Transitional Justice: Framing the Key Debates

(Notes from the graduate seminar: Postcolonial Studies, with Professor Guy Beauregard)

Week 2

/*In the past week, the Japanese government has recognized the Ainu people as an indigenous tribe. */

Neology, “Culture in Transition”, Transition (1961)

Soyinka, “Editorial”, Transition (1974)

Transition was a journal started in East Africa by Neology. It takes an ambitious interdisciplinary approach. Asking the question: What is East African Culture? 

However, the juxtaposition of a coca cola advertisement tells the story of the transition from British colonialism to independence, which is then marked by the neo-colonialism of American capitalist markets. “Neocolonialism” is a term coined by Kwame Nkrumah, who Neology also mentions in his editorial. 

Then, in 1974, Soyinka resurrected the journal. In Soyinka’s “Editorial” from Transition (1974), he tries to figure out a way from Neo-colonism to a truer form of decolonization. Amilcar Cabra was another major theorist of African’s transition.

The 3rd iteration of the journal resurged in the 1990s, and was published in Harvard, where they were figuring out the cultures in globalization after the collapse of the Soviet Union. In our readings on transitional justice, we are looking for new vocabulary in ways of talking about change.

Transitional Justice in the Asia-Pacific (2004), edited by Jeffrey and Kim
The Peacemaker’s Paradox (2008), Hayner 

Transitional Justice actually isn’t limited to the legal responses. 

First Impressions: 
  • Reading about the realism of negotiating peace. A plethora of parties and forces involved.
  • ICC holds institutional power invested by the Rome Statute, while the anonymous and diverse mediators have to works on common agreements and some common assumptions. However, ICC can't always reach the ground, while mediators are on the ground and in the room with perpetrators. 
  • Division of labour at this level shuts down debates. 
  • Hayner came from the legal, human rights background, and she has somehow also become involved in peace negotiating field. 
  • Whilst the events Hayner describe are on the heels or in the midst of heightened conflicts, Jeffrey and Kim talk about post-violence situations, and they are able to frame the debates in categories. Top-down vs bottom up, prosecution vs pardon, retributive vs. restorative justice, are all terms used in legal studies. ICC has a very rigid definition of justice, and it delivers its influence from the top down. 
  • How do we measure the progress of justice? 
  • M: "[Colombia] rushed to peace, without defining clearly what justice means, this is causing backsliding and conflicts in the present day."
  • Dichotomy of liberal peace vs local indigenous (morals?): Hayner warns of leaning too heavily on either side. 
Discussions on Jeffrey and Kim’s chapter: 
  • Why the belatedness of studies in Asia-Pacific? - something to do with the United States...
  • Practically, how to adopt/localize different strategies? 
  • The opposing terms are problematic;
  • The 3 debates are unclear;
  • Why are some sites excluded? Where’s Taiwan? South Korea? 
  • On seeking hybrid models;
  • Valuable points raised in the text: a clear narrative of the development of transitional justice; a basic vocabulary for discussing transitional justice.
  • Where is New Zealand and Australia? - Jeffrey and Kim has bracketed the development in New Zealand and Australia, clarifying that it doesn’t fit in the scope of “transitional justice” in its definition of involving democratization of a peace process. However, in Stan and Nedelsky’s definition of transitional justice, as we read last week, it includes when “established democracies confront past serious injustices”. 
Discussions on Hayner’s chapter:
  • Helpful points raised: Her practical experience (not just theoretical); reparative mode is helpful; 
  •  How does international/local interaction work? 
  • What is the Neo-colonialism definition of justice? 
  • What is the significance for us, the literary/humanities scholars? The victims bring their stories into the reparative process. Although we can't be involved with negotiating, what we do is read stories, and read them carefully. Guy finds Hayner’s emphasis on the victims in Colombia’s conflict interesting. She really emphasizes letting them tell their stories. But then what? What do we do with these stories?

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

《國際新聞》洛興雅兒童長住難民營需正式教育 恐喪失整代人才

Introduction to Existentialism