{"title":"过渡时期司法的标准化","authors":"L. E. Gissel","doi":"10.1177/13540661221120980","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article argues that transitional justice (TJ) has recently been standardised: There is now a two-tiered global standard of TJ which structures policy responses and academic thinking. TJ comprises criminal justice, truth-telling, reparation and institutional reform – four core elements in a ‘comprehensive’ approach. The standard involves specifications for design, procedure and performance and draws on a selection of seemingly unambiguous international legal norms. Paradoxically, it claims to eschew a one-size-fits-all formula, while promoting uniformity in diverse contexts. It is moreover unclear whether its implementation generates beneficial effects in society. Building on existing research on international standardisation as an international political and sociological phenomenon, the article analyses the recently developed TJ standard and presents the first account of the process of TJ standardisation. It demonstrates how processes of ‘generification’ and ‘localisation’ make practices transferable and establish the means to facilitate their replication in and across different contexts and settings. These processes are illustrated drawing on existing scholarship from around the world that highlights the acceptance and contestation of and resistance to the standard. After analysing these processes, the article discusses the implications of TJ standardisation for societies, scholarship and global governance.","PeriodicalId":48069,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of International Relations","volume":"28 1","pages":"859 - 884"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The standardisation of transitional justice\",\"authors\":\"L. E. Gissel\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/13540661221120980\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article argues that transitional justice (TJ) has recently been standardised: There is now a two-tiered global standard of TJ which structures policy responses and academic thinking. TJ comprises criminal justice, truth-telling, reparation and institutional reform – four core elements in a ‘comprehensive’ approach. The standard involves specifications for design, procedure and performance and draws on a selection of seemingly unambiguous international legal norms. Paradoxically, it claims to eschew a one-size-fits-all formula, while promoting uniformity in diverse contexts. It is moreover unclear whether its implementation generates beneficial effects in society. Building on existing research on international standardisation as an international political and sociological phenomenon, the article analyses the recently developed TJ standard and presents the first account of the process of TJ standardisation. It demonstrates how processes of ‘generification’ and ‘localisation’ make practices transferable and establish the means to facilitate their replication in and across different contexts and settings. These processes are illustrated drawing on existing scholarship from around the world that highlights the acceptance and contestation of and resistance to the standard. After analysing these processes, the article discusses the implications of TJ standardisation for societies, scholarship and global governance.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48069,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of International Relations\",\"volume\":\"28 1\",\"pages\":\"859 - 884\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of International Relations\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/13540661221120980\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of International Relations","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13540661221120980","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
This article argues that transitional justice (TJ) has recently been standardised: There is now a two-tiered global standard of TJ which structures policy responses and academic thinking. TJ comprises criminal justice, truth-telling, reparation and institutional reform – four core elements in a ‘comprehensive’ approach. The standard involves specifications for design, procedure and performance and draws on a selection of seemingly unambiguous international legal norms. Paradoxically, it claims to eschew a one-size-fits-all formula, while promoting uniformity in diverse contexts. It is moreover unclear whether its implementation generates beneficial effects in society. Building on existing research on international standardisation as an international political and sociological phenomenon, the article analyses the recently developed TJ standard and presents the first account of the process of TJ standardisation. It demonstrates how processes of ‘generification’ and ‘localisation’ make practices transferable and establish the means to facilitate their replication in and across different contexts and settings. These processes are illustrated drawing on existing scholarship from around the world that highlights the acceptance and contestation of and resistance to the standard. After analysing these processes, the article discusses the implications of TJ standardisation for societies, scholarship and global governance.
期刊介绍:
The European Journal of International Relations publishes peer-reviewed scholarly contributions across the full breadth of the field of International Relations, from cutting edge theoretical debates to topics of contemporary and historical interest to scholars and practitioners in the IR community. The journal eschews adherence to any particular school or approach, nor is it either predisposed or restricted to any particular methodology. Theoretically aware empirical analysis and conceptual innovation forms the core of the journal’s dissemination of International Relations scholarship throughout the global academic community. In keeping with its European roots, this includes a commitment to underlying philosophical and normative issues relevant to the field, as well as interaction with related disciplines in the social sciences and humanities. This theoretical and methodological openness aims to produce a European journal with global impact, fostering broad awareness and innovation in a dynamic discipline. Adherence to this broad mandate has underpinned the journal’s emergence as a major and independent worldwide voice across the sub-fields of International Relations scholarship. The Editors embrace and are committed to further developing this inheritance. Above all the journal aims to achieve a representative balance across the diversity of the field and to promote deeper understanding of the rapidly-changing world around us. This includes an active and on-going commitment to facilitating dialogue with the study of global politics in the social sciences and beyond, among others international history, international law, international and development economics, and political/economic geography. The EJIR warmly embraces genuinely interdisciplinary scholarship that actively engages with the broad debates taking place across the contemporary field of international relations.