Skip to main content

LUP Student Papers

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Sanning eller konsekvens? Amnesty Internationals hantering av balansgången mellan fredsbyggande och rättviseskipande vad gäller juridiska och icke-juridiska former av rättvisa

Gustafsson, Jakob LU (2014) FKVK02 20141
Department of Political Science
Abstract
This essay aims to investigate how Amnesty International handles the so called peace versus justice dilemma in post-conflict societies. This is done by studying a number of Amnesty publications published between 1996 and 2000, concerning various aspects of justice within the peacebuilding-process in Sierra Leone. More concretely, what is studied is whether Amnesty tends to prefer judicial (trials) or non-judicial (truth commissions) forms of justice, and what arguments are used. William Zartman's and Rama Mani's thoughts regarding peace and justice serve as the essay's main theoretical framework. The essay finds that in general, Amnesty International seems to prefer judicial forms of justice, mainly because of its deterrent effect.... (More)
This essay aims to investigate how Amnesty International handles the so called peace versus justice dilemma in post-conflict societies. This is done by studying a number of Amnesty publications published between 1996 and 2000, concerning various aspects of justice within the peacebuilding-process in Sierra Leone. More concretely, what is studied is whether Amnesty tends to prefer judicial (trials) or non-judicial (truth commissions) forms of justice, and what arguments are used. William Zartman's and Rama Mani's thoughts regarding peace and justice serve as the essay's main theoretical framework. The essay finds that in general, Amnesty International seems to prefer judicial forms of justice, mainly because of its deterrent effect. However, there are indications that Amnesty International also considers judicial justice as the best way to establish truth about abuse, violence, victim and offender. When having established these truths, Amnesty may be open to more pragmatic forms of justice. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Gustafsson, Jakob LU
supervisor
organization
course
FKVK02 20141
year
type
M2 - Bachelor Degree
subject
keywords
peacebuilding, transitional justice, dilemma, Amnesty International, trial, truth commission, peace versus justice
language
Swedish
id
4588424
date added to LUP
2014-09-17 13:26:40
date last changed
2014-09-17 13:26:40
@misc{4588424,
  abstract     = {{This essay aims to investigate how Amnesty International handles the so called peace versus justice dilemma in post-conflict societies. This is done by studying a number of Amnesty publications published between 1996 and 2000, concerning various aspects of justice within the peacebuilding-process in Sierra Leone. More concretely, what is studied is whether Amnesty tends to prefer judicial (trials) or non-judicial (truth commissions) forms of justice, and what arguments are used. William Zartman's and Rama Mani's thoughts regarding peace and justice serve as the essay's main theoretical framework. The essay finds that in general, Amnesty International seems to prefer judicial forms of justice, mainly because of its deterrent effect. However, there are indications that Amnesty International also considers judicial justice as the best way to establish truth about abuse, violence, victim and offender. When having established these truths, Amnesty may be open to more pragmatic forms of justice.}},
  author       = {{Gustafsson, Jakob}},
  language     = {{swe}},
  note         = {{Student Paper}},
  title        = {{Sanning eller konsekvens? Amnesty Internationals hantering av balansgången mellan fredsbyggande och rättviseskipande vad gäller juridiska och icke-juridiska former av rättvisa}},
  year         = {{2014}},
}