"How does aid to transitional justice work? What are the patterns, types and causes of such aid? Research on transitional justice (TJ) has boomed in the last couple of decades. In recent years the policy world has also started assisting countries coming out of periods of massive violence. Yet even if this donor engagement emerged more than a decade ago, we still know little about the dynamics of external economic assistance to national transitional justice efforts.
This study fills some of this gap. it examines the aid that was given to assist two countries that were “post-conflict”, in the sense of being in a process of transition from a past period of massive armed violence. The two cases, Rwanda and Guatemala from 1995 to 2005, are selected since they received considerable foreign aid to deal with their violent pasts. The failure of the international community to prevent and stop the 1994 genocide in Rwanda, and the relative success of the efforts to negotiate a solution to Guatemala’s long civil war in the mid-1990s, were followed by considerable donor attention to these two countries’ post-conflict needs – including their need to deal with a past of violence. Yet although much aid was given to transitional justice, little research has been conducted on how this aid has worked, let alone on its scope and patterns. In this study authors take stock of this aid. They do not assess its impact; nor do they look at how it was perceived by the recipients. Yet on the basis of data from donors, in the context of Rwanda and Guatemala from 1995 to 2005 this study:
• Maps the terrain – by giving an overview of which donors provided how much aid for what transitional justice mechanisms, when and where; and
• Explores some of that terrain – by examining how the transitional justice aid was followed up, to what extent different interventions complemented each
other, and what factors influenced donor priorities.
Based strictly on the recommendations and concluding arguments in the study, 3 most relevant conclusions can be highlighted :
1 Sustainability requires both local ownership and commitment to the overall goals of transitional justice : The study concludes that donors should not maintain transitional justice processes “just for the sake of it.” Sustainability requires a balance between local ownership and achieving the broader goals of transitional justice: truth, restitution, accountability and reconciliation.
2 Transitional justice support needs greater complementarity between different mechanisms: The study finds that security sector reform dominated transitional justice assistance, while other mechanisms received much less support. It argues that SSR cannot replace mechanisms such as criminal courts, truth commissions and reparations, because it cannot provide truth, acknowledgment or restitution. Donors should therefore support a more balanced approach to transitional justice.
3 Donors should create space for local debate and different perspectives on dealing with the past: The study stresses that local ownership cannot mean allowing only one actor, such as the government, to set the transitional justice agenda. Donors should promote national debates and create space for the views and needs of different groups, including victims. Transitional justice should ultimately contribute to social peace and participatory democracy
" (Introduction & Conclusion)