On Monday 20 February, LSE’s Centre for Women, Peace and Security hosted a seminar by Dr Denisa Kostovicova (Department of Government) and Tom Paskhalis (Department of Methodology) on ‘Women Deliberators and Post-conflict Justice: What Kind of Voice?’
The Centre for Women, Peace and Security, London School of Economics and Political Science
20 February 2017
Women Deliberators and Transitional Justice: What Kind of Voice?
Denisa Kostovicova (Department of Government, London School of Economics and Political Science) and Tom Paskhalis (Department of Methodology, London School of Economics and Political Science)
This first exploratory paper, part of the LSE’s programme of research of the ‘Art and Reconciliation: Conflict, Culture and Community’ project, addressed the role of women in reconciliation. The recent turn in the scholarship on transitional justice that studies how states and societies engage with the legacy of mass atrocity has been to investigate the women’s perspective on post-conflict justice. This welcome development in the field is part of an effort to investigate a paradox: transitional justice measures do not necessarily deliver either justice or reconciliation, which are their key aims, and, by contrast, often entrench injustice. The gender perspective has shone the light on blind spots in this scholarship that result in highly gendered masculinized versions of post-conflict justice. This paper furthers the study of women’s voice in post-conflict justice processes, by overcoming the silence-voice dichotomy in theorising women’s contribution to peace-building. It brings together the scholarship of transitional justice and the theory of deliberative democracy. Scholars of deliberative democracy have also highlighted inequalities in women’s participation in deliberation, concerning both the conditions for deliberation and the frequency of women’s contributions. We argue that more can be gleaned about women’s contribution to transitional justice understanding the ‘kind’ of voice women have in these processes by investigating the women’s role in the RECOM, which is the unique regional civil society justice-seeking initiative in the Balkans. We combine quantitative content analysis and quantitative text analysis to answer the following questions: Can women deliberate as capably as men? Do they use more stories than men? Are their contributions more reconciliatory?
King’s College London Cultural Institute are running a series of workshops and launching a funding scheme for higher education/cultural sector collaborations in collaboration with the Faculty of Arts & Humanities at King’s College London and the National Co-ordinating Centre for Public Engagement.
Members of the Art & Reconciliation project are excited to be participating in this new scheme, which aims to support innovative approaches to co-research between King’s academics and our partners in the arts, culture and heritage sector. In distinction to collaborations that focus on extending the reach or impact of existing research, or conducting research on or on behalf of a partner, the focus here is on providing opportunities to co-develop a research agenda; co-create new research; and build and sustain a shared community of research.
A programme of workshops and themed salons will provide an introduction to the key principles and methodologies of co-research; opportunities for cross-sector networking; and a facilitated environment for collaborative ideas generation. This will be followed by a funding scheme offering up to £5,000 for up to five teams to cover a pilot project or collaborative R&D leading to a joint grant application.
The project’s official start date was 1 December 2016, and we launched with a panel discussion at the Sixth Annual Conference of the Historical Dialogues, Justice and Memory Network, NIOD Institute for War, Holocaust, and Genocide Studies, Amsterdam, December 1-3, 2016: ‘Confronting Violent Pasts and Historical (In)Justice’.
Dialogues of justice and reconciliation: the experience of the former Yugoslavia.
When the ICTY was established, in May 1993, it was with the expectation that it would contribute to the restoration and maintenance of international peace and security. Twenty-three years later, and with its work now drawing to a close, attention is focused on whether it has been successful in achieving its goals. Certainly, the ICTY can boast a record of considerable achievements in terms of the number of people prosecuted and its reach into the most senior political and military leadership; it has also made enormously significant contributions to international law through its considerable jurisprudence. But what of its contribution to processes of coming to terms in the region where the crimes under its jurisdiction were committed? In particular, to what extent is the judicial legacy translatable to a ‘historical record’? Given the contention surrounding some of its more recent judgments, the relationship between a judgment and ‘history’ is all the more acute. And what is the relationship between the ICTY and its record and the development of historical memory and discourses of justice and reconciliation in the former Yugoslavia? The panel addressed these questions by focusing on certain aspects of the historical record created in key trials, and by turning the focus around to investigate how justice and reconciliation is practiced and understood locally.
James Gow (King’s College London) presented part of his Leverhulme Major Fellowship research on ‘The Mladić Trial and the Legacy of the Yugoslavia Tribunal: Military Command and Responsibility at Srebrenica’ and Denisa Kostovicova (London School of Economics) discussed her Leverhulme-funded research on discourses of reconciliation: ‘Regional Reconciliation: Testing the RECOM initiative in the Western Balkans’. We were also joined by Iva Vukusic (Utrecht University), who presented her research on ‘Paramilitaries on trial: Examples from the former Yugoslavia’. The panel was chaired by Rachel Kerr (King’s College London).