THE IMPACT OF TRANSITIONAL JUSTICE ON THE RULE OF LAW IN POST-CONFLICT AND POST-REPRESSIVE SOCIETIES

Abstract

The violation of human rights, the rise of dictators, and the escalation of war conflicts often come in the period when the rule of law will fade out. And, when the conflict will end or the repressive regime will be defeated, the following questions arise: how to rebuild the society and how to prevent the repetition of the injustices from the past. One of the answers to that question is by reestablishing the rule of law. However, the establishment of the rule of law in societies hit by a war conflict or repressive regime is not an easy task at all. There are a number of dilemmas and challenges in that process. What to do with the problematic past is one of the most important and at the same time one of the most bitter questions that are being posed after the war conflict finishes or after the fall of the repressive regime. In this context, the following question is posed: will dealing with the problematic past positively contribute to restoring the rule of law, or will the opening of the past push society into new conflicts and problems? The theoreticians’ views are divided, but most theoreticians believe that dealing with the problematic past is one of the key moments in the process of democratic consolidation and restoring the rule of law. On the other hand, certain theoreticians emphasize that transitional justice is not in line with the rule of law because it relies on retroactive justice. Additionally, these theorists are stressing out that the application of transitional justice could lead to instability in society which will bring into question not only the rule of law but also peace in society. Still, the dominant position, in theory, is that peace without justice is doomed and that only the implementation of a comprehensive transitional justice strategy could lead to the rule of law, but also to peace and democracy.