What is the relationship between security system reform (SSR) and transitional justice? How can the European Union (EU) strengthen its approach to SSR and implementation of SSR programmes in countries with a legacy of massive human rights abuse? This paper from the International Center for Transitional Justice discusses the relationships between transitional justice and SSR. It argues that applying a justice-sensitive approach may enable the EU to strengthen its contribution to peacebuilding through SSR processes.
Both transitional justice and SSR contribute to statebuilding, democratisation and peacebuilding in countries with legacies of massive human rights abuse. A justice-sensitive approach to SSR is an important component of transitional justice, particularly where security agents have committed and continue to commit human rights violations. Justice-sensitive SSR seeks to reform abusive security institutions by addressing the past record of an institution and holding individual perpetrators to account. One component of a justice-sensitive approach to SSR is vetting, which can contribute to the integrity and legitimacy of security institutions.
A justice-sensitive approach to SSR focuses on:
- Building the integrity of a security system. Integrity refers to adherence to the rule of law in the provision of security. Crucial elements for building integrity include establishing multiple, overlapping mechanisms and processes for accountability.
- Establishing effective accountability. Justice-sensitive SSR proposes a more holistic approach to accountability than common SSR approaches, establishing accountability for past abuses, as well as present and future violations.
- Strengthening the legitimacy of the security system. Alongside building integrity, measures to promote legitimacy may include symbolic measures reaffirming a commitment to democratic values and overcoming the legacy of abuse.
- Empowering citizens. Victims of abuses and other vulnerable groups must become citizens with rights. Measures to empower citizens include public information campaigns, citizens’ surveys and training for civil society organisations.
Case studies of Afghanistan, Burundi, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Timor-Leste highlight a number of lessons for justice-sensitive approaches to SSR. Adopting the following recommendations would strengthen the EU’s approach to SSR and implementation of SSR programming in countries with a legacy of human rights abuse:
- SSR should be seen as part of a broader statebuilding approach. Emphasis should be put on ensuring coherence between SSR and other transitional justice approaches. SSR projects should consider the whole security and justice system.
- Addressing crimes by security agents, including sexual violence, must be a priority. The EU should encourage prosecution of at least the most serious abusers, preferably in domestic courts.
- The EU should support a justice-sensitive approach. This will include vetting processes for human rights abusers, internal disciplinary mechanisms and effective civilian oversight. Citizens must be empowered to hold public institutions to account.
- Programme design must be context-specific and informed by best practice and lessons learnt. It should be based on recognition that post-conflict SSR is both political and technical, and demands a rapid response and flexible long-term strategy.
- The national government should drive the SSR process and coordinate programmes, but the EU must insist on principles such as accountability. The EU should try to improve coordination between international actors and member states.
- The quality of programming could be improved by rigorous selection of international staff and ensuring gender-sensitivity and equitable representation of ethnic groups. All programmes should be evaluated with the participation of civil society actors.
