| Summary: | Thesis (MA (Political Science))--University of Stellenbosch, 2010. === ENGLISH ABSTRACT: Based on the work of leading theorists within peace and conflict studies, this thesis develops a
theoretical framework in order to analyse the seemingly deadlocked ‘peace vs. justice’ debate
to explore the possibility of expanding the perspectives in a combined approach. It finds that
the debate is based on a narrow perception of both concepts, where they are perceived as
negotiations and punishment respectively. Only through applying such a combined approach
is it thereby possible to move beyond this current situation. This theoretical framework is then
applied on the case of the ongoing conflict in Northern Uganda, where the empirical aspects
of this debate have lasted for the longest period of time since the International Criminal
Court’s involvement in 2004. With basis in the Juba peace agreement from 2008 that would
have balanced retributive and restorative forms of justice, this study finds that the only way to
create sustainable peace is by striking a balance between the transitional justice mechanisms
of the ICC, conditional amnesties and more traditional forms of justice in the affected
communities in Northern Uganda. === AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Op grond van die werk van voorste teoretici op die gebied van vrede- en konflikstudie,
ontwikkel hierdie tesis teoretiese raamwerk vir die ontleding van die oënskynlik vasgevalle
debat tussen vrede en geregtigheid, ten einde die moontlike verbreding van perspektiewe met
behulp van 'n gekombineerde benadering te ondersoek. Die studie bevind dat die debat tussen
vrede en geregtigheid op 'n baie eng opvatting van dié twee konsepte berus, naamlik dié van
onderhandeling en straf onderskeidelik. Slegs deur 'n gekombineerde benadering toe te pas, is
dit dus moontlik om die huidige toedrag van sake te bowe te kom. Die teoretiese raamwerk
van die studie is vervolgens op die voortslepende konflik in Noord-Uganda toegepas, waar die
empiriese aspekte van dié debat steeds sedert die betrokkenheid van die Internasionale
Strafhof in 2004 voorkom. Met die Juba-vredesooreenkoms van 2008 as uitgangspunt, wat
veronderstel was om 'n balans te vind tussen vergeldende en herstellende vorme van
geregtigheid, bevind dié studie dat volhoubare vrede slegs bereik kan word deur 'n
gebalanseerde kombinasie van die Internasionale Strafhof se
oorgangsgeregtigheidsmeganisme, voorwaardelike amnestie, en meer tradisionele vorme van
geregtigheid in die geaffekteerde Noord-Ugandese gemeenskappe.
|
|---|
