While armed conflict is ultimately about violent interaction between combatant groups, a variety of policies are pursued in conjunction with violence that contribute to the course of conflict and its outcomes. One underdeveloped area of research is the use of judicial and quasi-judicial processes during armed conflict. These processes, including trials, truth commissions, reparations, amnesties, purges, or exiles, are directly related to the actions and abuses of the conflict itself—a phenomenon we refer to as during-conflict justice (DCJ). To enable researchers to answer questions about when and why governments and rebels resort to these strategies, and to what effect, we created a global, cross-national dataset which includes 2,205 justice processes implemented during 204 internal armed conflicts between 1946 and 2011. Using these data, this article investigates the conditions under which governments and rebels employ DCJ as well as the potential effects of DCJ usage on conflict dynamics and outcomes.
AppelBenjaminLoyleCyanne E.. 2012. “The Economic Benefits of Justice: Post-conflict Justice and Foreign Direct Investment.” Journal of Peace Research49 (5): 685–99.
2.
BBC Summary of World Broadcasts. 1992a. “Horn of Africa in Brief; Commission of Inquiry Begins Investigation into Killings in Eastern Ethiopia.” 8 May.
3.
BBC Summary of World Broadcasts. 1992b. “Angola Dissident Generals Accuse UNITA of Political Killings; Allegation Denied.” 26 March.
4.
BinningsbøHelga MalminLoyleCyanne E.GatesScottElsterJon. 2012. “Armed Conflict and Post-conflict Justice, 1946–2006: A Dataset.” Journal of Peace Research49 (5): 731–40.
5.
ChenowethEricaStephanMaria J.. 2011. Why Civil Resistance Works: The Strategic Logic of Nonviolent Conflict. New York: Columbia University Press.
6.
CohenDara Kay. 2013. “Explaining Rape during Civil War: Cross-national Evidence (1980–2009).” American Political Science Review107 (03): 461–77.
7.
CohenDara KayNordåsRagnhild. 2014. “Sexual Violence in Armed Conflict: Introducing the SVAC Dataset, 1989–2009.” Journal of Peace Research51 (3): 418–28.
8.
ConradCourtenay RyalsMooreWill H.. 2010. “What Stops the Torture?” American Journal of Political Science54 (2): 459–76.
9.
CrowleyTimothy Wickham. 1991. Guerrillas and Revolutions in Latin America: A Comparative Study of Insurgents and Regimes since 1956. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
10.
CunninghamDavid E.GleditschKristian SkredeSalehyanIdean. 2009. “It Takes Two: A Dyadic Analysis of Civil War Duration and Outcome.” Journal of Conflict Resolution53 (4): 570–97.
11.
DavenportChristian. 2010. Media Bias, Perspective, and State Repression: The Black Panther Party. New York: Cambridge University Press.
12.
DaviesGraeme A. M.2014. “Policy Selection in the Face of Political Instability: Do States Divert, Repress, or Make Concessions?” Journal of Conflict Resolution60:118–42.
13.
De GrieffPablo, ed. 2006. The Handbook of Reparations. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
14.
EckKristineHultmanLisa. 2007. “One-sided Violence against Civilians in War: Insights from New Fatality Data.” Journal of Peace Research44 (2): 233–46.
15.
ElsterJon. 2004. Closing the Books: Transitional Justice in Historical Perspective. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
16.
FearonJames D.2004. “Why Do Some Civil Wars Last So Much Longer Than Others*.” Journal of Peace Research41 (3): 275–301.
17.
FortnaVirginia Page. 2008. Does Peacekeeping Work? Shaping Belligerents’ Choices after Civil War. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
18.
GatesScott. 2002. “Recruitment and Allegiance: The Micro-foundations of Rebellion.” Journal of Conflict Resolution26:111–30.
19.
GentStephen E.2011. “Relative Rebel Strength and Power Sharing in Intrastate Conflicts.” International Interactions37 (2): 215–28.
20.
GleditschNils PetterWallensteenPeterErikssonMikaelSollenbergMargaretaStrandHåvard. 2002. “Armed Conflict 1946–2001: A New Dataset.” Journal of Peace Research39 (5): 615–37.
21.
HaynerPriscilla. 2011. Unspeakable Truths: Facing the Challenge of Truth Commissions. New York: Routledge.
22.
HultmanLisa. 2012. “Attacks on Civilians in Civil War: Targeting the Achilles Heel of Democratic Governments.” International Interactions38 (2): 164–81.
23.
HumphreysMacartanWeinsteinJeremy. 2006. “Handling and Manhandling Civilians in Civil War.” American Political Science Review100 (3): 429–47.
24.
Indo-Asian News Service. 2008. “Maoists in Jharkhand Introduce Compensation for Killed Cadre.” 8 January.
25.
Inter Press Service. 1991. “Rwanda: Thousands of Prisoners Released, Says Amnesty.” 26 April 26.
26.
JoHyeranThomsonCatarina P.. 2014. “Legitimacy and Compliance with International Law: Access to Detainees in Civil Conflicts, 1991–2006.” British Journal of Political Science44 (2): 323–55.
27.
KalyvasStathisBalcellsLaia. 2010. “International System and Technologies of Rebellion: How the End of the Cold War Shaped Internal Conflict.” American Political Science Review104 (3): 415–29.
28.
KreutzJoakim. 2010. “How and When Armed Conflicts End: Introducing the UCDP Conflict Termination Dataset.” Journal of Peace Research47 (2): 243–50.
29.
LacinaBethanyGleditschNils Petter. 2005. “Monitoring Trends in Global Combat: A New Dataset of Battle Deaths.” European Journal of Population21 (2–3): 145–66.
30.
LaFreeGaryDuganLauraKorteRaven. 2009. “The Impact of British Counterterrorist Strategies on Political Violence in Northern Ireland: Comparing Deterrence and Backlash Models.” Criminology47 (10): 17–45.
31.
LeebawBronwyn Anne. 2008. “The Irreconcilable Goals of Transitional Justice.” Human Rights Quarterly30 (1): 95–118.
32.
LieTove GreteBinningsbøHelga MalminGatesScott. 2007. “Post-conflict Justice and Sustainable Peace.” Paper Presented at DC Area Workshop on Contentious Politics, College Park, MD.
33.
LoyleCyanne E.AppelBenjamin. 2014. “Post-conflict Justice and Conflict Recurrence: Addressing Motivations and Opportunities for Sustainable Peace.” Presented at the International Studies Association Annual Conference, March 26–29, Toronto, Canada.
34.
LyallJason. 2009. “Does Indiscriminate Violence Incite Insurgent Attacks? Evidence from Chechnya.” Journal of Conflict Resolution53 (3): 331–62.
35.
MarshallMonty G.JaggersKeith. 2002. Polity IV Project: Political Regime Characteristics and Transitions, 1800–2002. Dataset Users’ Manual. College Park: Center for International Development and Conflict Management, University of Maryland.
36.
MendeloffDavid A.2004. “Truth-seeking, Truth-telling and Post-conflict Peacebuilding: Curb the Enthusiasm?” International Studies Review6 (3): 355–80.
37.
OcowunChris. “War Victims to get cash for livestock.” 25 February 2010. New Times.
38.
OlsenTriciaPayneLeigh A.ReiterAndrew G.. 2010. Transitional Justice in Balance: Comparing Processes, Weighing Efficacy. Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace Press.
39.
QuinnJoanna R.2004. “Constraints: The Un-doing of the Ugandan Truth Commission.” Human Rights Quarterly26 (2): 401–27.
40.
ReiterDanStamAllan C.. 2002. Democracies at War. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
41.
SikkinkKathryn. 2011. The Justice Cascade: How Human Rights Prosecutions Are Changing World Politics. New York: W. W. Norton & Co.
42.
SimmonsBeth. 2009. Mobilizing for Human Rights: International Law in Domestic Politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.
43.
SivakumaranS.2009. “Courts of Armed Opposition Groups: Fair Trials or Summary Justice?” Journal of International Criminal Justice7 (3): 489–513.
44.
SlantchevBranislav. 2003. “The Principle of Convergence in Wartime Negotiations.” American Political Science Review97 (4): 621–32.
The New York Times. 1990. “Liberian Army’s ‘Reign of Terror’ Protested by U.S. and Other Embassies.” 13 July.
47.
ValentinoBenjamin A.HuthPaulBalch-LindsayDylan. 2004. “Draining the Sea: Mass Killing and Guerrilla Warfare.” International Organization58 (2): 375–407.
48.
WalterBarbara F.2006. “Building Reputation: Why Governments Fight Some Separatists but Not Others.” American Journal of Political Science50 (2): 313–30.
49.
WoodReed M.2010. “Rebel Capability and Strategic Violence against Civilians.” Journal of Peace Research47 (5): 601–14.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
