This paper is part of a doctoral research project that looks at the various ways through which different actors make use of transitional justice (TJ) in the post-conflict state formation process in Burundi. It analyses how civil society organizations (CSOs), political parties and governmental bodies refer to the concept of TJ as a self-legitimation strategy. As (international) norms are always filtered, adapted and appropriated by local actors, the research shows how justice, rule of law and statehood are negotiated and produced. In 2009, national consultations on TJ mechanisms were conducted in Burundi by a steering committee with representatives of the government, local CSOs and the UN. The consultations resulted of negotiations between the Burundian government and the UN in order to unblock the obstructed TJ process. They were supposed to involve the population in the TJ and reconciliation process. However, many raised concerns that they were only an alibi process or another delaying tactic by the government. It remains to be seen whether the consultations constitute a simple exercise or a serious approach to the TJ process. The paper proposes a qualitative analysis of the consultations as a public arena where TJ is negotiated. Based on empirical data, it focuses on the role of civil society and how CSOs use the consultations to gain legitimacy and to strengthen their position in the state formation process. CSOs shaped the consultations by providing expert knowledge and as representatives in the steering committee, thereby presenting themselves as the ‘legitimate representatives’ of the population. As a result of the consultations, the population then ascribed civil society a key role in TJ. The paper argues that civil society has become an active player in the TJ process through the consultations nationales and it shows how the consultations affected the power relations of local actors.
