Ongoing political instability in Egypt, in particular since June 2013, has illustrated that the paradigm of liberal transition from autocratic to democratic rule has not been able to accurately explain situations of political upheaval. Transitional justice has been unable to properly anticipate contexts where the outlook of the state remains intact following unrest, yet continues to exhibit features of transformation; for example, trials for past leaders and drafting new constitutions.
Since June 30th, much of the popular and official discourse on Egypt has focused on the “failed” nature of its “transition to democracy”, however what this paper proposes is that premature calls for transitional justice can lead to situations where its very procedures are utilised for the benefit of continued autocracy. I therefore argue that elements of transitional justice can be used to strengthen contradictory contexts of state repression on the one hand, and limited, procedural democracy on the other.
