Data on Criminal Accountability in Post-Civil War Societies: Implications for Sri Lanka

Abstract

For or decades, the so-called ‘peace versus justice’ debate has been central to post-conflict policy discussions. Both positions rest on reasonable logic and have anecdotal support. In fact, the main differences between the two camps are theoretical rather than epistemic. In this chapter, we explain our theory of peace and justice that is grounded in the implicit difference between these perspectives. Stated simply, we theorise that far-reaching retributive justice policies are peace promoting if practiced over time. At the same time, peace deals that emphasise immediate political compromise over justice are effective in extraordinary situations, but not if they become a habit. We hypothesise about the implications of differences in time horizon on the prospects for peace, in the presence and absence of trials and amnesties. Using Sri Lanka as an illustration, we conclude that concerns about the destabilising potential of prosecuting state agents for civil war-era human rights abuses is likely overblown.

Keywords: trials, post-conflict, Sri Lanka