Expectations of the Tribunal and Chambers were frequently seen as “too high”, “unrealistic”, and “inappropriate”. Yet the expectation dilemma is by no means limited to these two institutions and exists for transitional justice more broadly. An expectation gap—between likely and expected contributions—may influence a variety of factors that are important in aiding recovery after mass violence. Unsatisfied expectations may have a distinct impact on the contribution that institutions can make in transitional societies. While it is impossible to meet every expectation, better strategies for expectation realisation are needed.
- Becker, E 1998, ‘Death of Pol Pot: The diplomacy; Pol Pot’s end won’t stop U.S. pursuit of his circle’, The New York Times, April 17.Google Scholar
- Belgrade Center for Human Rights 2004, Attitudes towards the International Criminal tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia 2004, Belgrade Center for Human Rights, Belgrade.Google Scholar
- Braithwaite, J 2005, Markets in vice, markets in virtue, Federation Press, Annandale, NSW.Google Scholar
- Odendaal, A 2010, An architecture for building peace at the local level: A comparative study of local peace committees, United Nations Development Programme, New York.Google Scholar
- Shearing, C and Froestad, J 2007, ‘Beyond restorative justice—Zwelethemba, a future-focused model using local capacity conflict resolution’ in Mackay, R, Bosnjak, M, Deklerck, J, Pelikan, C, Van Stokkom, B and Wright, M (eds), Images of Restorative Justice Theory, Verlag fur Polizeiwissenschaft, Frankfurt, Germany.Google Scholar
- Waters, TW 2009, ‘Seeking justice decades later: Hear the victims’ voices’, The New York Times, February 4.Google Scholar