Dealing with the past and the path to transitional justice: A comparative analysis of South Korea and Albania

Abstract

This article compares the authoritarian regimes of early South Korea and Albania, identifying historical anecdotes of state authoritarianism that resulted in state‐led crimes and human rights violations. It identifies the historical connections between the establishment and maintenance of authoritarian regimes, as well as the consequences of such meticulous upkeep, by comparing and contrasting the efforts made in dealing with the past and lustration, as well as their significance for peace and stability. We compare the South Korean and Albanian cases from these perspectives to find similarities and differences. By comparing two different countries with similar authoritarian pasts, this article analyzes the efforts of both countries towards transitional justice, and unified rhetoric across the political spectrum for lustration and punishment of past crimes, and discovered that when it comes to practice, these laws tend to be unilateral and were strongly challenged in courts and used as political tools against ideological opponents.

Editor's introduction: Comparatively studying Asia: Challenges & promises

“…Another type of country comparison is to choose countries from different regions as demonstrated by the cross-regional comparison of South Korea in Asia and Albania in Europe regarding the pursuit of transitional justice. Kasmi (2024) argued that while there is variation in the authoritarian regime type in both countries, there has been similar steady progress in dealing with their respective dictatorial legacies. While Korea focused more on truth commissions, and compensation, Albania emphasized more on commemoration and building collective memory.…”