This collaborative project examines the consequences of the choices countries make about how to deal with past violations of human rights during the course of transitions from periods of violent conflict. A principal contribution is to assess the efficacy of these decisions from the distinctive vantage point of the victims of these abuses, whose perspective is underrepresented in related academic and policy discussions and rarely the subject of primary empirical research. As a result, the latent question of whether or not victims accept the transitional justice measures that are implemented for purposes of conflict resolution and democratization remains largely unresolved, though the collaborators have conducted relevant research in South Africa and other countries. This project extends that work by exploring the reciprocal dynamics among (1) transitional justice processes, with a focus on recent truth commissions, designed around the South African model, that emphasize participation by victims; (2) victims' attitudes and behaviors; and (3) trajectories of political and social development. Primary data will be collected in four post-conflict societies in West Africa --Ghana, Liberia, Nigeria and Sierra Leone--sing both qualitative (focus groups, interviews) and quantitative (surveys) methods. These cases afford a useful cross-section of historical legacies and transitional justice measures that are closely linked in practice. The resulting analysis will constitute the first multi-country study in this field to be based mainly on primary data collected from victims. In addition, an unprecedented longitudinal study is planned for Liberia. The comparative research design also permits novel insights concerning the interactions among domestic, regional and international forms of post-conflict accountability and democracy promotion. Broader Impacts
The major outputs of the project will include extensive survey data, an executive summary and educational pamphlet of project results, and multiple article and book manuscripts. These items will be disseminated locally and abroad via posting on websites, presentations at professional conferences, distribution of hard copies and publications. Among the target audiences are the victim communities and the general public in the study countries, as well as scholars, students, policy-makers and NGOs across Africa and throughout the international community. Furthermore, the project builds upon existing research and civil society networks, invests resources in employment and capacity building, and benefits curriculum development and training programs related to human rights, transitional justice, comparative democratization and African politics.
This project focuses on the nature and repercussions of exposures among victims of violent conflict, their preferences and priorities in addressing these circumstances, the extent of their participation in measures of transitional justice, and consequent effects on them as political actors. A key objective is improve on existing literature and especially most empirical studies to date, which lacked (1) concrete evidence and direct tests of claims about patterns, relationships and mechanisms, (2) appropriate attention to victims, (3) sufficient depth of inquiry, (4) comparative scope, and/or (5) examination of changes over time. Another purpose is to afford better guidance to real-world policy debates and decisions and associated practice. With these considerations in mind, fieldwork was conducted in a diverse set of four post-conflict countries: Ghana, Liberia (two waves), Nigeria, and Sierra Leone. Extensive original primary data collection was undertaken, through focus groups, surveys and in-depth interviews, with over 3,200 victims—the largest such comparative study to date. Questionnaires were conceived to yield an intricate picture of respondents' characteristics, experiences, attitudes and actions, with these dimensions approached in an integrated, dynamic manner. The resulting data enable an elaborate tracing of a full arc that spans periods before, during and after conflict. Among the notable findings: (1) Victims of conflict are not homogenous. Certain tendencies are evident, but considerable diversity is observed within and across countries and along many dimensions. Therefore, definitive statements that reduce victims to simple archetypes are misguided. (2) Experiences in relation to violent conflict are multifaceted -- and far from being limited to physical violations. Differences across conflict contexts in the profiles of experiences are conspicuous. (3) Victims of conflict are not monolithic in what they feel and think. Exposure to the same circumstance can prompt a range of responses. Attitudes about the same issue can vary. Thus, a singular perspective should not be attributed to victims. Rather, the range of their perspectives ought to be acknowledged and viewed as warranting deeper examination, subtle description, and contemplation of the implications. (4) Respondents showed a good deal of sophistication, often demonstrating robust awareness, introspection and acuity about issues. (5) Despite the difficult topic, victims often have a strong desire to talk and open up about what they have suffered and broader aspects of themselves. (6) Majorities of respondents in all four study countries expressed approval of amnesty for perpetrators of violations. The distribution of orientations could be viewed as surprising, given a conventional wisdom that victims of violations favor punitive forms of justice. Yet we find that one driving factor is instrumental considerations: a desire for peace. At the same time, amnesty is not generally seen as fair. Also, approval of amnesty and a desire for accountability are not mutually exclusive. Respondents' perceptions of the fairness of amnesty would be bolstered by attaching one or more conditions. This study is the first one to investigate the issue of amnesty on a comparative basis. It stands out in probing the layers of victims’ attitudes, to afford more nuanced impressions of what they think about amnesty and accountability -- and why. The results are instructive concerning difficult choices that are confronted in conflict-affected settings, about whether to pursue legal measures against perpetrators of violations. (7) Around one in seven of the respondents to the second wave of the survey in Liberia report having engaged in political violence and vigilantism during the previous year. Such behavior has rarely been examined through primary data collection, especially among victims. The findings spotlight a critical aspect of the normalization of violence in conflict-affected settings, which contribute to a high frequency of recurrence. This phenomenon has been observed at an event level, but not probed at an individual level. Knowing that the prevalence of violent actions are elevated among victim populations, relative to general populations, and having a better sense of what drives this behavior is constructive in anticipating risks and designing measures to mitigate a serious concern in conflict-affected settings. These and other novel results advance understanding of important subject matter and a vital constituency with contemporary relevance. Because of the design and scope of the study, the findings are pertinent across an assortment of disciplines and domains of activity. The research has been presented on several dozen occasions in 10 US states plus the District of Columbia as well as 11 foreign countries, including at nine academic institutions, annual conferences of six professional associations, and three US government agencies. In addition to extensive survey data, the project has yielded a substantial collection of written products, including publications and other work in progress. Over 150 people in the study countries and the US (including undergraduate and graduate students) contributed to the implementation of the project. Many received formal training about research methodology and hands-on experience, which has led to subsequent academic and employment opportunities.
