Pregledni rad
https://doi.org/10.2478/cirr-2019-0003
Reconciling after Transitional Justice: When Prosecutions are not Enough, the Case of Bosnia and Herzegovina
Jared O’Neil Bell
orcid.org/0000-0002-4730-5667
; Independent Scholar
Sažetak
The concept and study of transitional justice has grown exponentially over the last decades. Since the Nuremberg and Tokyo trials after the end of the Second World War, there have been a number of attempts made across the globe to achieve justice for human rights violations (International Peace Institute 2013: 10). How these attempts at achieving justice impact whether or not societies reconcile, continues to be one of the key discussions taking place in a transitional justice discourse. One particular context where this debate continues to rage on is in Bosnia and Herzegovina, many scholars argue that the transitional justice process and mechanism employed in Bosnia and Herzegovina have not fostered inter-group reconciliation, but in fact caused more divisions. To this end, this article explores the context of transitional justice in Bosnia and Herzegovina from a unique perspective that focuses on the need for reconciliation and healing after transitional justice processes like war crime prosecutions. This article explores why the prosecuting of war criminals has not fostered reconciliation in Bosnia and Herzegovina and how the processes have divided the Bosnian society further. Additionally, this article presents the idea of state-sponsored dialog sessions as a way of dealing with the past and moving beyond the divisions of retributive justice.
Ključne riječi
justice; reconciliation; transitional justice; Bosnia and Herzegovina; trials; retributive justice; International Criminal Court for the Former Yugoslavia.
Hrčak ID:
218980
URI
Datum izdavanja:
15.4.2019.
Posjeta: 1.381 *