Transitional justice scholarship and praxis has been a site of ever increasing activity in the past two decades. Accordingly, much attention has been paid to the transitional justice ‘success stories’ – those societies that have successfully, at least, attempted to engage in a macro level process of dealing with past human rights violations. Comparatively less is known about those jurisdictions which, in the aftermath of violent conflict, have eschewed a formal process of addressing historical injustices and the potential impact upon democratization. Northern Ireland is one such instance where despite a ‘piecemeal’ approach to dealing with the past and a considerable energy around the question of whether a truth recovery process should be established, it appears that the foreseeable future will be marked by the absence of a formal mechanism of historical investigation. Drawing on this case study and informed by the author’s empirical research, this paper will trace the development of the truth recovery debate in Northern Ireland and analyse why some of the strongest opposition to a truth mechanism has been from unionist and loyalist political parties and representatives of the security forces. Particular reference will be paid to the specific cultural and historical backdrop and the role of identity and memory formation against which their oppositional discourses have been constructed. This paper will then assess whether and how the failure to deal with the past will impact on the development of democratisation in Northern Ireland. Areas of significance include the development and consolidation of political maturity and generosity; the promotion of stable social relations; the capacity to respond to and impact upon victims’ needs; and the ability to foster confidence in key civil society agencies, including the police service. The paper will suggest that the absence of a process of dealing with the past has the potential to adversely affect democratisation in Northern Ireland.
