Transitional justice gains momentum but accountability gaps persist
African states are involved in transitional justice, yet political constraints, resource gaps and implementation challenges remain, says Dr John Ikubaj.
How would you assess the progress made by the African Union (AU) in implementing the 2019 transitional justice policy in its member states?
The policy was a milestone, the culmination of nearly 10 years of consultations with member states, civil society, academia and practitioners. That inclusive process was crucial because transitional justice was initially misunderstood, often reduced to criminal accountability or imprisonment of political leaders.
In reality, it encompasses accountability, reconciliation, institutional reform and victim-centred approaches. Before the policy, the AU was already involved in justice-related work, but there was no single framework that brought these elements together. Because member states were involved in the policy’s development, they see it as their own, which has eased implementation.
The AU Transitional Justice Unit has focused on technical support. We have assisted countries such as The Gambia, Ethiopia, South Sudan, Lesotho, the Central African Republic and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. In Ethiopia, for example, we deployed technical experts to shape the national transitional justice policy and its implementation roadmap. Even before the policy was formally adopted, the draft served as a guide for The Gambia’s Truth, Reconciliation and Reparations Commission.
We also developed a guide to the AU Transitional Justice Policy and a continental implementation roadmap. We established a member states platform that brings together countries at different stages of transitional justice implementation. This helped build peer learning and demand for AU support, which has grown significantly in recent years.
How is the AU working beyond national frameworks?
Many justice challenges are cross-border, but national transitional justice policies cannot fully address violations of this nature. That is why we also work with regional economic communities and regional mechanisms. For example, the Economic Community of West African States and the Lake Chad River Basin Commission requested assistance in developing a regional transitional justice framework, which is particularly important given that insurgency and human rights violations affect multiple countries.
Transitional justice was misunderstood as criminal accountability or imprisonment of leaders
The AU also supported the Intergovernmental Authority on Development in the formulation of its draft transitional justice framework, currently awaiting adoption. In addition, it provided technical support for the Southern African Development Community’s post-conflict reconstruction and development and transitional justice framework in 2025. Regional frameworks can address issues such as cross-border accountability, displacement, human rights violations and shared victim experiences through commissions of enquiry.
How is the AU integrating traditional justice mechanisms?
The policy promotes traditional and indigenous justice mechanisms, which are often more accessible and culturally relevant. These mechanisms can handle many cases and promote reconciliation at the community level. However, we emphasise that they must comply with international human rights standards, including the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights.
Certain practices cannot be accepted – for example, harmful or degrading traditional procedures. Thus, the approach is not to romanticise traditional justice, but to adapt and regulate it. To support this, we are developing continental guidelines on mechanisms to inform member states. We have also translated the policy into languages beyond the AU’s official languages to ensure accessibility.
How does the AU balance stability over accountability in fragile contexts?
We promote a balanced narrative. Some actors prioritise reconciliation, while others emphasise accountability. Both are important, but one cannot substitute for the other. Without accountability, reconciliation risks being superficial. It is like covering a wound without treating it – it will reopen.
In contexts such as South Sudan's, the tendency is to prioritise truth-telling and reconciliation, given the fragility of the political environment. While sequencing may be necessary, we consistently emphasise that accountability is essential for sustainable peace. That country’s transitional justice framework includes a truth commission, a reparations authority and a hybrid court. Progress has been made on some elements, but accountability mechanisms have been slower to advance. We continue to advocate for their implementation.
Should transitional justice wait until conflicts end?
No. Even in active conflict settings such as Sudan, violations can be documented, victims given psychosocial and mental health support and the groundwork laid for accountability.
Waiting until conflicts end risks neglecting victims and losing crucial evidence.
We also include transitional justice in peace agreements, as in Ethiopia. This ensures that processes are embedded from the outset of political transitions.
Both reconciliation and accountability are important, but one cannot substitute for the other
What are the main constraints to meaningful victim participation?
Victim participation is central to the policy, but several constraints exist, the most significant being limited funding, particularly for reparation programmes. While the policy provides for a transitional justice fund, resources have been a major challenge. Institutional capacity is another issue, as many countries lack the structures to address victims effectively.
To address this, we advocate establishing victim support centres. These exist in countries such as The Gambia and South Sudan, where they help organise victims, amplify their voices and facilitate engagement with national processes. We also emphasise the importance of managing expectations. Transitional justice processes cannot meet all victim needs immediately. If expectations are not managed, disillusionment can undermine the process.
How does the AU adapt transitional justice frameworks in cases of violent extremism?
In regions such as the Lake Chad Basin, transitional justice must be inclusive and context-specific. This includes engaging, where possible, with non-state actors and affected communities. Excluding such actors can limit the effectiveness of transitional justice processes.
We encourage member states to adhere to the policy's principles, particularly inclusivity, participation and accountability, while adapting its implementation to their circumstances. However, the AU cannot impose solutions. Member state ownership remains paramount.
What monitoring and evaluation tools or benchmarks are used to assess implementation, and where are the biggest accountability gaps?
We report to the AU Peace and Security Council and use high-level transitional justice forums. Peer learning platforms among member states are key, as is engagement with civil society. Our forums allow states to present progress, share challenges and receive feedback from other stakeholders. Civil society also plays an important role in monitoring, providing independent assessments of transitional justice processes.
The challenge is not a lack of knowledge but the translation of research into policy
Where are the key research and policy gaps?
There is significant research on transitional justice in Africa. The challenge is not a lack of knowledge but the translation of research into policy. Many policymakers do not engage with lengthy academic outputs, preferring concise, targeted policy briefs that present actionable recommendations. We encourage researchers to focus on how their work can directly inform policymaking, for example, by producing short briefs tailored to ministries of justice or peace.
How does the AU target youth and women?
We have invested heavily in the African Youth for Transitional Justice and African Women for Transitional Justice platforms, which are active in research, advocacy and policy engagement. They produce policy briefs, participate in consultations and contribute to continental implementation processes – essential for inclusive and sustainable transitional justice.
What are the main challenges?
Resource constraints, political resistance and implementation capacity. Simultaneously, demand for justice support is growing, as evidenced by the need for assistance from more member states. The task now is to scale up support while maintaining quality and ensuring that transitional justice contributes meaningfully to sustainable peace, justice and development across Africa.
