This project explored “The interplay between transitional justice and reconciliation processes in peacebuilding” after violent conflicts. The project was undertaken given a knowledge gap resulting from the contradictory insights and speculation, in the existing literature and poor empirical evidence, on the peacebuilding effects of transitional justice and reconciliation mechanisms and processes. More in-depth comparative empirical and theoretical inquiries, as well as comparison between cases, were thus needed in order to explain how the relationship between transitional justice and reconciliation processes works in practice across different context. The project’s overall purpose was thus to address this gap by considering two country cases, Algeria and Rwanda, which have experienced armed conflicts but within different contexts and engaged in transitional justice and reconciliation processes to address the legacies of these conflicts.
Empirical findings encompass theoretical and clear-cut policy and practical action results that are useful for multiple actors and audience—both academic and non-academic. In other words, the study results are useful for scientific and societal purposes (research, education, and policy actions). Specifically, the project explored four objectives. The first objective aimed to explore why countries or states chose particular transitional justice and reconciliation mechanisms, and the factors that influence and restrain their choice. The second objective endeavoured to explore and explain whether, and in what ways, the chosen transitional justice and reconciliation mechanisms affect each other on the ground. The third objective aimed to explore which combinations of transitional justice and reconciliation mechanisms are most effective in dealing with the legacies of past violence, and to identify the factors that explain success or failure. Finally, the project analysed how the combination of the chosen transitional justice and reconciliation mechanisms affect peacebuilding.
Methodologically, the design of this project was a comparative qualitative case study, which used the Qualitative Comparative Analysis method and participatory visual methods combining photo-voice and art, along with elicitation and auto-driving.The process of qualitative data collection combined archival review and interviews. Two main categories of participants, who have been involved, or with expertise, in various transitional justice and reconciliation processes, participated in this study: (1) individuals at the TOP and ELITE levels including government officials, representatives of political parties, military leaders, representatives of international organizations, lawyers, academics, and (2) individuals at the GRASSROOTS level including religious leaders, civil society (NGOs, associations/cooperatives) and community leaders, and representatives of local constituencies (e.g. women, youth, educators, private sector, survivors, perpetrators…).
