Support for Transitional Justice Mechanisms in Guatemala, Nepal, and Northern Ireland. A Comparative Study

A recent development within the study of transitional justice (TJ) has been to move from formal institutions and their effectiveness, to an emerging victim-centred approach to TJ mechanisms. Some of these studies question the common assumption that victims want to know the truth, while others warn against treating victims as a homogeneous group. The population in former conflict zones consist of groups who played different roles during the conflict. Sometimes it is hard to define who should be included in categories such as 'victims' and 'perpetrators', and some people may be both. In this study, we analyse popular support for various TJ mechanisms, using original survey data from Guatemala, Nepal, and Northern Ireland. The data contains extensive information about both participation and victimization, making it possible to compare the preferences of victims, perpetrators, and people who were not personally involved in or affected by the armed conflict. Few studies, if any, include victims, perpetrators, and 'others'. Hence, we do not know whether these opinions are conflicting or mutually supportive, or if other issues, like personal security and well-being, or political preferences are more important than previous conflict experiences.