Conclusion

Abstract

The rebel administration of justice can be a social good provided by non-state armed groups in situations of armed conflict. International humanitarian law and international human rights law provide parameters that can guide this practice, calling for more detailed studies of rebel justice that will allow precise legal analyses. State and non-state law interact in complex patterns in zones of conflict, opening new avenues for an understanding of legal normativity inspired by legal pluralism. Finally, decisions of rebel courts do not lose all significance once war is over. Transitional justice must recognise that the rebel administration of justice is a practice that has factual and legal consequences that keep producing effects long after hostilities have ceased.