 4 (1994), pp. 656–675.

42
Desmond
Tutu
,
No Future without Forgiveness
, New York: Doubleday, 1999, p. 30.

43
Elizabeth
Kiss
, ‘Moral Ambition Within and Beyond Political Constraints: Reflections on Restorative Justice’ in Robert I.
Rotberg
and Dennis
Thompson
(eds.),
Truth v. Justice: The Morality of Truth Commissions
,Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2000, p. 86.

Other books

A Golfer's Life by Arnold Palmer
Lost in Shadows by CJ Lyons
Diva Las Vegas by Eileen Davidson
The Evolution of Alice by David Alexander Robertson
Outrage by Robert K. Tanenbaum
Dead Men's Harvest by Matt Hilton