Global Models, Victim Disconnect and Demands for International Intervention: The Dilemma of Decoloniality and Transitional Justice in Sri Lanka
Journal of Human Rights Practice, ISSN: 1757-9627, Vol: 16, Issue: 3, Page: 945-963
2024
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Article Description
This article uses Sri Lanka as a case study to impel engagement of decoloniality with transitional justice. It identifies gaps in the literature critical of transitional justice, specifically structural interpretations of power hierarchies, state-centrism and disregard of ethnicity and religion. It thereby uses a decolonial analytical lens on empirical findings from Sri Lanka’s failed transitional justice process to identify and understand continuing colonial power structures, including epistemic coloniality. The empirical findings offer three new insights. First, an ideational, structural and procedural disconnection between victims and the global transitional justice model is noted. The article traces how victim positioning and this disconnection were disregarded in favour of an internationally authoritative, credible and universal model of transitional justice. Second, the ethno-religious challenges to transitional justice, which include its reliance on the state as a neutral provider of justice, are highlighted. The third finding, however, on victim demands for greater international involvement, presents a dilemma to future decolonial consideration of transitional justice. Despite only using decoloniality as an analytical tool, the article nevertheless demonstrates the need for deeper reform, including at the epistemic level, for transformation to occur within the field.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85213884838&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jhuman/huae024; https://academic.oup.com/jhrp/article/16/3/945/7748714; https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jhuman/huae024; https://academic.oup.com/jhrp/article-abstract/16/3/945/7748714?redirectedFrom=fulltext
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know