Current British Government strategies to counter terrorism (exemplified in the Prevent policy and Channel programme) are based upon a problematic fusion of certain dominant explanatory models of the 'causes of terrorism' (specifically, 'psychological vulnerability' to 'radicalisation') with discourses of 'child protection/safeguarding'. Derived from particular mainstream traditions of social scientific epistemology and inquiry, these knowledge paradigms 'legitimise' a pre-emptive, interventionist and securitising approach that affects the lives of young British Muslims. The aim of this article is to challenge some of the assumptions that underpin the understanding of 'radicalisation', 'psychological vulnerability' and 'child protection' evidenced in these state practices and policies.
This paper argues that transitional justice needs to adopt a participatory approach to achieve longer‐term sustainability, shifting away from the top‐down ‘one‐size‐fits‐all’ approach to allow ‘voices from below’ to be heard and heeded. It critiques dominant interpretations of key transitional justice concepts, and links them to the difficulties of post‐conflict transitional justice in a range of violently divided societies. Popular participation and local agency, it is argued, is necessary to achieve ends identified in much transitional justice discourse, and to embed mechanisms for the creation of sustainable peace. A Northern Ireland initiative (the Ardoyne Commemoration Project) will be explored in‐depth, illustrating how a bottom‐up ‘truth‐telling’ process can make a significant contribution to transitional justice and casting doubt on the validity of the deference to legal dominance in current policy and practice. The paper recommends that knowledge available in development studies and participatory theory be applied more clearly in debates and approaches in transitional justice.
The aim of this article is to examine the relationship between trust, testimony and truth recovery processes as part of post-conflict transition. The paper uses the case study of unionist attitudes toward a community-based truth-telling project in Northern Ireland to demonstrate the impact an absence of trust can have upon what the French philosopher Paul Ricoeur has described as the 'space of controversy' that emerges between the 'certification' and the 'accreditation' of testimony. The paper suggests such distrust is a legacy, not only of conflict, but also of the particular circumstances of transition and the specific mechanisms of truth recovery adopted. Ultimately the paper argues for a holistic, community-centred approach towards truth-telling and raises issues relevant to other violently divided societies undergoing transition and grappling with ways in which to deal with the legacy of political conflict.
and-conditions-of-access.pdf This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution , reselling , loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.