{"title":"The Price of Transitional Justice: A Cost‐Benefit Analysis of its Mechanisms in Post‐Revolution Phase","authors":"E. Rashwan","doi":"10.6092/ISSN.2531-6133/13622","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Transitional Justice [hereinafter T.J.] in the post-revolution phase refers to the policies that aim to deal with the autocratic past-regime violations against its people to achieve accountability and democracy and promote human rights and the rule of law. To achieve these goals, the United Nations, within its Rule of Law Initiative, issued in 2010, a set of five mechanisms that work as guidelines for nations recovering from conflicts. I argue that whatever the mechanism or combination selected by a society transforming from an autocracy into democracy is, the nature of these mechanisms requires a trade-off between multiple considerations. To explain this inevitable trade-off, I go through each mechanism in detail, analyze it from both legal and economic perspectives, and then provide a basic cost-benefit analysis. I suggest that transitional justice as a constitutional arrangement requires a holistic approach in its adoption and application because this initial cost-benefit analysis cannot be standardized for all cases. I also suggest that transitional justice policies that take into account proportionality, a combination of different mechanisms, customization of the mechanisms upon the relevant case, and adopting these policies in the formality of basic or organic laws may be expected to have the most effective outcomes achieving the goals of T.J. with the least legal complications.","PeriodicalId":36563,"journal":{"name":"University of Bologna Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"University of Bologna Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.6092/ISSN.2531-6133/13622","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
Transitional Justice [hereinafter T.J.] in the post-revolution phase refers to the policies that aim to deal with the autocratic past-regime violations against its people to achieve accountability and democracy and promote human rights and the rule of law. To achieve these goals, the United Nations, within its Rule of Law Initiative, issued in 2010, a set of five mechanisms that work as guidelines for nations recovering from conflicts. I argue that whatever the mechanism or combination selected by a society transforming from an autocracy into democracy is, the nature of these mechanisms requires a trade-off between multiple considerations. To explain this inevitable trade-off, I go through each mechanism in detail, analyze it from both legal and economic perspectives, and then provide a basic cost-benefit analysis. I suggest that transitional justice as a constitutional arrangement requires a holistic approach in its adoption and application because this initial cost-benefit analysis cannot be standardized for all cases. I also suggest that transitional justice policies that take into account proportionality, a combination of different mechanisms, customization of the mechanisms upon the relevant case, and adopting these policies in the formality of basic or organic laws may be expected to have the most effective outcomes achieving the goals of T.J. with the least legal complications.
革命后阶段的过渡司法(Transitional Justice,以下简称T.J.)是指旨在处理过去独裁政权对其人民的侵犯行为,以实现问责制和民主,促进人权和法治的政策。为了实现这些目标,联合国在2010年发布的《法治倡议》(Rule of Law Initiative)中提出了一套五项机制,作为冲突后恢复国家的指导方针。我认为,无论一个社会从专制向民主转变所选择的机制或组合是什么,这些机制的本质都需要在多种考虑之间进行权衡。为了解释这种不可避免的权衡,我详细介绍了每种机制,从法律和经济角度对其进行了分析,然后进行了基本的成本效益分析。我建议,过渡时期司法作为一项宪法安排,在其采用和应用方面需要采取全面的办法,因为这种最初的成本效益分析不可能对所有情况进行标准化。我还建议,考虑到比例性、不同机制的组合、根据相关案件定制机制以及在基本或组织法的形式中采用这些政策的过渡司法政策,可能会以最少的法律复杂性产生最有效的结果,以实现司法目标。