Post-Conflict Justice and Hybridity in Peacebuilding
This chapter addresses hybridity in a somewhat different way from that of many of the other chapters in this volume, as it deals not with peacebuilding in a particular country or region, but rather with a range of justice-oriented processes and institutions, which are often attendant to and are increasingly integrated into contemporary peacebuilding operations.1 Processes of post-conflict justice are frequent sites of hybridity, in which the interaction of local, national, and international actors shape decisions about accountability in ways that evolve over time. This is the case whether what is pursued is individualized criminal accountability, broader rule of law and access to justice, or processes of apology and forgiveness or punishment.
KeywordsInternational Criminal Court International Criminal International Crime Transitional Justice Legal Pluralism
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 12.Godfrey M. Musila, ‘Options for Transitional Justice in Kenya: Autonomy and the Challenge of External Prescriptions’, International Journal of Transitional Justice, Vol. 3, No. 3, 2009, p. 450.Google Scholar
- 32.Chandra Lekha Sriram and Johanna Herman, ‘DDR and Transitional Justice: Bridging the Divide?’ Journal of Conflict, Security, and Development, Vol. 9, No. 4, 2009.Google Scholar
- 35.Chandra Lekha Sriram, Globalizing Justice for Mass Atrocities: A Revolution in Accountability. London: Routledge, 2005, pp. 94–110.Google Scholar