Routledge Contemporary South Asia Series, 68. London; New York: Routledge, 2013. xx, 225 pp. US$145.00, cloth. ISBN 978-0-415-62997-3.
Transitional Justice in South Asia examines the achievements and shortcomings of truth-finding, human rights accountability and reparations in the context of peace and state-building efforts in today’s Afghanistan and Nepal. Tazreena Sajjad combines critical insights into the field of transitional justice with empirical research in two war-torn societies whose differences only serve to highlight what is similar about them: the near-total failure of justice initiatives. She takes a holistic approach to justice by blurring the distinctions between transitional (“extraordinary”) and post-transitional (“ordinary”) justice to problematize the simplistic conceptions and false dichotomies in the theory and practice of post-conflict justice.
Sajjad’s main argument is that local voices should inform contemporary justice efforts. However, the “local” should not be conceptualized as a set of unchanging and homogenous norms and practices. She is particularly critical of national politicians’ and international actors’ efforts to justify inaction in the face of injustices by referencing supposedly local norms, and creating false dichotomies. For example, she provides ample evidence for the cynical use of religious rhetoric to legitimize impunity in Afghanistan despite the fact that Islamic jurisprudence encourages the prosecution of murderers and of violators of warfare rules. Victims’ long-standing activism for retributive justice militates against the simplistic idea that courtroom justice is a Western imposition on the reconciliation-loving “locals.” Against cultural and religious essentialism, Sajjad proposes the “dynamic local,” which she identifies as “domestic politics, power struggles and realities of inclusion and exclusion even within the indigenous civil society and local NGO communities, such that systems of hierarchy emerge and become entrenched in the sociopolitical landscape” (23).
The book warns against the strict separation of backward-looking transitional justice and forward-looking forms of criminal and socioeconomic justice. The problem of justice in Afghanistan and Nepal cannot be reduced to the absence of human rights accountability for past crimes; crimes committed in the present by powerful individuals also go unpunished. Furthermore, a clean transition from conflict and institutional collapse to peace and political order is more fiction than fact—the political salience of warlords in Afghanistan is a case in point. In societies where significant populations suffer inequality and marginalization on the basis of class, status, gender and caste, historical justice and social justice should be combined, without sacrificing one for the sake of the other.
Transitional Justice in South Asia is a sober reminder of all the exclusions and shortcomings of post-conflict justice efforts. National governments are often unsupportive of truth, justice and reparation initiatives unless domestic civil society organizations and external actors (foreign governments and international organizations) put those governments’ legitimacy and funding at stake. The United Nations and foreign governments have their own political agendas, which may or may not be conducive to the dictates of human rights accountability and the rule of law. Furthermore, even the well-intentioned external actors have limited knowledge of the multiplicity of local values and interests, and fall easily into the trap of cultural essentialism. The “local” is the starting point of building a just society for Sajjad, but it should not be glorified uncritically: some of the domestic actors seek to uphold unjust social relations rather than transform them, and what is worse, these elite voices may hijack the claim to “authentic” local representation by excluding the “voices from the margins” (119). The organized human rights sector inspires optimism, but the author is quick to note that for all their achievements, human rights NGOs have their own biases, and their reliance on governments for policy change makes them vulnerable. Finally, newly established quasi-official bodies called “national human rights institutions” have been much more sensitive to the victims’ demands and willing to collaborate with human rights NGOs than conventional state bureaucracies. However, the case studies in the book show that their dependence on government support leaves them in a difficult in-between position where they should constantly struggle for autonomy and efficacy.
One area in which the research project initiated by this book should be carried further is the relationship between neoliberalism and transitional justice. Sajjad claims in various passages (pages 13, 16 and 139, to be more specific) that the contemporary transitional justice discourse exposes the neoliberal agenda, but she does not elaborate on this claim. While one can plausibly argue that some leading international organizations known for their neoliberal biases also try to incorporate post-conflict justice and reconstruction measures into the political mainstream, to the detriment of considerations of social justice, it seems unfair to me to equate transitional justice activism with neoliberalism. Human rights advocates and truth commissioners in many countries come from the political left. At least in the Latin American context, the neoliberal right has been the most virulent enemy of transitional justice measures—one should only be reminded of the reactions to Pinochet’s arrest in London, or Fujimori supporters’ campaign against Peru’s truth commission, or Menem’s presidential pardon of Argentina’s military offenders. Likewise there is no evidence to suggest that transitional justice in Afghanistan and Nepal simply reproduces the logic of neoliberalism, or if there is such evidence, it should be made clear.
Overall, Transitional Justice in South Africa leaves the reader with a crucial—and difficult—question: Is it possible to design truth and justice efforts in such a way that the “voices from the margins” overcome histories of exclusion, marginalization and elite-driven cultural discourses to initiate a dialogue on local values and demands? If the practices associated with transitional justice are to rectify past wrongs in search of a better future, rather than reproduce existing injustices, this is the question that needs to be addressed urgently.
Onur Bakiner
Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, Canada
pp. 370-372