Justice and peace in a new Zimbabwe: Transitional justice options
How will negotiations on ‘transitional justice’ persuade the powerful that it is safe to cooperate?
A major issue in any possible transition in Zimbabwe is how to deal with those responsible for and affected by past and recent political violence and human rights abuses. ‘Justice issues’ are not simply matters to be dealt with at some later stage. They are themselves ‘political issues’ affecting the current stalemate. A form of national truth, justice and reconciliation commission may be one option. There is no one conflict resolution ‘first aid kit’: truth commission strategies are not unproblematic. Moreover, what is possible is heavily dependent on the balance of political power at the time of any transition. However, various general and Zimbabwe-specific factors commend such a body and accompanying strategy. The compromise it would represent can assist now in ensuring a legitimate transition is possible (by giving reassurances and incentives to cooperate in peacebuilding); it can also assist in future in the actual process of establishing facts and dealing with perpetrators and victims of past violence.
Authors
Max du Plessis is an Associate Professor at Howard College School of Law, University of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa, an Associate Member of the KwaZulu-Natal Bar, and Research Associate at the Institute for Security Studies and at Matrix Chambers London.
Jolyon Ford is with the Centre for International Governance and Justice, the Australian National University (ANU), Canberra, and a Lecturer, ANU College of Law.
