The Pitfalls and Politics of Holistic Justice
| Author | Andrew Jillions,Rebekka Friedman |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.12193 |
| Date | 01 May 2015 |
| Published date | 01 May 2015 |
The Pitfalls and Politics of Holistic Justice
Rebekka Friedman
King’s College London
Andrew Jillions
London School of Economics and Political Science
Abstract
This article critically assesses the concept of the complementarity of means, a concept that underpins the ‘holistic jus-
tice’turn in postconflict policy making. Our concern is with how global transitional justice strategies are being
informed by a compelling but vague ideal of institutional cooperation. Drawing on research into Sierra Leone’s‘two
tracks’of transitional justice, we argue that political interaction between the two mechanisms and a contentious, ad
hoc learning process between the Special Court for Sierra Leone and the Truth and Reconciliation Commission were
crucial to the way the complementarity of means has come to underpin the holistic justice agenda. We caution that by
treating the complementarity of means as a mechanical outcome of the mere existence of separate transitional justice
mechanisms, global policy makers have drawn the wrong empirical lessons from Sierra Leone. Political engagement
played a central role in constructing a pragmatic partnership between the competing institutions, and in accounting
for some of the long-term and unintended consequences of transitional justice. We argue that if a complementarity of
means is to be effectively realized global policy makers need to embrace –rather than deny –the politics of holistic
justice.
Policy Implications
•Transitional justice mechanisms should recognize and address the tensions and competing policy choices repre-
sented by alternative mechanisms, inviting greater public debate about the appropriate configuration of the holistic
justice agenda.
•Key norm entrepreneurs, such as the UN and the International Center for Transitional Justice (ICTJ), should do more
to engage with the long-term and unintended consequences of failed transitional justice. Assuming a complemen-
tarity of means has fostered complacency about the need to develop effective strategies for achieving holistic jus-
tice.
•Reaching out to victims and affected communities plays a crucial role in communicating the terms of the relation-
ship between different mechanisms of transitional justice, and, in turn, developing the social and political legiti-
macy of transitional justice mechanisms.
•A complementarity of means does not emerge organically: effective cooperation requires greater strategic coordination in
both the shortand long term. To this end,stakeholders shoulddraw up and work within a ‘transitional charter’,which sets
out the basic terms of cooperation and provides a forum for resolving operational disputes.
The complementarity of means in transitional
justice
According to the UN and the International Center for Tran-
sitional Justice (ICTJ 2008, p. 2), a holistic approach to tran-
sitional justice is one with ‘several measures that
complement one another’. Holistic justice holds that ‘no
mechanism is likely to be effective in isolation’, encourag-
ing a plurality of approaches that combine retributive and
restorative conceptions of justice (ICTJ, 2008, p. 2; see also
UN, 2008, pp. 3–4; UN Secretary General, 2013, pp. 4, 9).
This emphasis on the complementarity of means has
become prominent in empirical and normative transitional
justice literature, which has increasingly argued that both
retributive (criminal) and restorative (truth seeking) mea-
sures serve different but equally valuable functions for
transitional justice (Boraine, 2006; De Greiff, 2004, p. 17).
Increasingly, scholars have appealed to the holistic charac-
ter of transitional justice to draw links to parallel practices
and discourses of sustainable peace building (see, for
instance, Mani, 2007; Philpott, 2012; Sriram, 2004, 2013)
and the International Criminal Court (Boraine, 2006; Clark,
Global Policy (2015) 6:2 doi: 10.1111/1758-5899.12193 ©2015 University of Durham and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Global Policy Volume 6 . Issue 2 . May 2015 141
Research Article
To continue reading
Request your trial