LOCALIZING TRANSITIONAL JUSTICE IN POST ARAB SPRING COUNTRIES A study on the effect of using local language and implementing bodies on the public acceptance of transitional justice in the Middle East

Abstract

The failure of transitional justice (TJ) processes in most post-Arab Spring countries has called TJ theory into question. Most literature addressing this failure is based, primarily, on arguments of anti-Westernism and the “external” nature of TJ measures. Two main TJ characteristics are viewed as problematic regarding post-Arab Spring states: its liberal paradigm and its top-down, state-centric focus. Transformative justice (TfJ) which is a bottom-up socio-cultural theory was developed to overcome these dilemmas. This thesis uses TfJ theory in developing research questions and hypotheses. Unlike most of the literature, which is based on qualitative methods, this thesis uses a quantitative experimental opinion poll survey, distributed in Libya, Yemen and Jordan, in order to examine whether using local religious language and implementing bodies gathers more local legitimacy for TJ’s pillars. The thesis found that, despite high mistrust in the UN, people nevertheless believe that it is more capable of enforcing TJ decisions than rijal-al-islah, indicating that the UN should still be viewed as an important player in the Arab TJ process. This thesis found limited support that the use of local religious language leads to more acceptance of TJ outcomes than the use of international language, but that this depends on the case. This thesis suggests an important recommendation to the UN and TJ scholars: it is worthwhile to conduct further research on the possibilities of cooperation between the UN and local religious actors to achieve better TJ results in Arab countries.