Meaningful Engagement from the Bottom-Up? Taking Stock of Participation in Transitional Justice Processes

Abstract

This article surveys the literature on participation in transitional justice (TJ) focusing primarily on victims and bottom-up actors. We argue that often the preoccupation in TJ has been with greater rather than more meaningful participation, and that there needs to be a concerted effort to focus on everyday actors, including their voices, needs and priorities. Consideration also needs to be given as to whether meaningful participation can occur without genuine obligation and commitment to heeding participants’ input, and greater consideration is required to measure and build an evidence-base regarding participatory TJ efforts and their outcomes. We advocate for further discussion in theory and in practice about how participation in TJ can be reimagined toward actor oriented, bottom-up led processes that lead to meaningful outcomes. We suggest that TJ specific participation considerations are required and refer to existing theoretical considerations and models from other disciplines and sectors as helpful departure points.

Victim-Centred Peacemaking: The Colombian Experience

“…The so-called 'victims' turn' emerged in the mid-2000s, as increasing attention was paid by policymakers and scholars to victims' claims and rights (Garcia-Godos 2016, 350). The victims' turn was consolidated with the crafting of specific norms, such as the UN's Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power (Firchow and Selim 2022) and the Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to Remedy and Reparations (Garcia-Godos and Lid 2010; Sajjad 2016) and further bolstered with the establishment of the victims' fund within the International Criminal Court and the increasing role of victims in criminal proceedings (de Waardt and Weber 2019). The accompanying 'hardening' of international human rights law, international criminal law and international humanitarian law (UN 2005) reinforced the codification, increasing normativisation and legal categorisation of victims' rights, developments which, in turn, played a crucial role in providing political opportunities for survivors' claims-making, claims that are now broadly perceived as morally and legally legitimate (Garcia-Godos and Lid 2010, 515).…”

“…Victim-centred initiatives have habitually been driven by states' needs/prerogatives (Robins 2017, 53). The 'victim-centeredness' of TJ is thus linked to governments'/policymakers' quests to legitimise top-down processes and by the 'pursuit of larger political or social goals' McConnachie 2012, 2013, 490), leading to tokenistic inclusion and ultimately instrumentalising subaltern voices (Firchow and Selim 2022). At worst, 'instrumentalisation' represents 'the defining characteristic of the relationship between victims and the mechanisms of transitional justice' McConnachie 2012, 2013, 491).…”

“…At worst, 'instrumentalisation' represents 'the defining characteristic of the relationship between victims and the mechanisms of transitional justice' McConnachie 2012, 2013, 491). Victim-centred practices often objectify and disempower victims and 'reproduce existing unequal power relationships' (Firchow and Selim 2022), whilst creating legitimation narratives for states (Robins 2017, 48).…”

“…Importantly, recent scholarship has identified useful benchmarks against which purported victim-centredness may been measured. Advancing Arnstein's research, Taylor (2014), Tsai and Robins (2014) and Firchow and Selim (2022) have innovatively developed the conceptualisation of and normative typologies pertaining to meaningful participation. Evrard, Mejía Bonifazi and Destrooper (2021) have similarly crafted a useful framework for evaluating participation across specific empirical cases of alleged victimcentred TJ.…”

“…However, Colombia's experience was not characterised uniquely by disempowerment. Participation was also 'meaningful' (Firchow and Selim 2022): victims asserted agency across diverse spheres and crafted consequential outcomes within Point Five. The article presents, therefore, a nuanced perspective, where, despite victims' contributions to shaping accountability mechanisms and the wider peace process, the sustainability and legitimacy of Colombia's peace settlement remain under question.…”