There was an intriguing article in the Washington Post yesterday (26 Mar 08). It talked about Sierra Leoneans' reaction to the Special Court established there in 2002 after the end of that country’s horrible civil war. Set up in conjunction with the United Nations, this court was to prosecute those who “bore the greatest responsibility” for the violence. It was said to be a compromise that would hold the very top responsible but not focus on actual perpetrators, who number in the thousands and often involved child soldiers and forced recruits.

The problem is, some locals feel just the opposite. They think the $150 million spent so far to prosecute 13 top-level war criminals could have been better spent in a country ranked near the bottom in terms of development. Funds for daily needs, employment, training, and medical care are desperately needed. Additionally, many of the perpetrators of actual violence, those who cut off limbs and killed people, are not being punished or prosecuted. This is partly due to a barely functioning judicial system, one of the reasons given for creating the Special Court in the first place.

This story continues to build momentum and draw attention to international justice in recent times. In the past few years, we’ve seen the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) spend years trying Slobodan Milosevic, only to have him die before a verdict could be reached. It also has been trying, in vain, to capture two wanted criminals: Ratko Mladic and Radovan Karadzic. The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) has made strides in holding a few people accountable but hasn’t addressed the systemic violence and aftermath of that country’s genocide in 1994. The International Criminal Court (ICC), the world’s first permanent international criminal tribunal, is having problems trying to execute arrest warrants for Joseph Kony and his colleagues who lead the Lord’s Resistance Army in Uganda. Charged with crimes against humanity and war crimes, these individuals have the tacit protection of the Ugandan government. This isn’t necessarily a backdoor attempt to prevent justice. Ugandan President Museveni says he’d like the arrest warrants withdrawn so that Kony and his army will sit down at peace talks and then be held accountable by traditional justice. Under the threat of ICC extradition, Kony and his compatriots have hidden themselves away and peace talks are on hold.

A dilemma is can one have peace without justice? And, what exactly do we mean by peace and by justice? I’ve worked on these issues for years, via studies in international affairs and anthropology. I’ve also worked on these issues as an advocate in Washington. I’m still not sure where I land. My thesis on Rwanda and Guatemala looked at truth commissions and international tribunals and found both wanting. International justice is often used to assauge the guilt of major powers who stood by, or assisted, gross violence. It’s also used as a method to legitimize and solidify power by the local government. People want justice, but they also want to be able to have peace and continue their lives. A one-size-fits-all solution isn’t going to work, but that means we need to take time (and, of course, money) in order to address the peculiarities of each situation.