The four main lines of engagement of the new Special Rapporteur with the General Assembly

The present report is the first submitted by the new Special Rapporteur on the promotion of truth, justice, reparation and guarantees of non-recurrence to the General Assembly, in accordance with resolution 36/7 of the Human Rights Council.

In the report, the Special Rapporteur presents his priority lines of engagement with the General Assembly, which should be read together with his first report submitted to the Human Rights Council (A/HRC/39/53), in which he described his approach to the discharge of the mandate and gave a preliminary outline of areas of interest.

The activities undertaken by the mandate holder from August 2017 to June 2018 are contained in the report of the Special Rapporteur to the Human Rights Council (A/HRC/39/53).

On the basis of the foundational work accomplished and with a view to further enhancing the efforts of the mandate holder in relation to the General Assembly, the Special Rapporteur, who took up his functions in May 2018, presents herein his preliminary vision of four main lines of engagement in areas that are at the core of the recent work of the Assembly and the Security Council.

The areas, which are closely interlinked, pertain to the following issues:
• Transitional justice, prevention and sustaining peace
• Harnessing youth’s creative agency for transitional justice
• Accentuating the gender perspective in transitional justice efforts
• The intersection of human rights (with a focus on economic, social and cultural rights) and the Sustainable Development Goals in the context of transitional justice

The Special Rapporteur intends to continue to contribute, from the perspective of the mandate, to the ongoing reflections in the area of prevention and sustaining peace.

The Special Rapporteur recalls earlier work undertaken by the mandate holder, such as a report in which he called for a substantive, comprehensive framework approach to prevention, giving content to the frequently referenced need to broaden the scope of and “upstream” prevention work (A/72/523); and two interlinked reports in which he elaborated on the (not so frequently employed) notion of guarantees of non-recurrence (A/HRC/30/42 and A/70/438).

The Special Rapporteur makes further reference to the joint study on the contribution of transitional justice to the prevention of gross violations and abuses of human rights and serious violations of international humanitarian law, including genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity, and their recurrence, prepared by the previous Special Rapporteur and the Special Adviser to the Secretary-General on the Prevention of Genocide (A/HRC/37/65).

Lastly, he highlights the work undertaken specifically to address the “challenges in weakly institutionalized post-conflict settings” (see A/HRC/36/50), which imply transitional justice contexts with weak State structures (see A/HRC/37/65), which account for an increasing part of the efforts of the mandate holder, and highlights the relevance of those challenges for the United Nations political main organs. He recalls that these situations vary significantly from the post-authoritarian context in which the model of transitional justice originally took shape (see A/HRC/21/46).

On the basis of that foundational work, and given the urgent need to improve the effectiveness of transitional justice efforts in these new contexts of application, the Special Rapporteur will prioritize the continued interaction with relevant United Nations organs, pertinent departments of the Secretariat and United Nations agencies, as well as regional organizations, in the implementation of his mandate.

The Special Rapporteur also underlines the significant work relating to the adoption and implementation of the twin resolutions of the General Assembly (resolution 70/262) and the Security Council (resolution 2282 (2016)), which followed from the review of the United Nations peacebuilding architecture in 2015.

The Special Rapporteur underscores that the twin resolutions include a “comprehensive approach to transitional justice” as a key component of the efforts to sustain peace. In paragraph 12 of the twin resolutions, it is stressed that “a comprehensive approach to transitional justice, including promotion of healing and reconciliation, a professional, accountable and effective security sector, including through its reform, and inclusive and effective demobilization, disarmament and reintegration programmes, including the transition from demobilization and disarmament to reintegration, are critical to consolidation of peace and stability, promoting poverty reduction, rule of law, access to justice and good governance, further extending legitimate State authority, and preventing countries from lapsing or relapsing into conflict”.

In that regard, the Special Rapporteur would like to make the following remarks, opening avenues for future work under the mandate. First, he notes that the “comprehensive approach” — in the understanding of the two resolutions — is meant to include the “promotion of healing and reconciliation”, two themes that have been recurrent in Security Council resolutions in recent years.¹ Against this background, he indicates that, in his thematic and country-related work, he will thoroughly study the conceptualization of these two recurrent themes, also comparing them with their usage in practice, and examine issues surrounding and intersecting with them.

1. For example, Security Council resolutions 2406 (2018), 2327 (2016), 2290 (2016), 2252 (2015), 2241 (2015) and 2223 (2015) on South Sudan; and resolutions 2333 (2016), 2239 (2015) and 2190 (2014) on the situation in Liberia. ↩

Furthermore, he points out that in the wording of the twin resolutions there is an emphasis on reform efforts towards a professional, accountable and effective security sector, on the one hand, and inclusive and effective demobilization, disarmament and reintegration programmes, on the other, with a view to preventing countries from lapsing or relapsing into conflict.

In that connection, the Special Rapporteur recalls that over the years the transitional justice debate has gradually shifted, such that the concept of “guarantees of non-recurrence” went from covering primarily institutional reforms to integrating initiatives at the society and individual levels (see A/HRC/30/42 and A/HRC/39/53). Nevertheless, he notes that the approach reflected in the resolutions of the General Assembly and the Security Council remains focused on the institutional level (that is, mainly security sector reform in a broader sense).

In many contexts, however, the international community, including the United Nations, regional actors and others, has come to realize that institution-centred transitional justice and peacebuilding initiatives — on their own — have hardly ever reached the grass-roots level to the extent required to significantly contribute to processes of achieving increased social cohesion. Such an approach, as witnessed in several instances, has significant potential to refuel conflict in the absence of progress in adjacent areas at the society and individual levels, which need to complement — and sustain — any institutional reform.

Furthermore, the Special Rapporteur intends to thoroughly study throughout his term the inclusion of transitional justice measures, or components thereof, in the context of prevention, human rights and transitional justice in Security Council resolutions relating to a number of countries in conflict and post-conflict settings.

In that connection, he observes with interest the most recent use of the term “holistic transitional justice measures”, which comprises accountability, truth-seeking and reparations.²

2. See Security Council resolution 2406 (2018), para. 31; and resolution 2327 (2016), para. 29, on South Sudan. ↩

The Special Rapporteur also notes the references to specific accountability measures pertaining to criminal justice initiatives in different forms and with different arrangements.³

3. See most recently, for example, resolution 2406 (2018), para. 28, on South Sudan (Hybrid Court for South Sudan); and resolution 2399 (2018), preamb. para. 15, on the Central African Republic (Special Criminal Court). ↩

Regarding the pillar of “guarantees of non-recurrence”, he preliminarily observes an emphasis on institutional reform, mainly encompassed through security sector reform, as being among the tasks of the respective peace missions.⁴ Furthermore, some resolutions contain references to specific ongoing or envisaged truth-seeking initiatives,⁵ while few references pertain to reparation.

4. See most recently, resolution 2409 (2018), para. 37 (ii), on the Democratic Republic of the Congo. ↩
5. See, for example, resolution 2364 (2017) para. 20 (a) (iii), on Mali (Truth, Justice and Reconciliation Commission); and resolution 2327 (2016), para. 26, on South Sudan (Commission for Truth, Reconciliation and Healing, as stipulated in the Agreement on the Resolution of the Conflict in the Republic of South Sudan). ↩

The Special Rapporteur will make concerted efforts to study the topic of leveraging the creative agency of young people for transitional justice processes, both conceptually and in practice, mainly through country visits and other country-related work.

The Special Rapporteur would like to take the opportunity to introduce a number of preliminary remarks in relation to this issue.

As indicated in Security Council resolution 2250 (2015) on youth and peace and security,⁶ today’s generation of youth (persons aged 18–29 years, as defined in the resolution) is the largest the world has ever known and young people often form the majority of the population in countries affected by armed conflict. 2 See Security Council resolution 2406 (2018), para. 31; and resolution 2327 (2016), para. 29, on South Sudan. 3 See most recently, for example, resolution 2406 (2018), para. 28, on South Sudan (Hybrid Court for South Sudan); and resolution 2399 (2018), preamb. para. 15, on the Central African Republic (Special Criminal Court). 4 See most recently, resolution 2409 (2018), para. 37 (ii), on the Democratic Republic of the Congo. 5 See, for example, resolution 2364 (2017) para. 20 (a) (iii), on Mali (Truth, Justice and Reconciliation Commission); and resolution 2327 (2016), para. 26, on South Sudan (Commission for Truth, Reconciliation and Healing, as stipulated in the Agreement on the Resolution of the Conflict in the Republic of South Sudan). 6 In its resolution 2250 (2015), the Security Council recognized the contribution of youth in the prevention and resolution of conflicts and warned against the rise of radicalization and violent extremism among youth. 6/13

6. In its resolution 2250 (2015), the Security Council recognized the contribution of youth in the prevention and resolution of conflicts and warned against the rise of radicalization and violent extremism among youth. ↩

That observation is in stark contrast, however, to the yet underutilized agency and role that youth are capable and willing to take on to contribute to transitional justice measures and prevention initiatives.

While young people have often been key actors in challenging injustice and its enabling structures, and human rights violations specifically, and in pushing for societal renewal in the aftermath of conflict and/or repression, they continue to face a number of limitations in their engagement with and for transitional justice measures.

Frequently, they are kept at bay in the debates and processes — inside and outside State entities — about policies and strategies on how to deal with the past and ensure non-recurrence of violations.

The approach that has typically been applied has been to create specific opportunities, mainly in the form of predetermined forums or activities for the engagement of youth. Those methods of engaging young people have often taken the form of capacity-building and technical assistance, with a focus on developing mechanisms to allow young people to introduce their ideas and vision into a pre-existing process that has already taken shape.

While the dedicated efforts to achieve some sort of youth involvement and participation are to be welcomed, it should be noted that the creative potential of youth to proactively contribute to designing and shaping transitional justice efforts is likely to be partly foregone with such an approach.

The Special Rapporteur preliminarily indicates that a more cohesive and genuinely inclusive approach needs to be envisaged in order to effectively catalyse the crucial agency of young people in their engagement for lasting peace and their contributions towards justice and reconciliation. The aim would be to set up structures and design approaches that enable youth to play a central role as agents of change in and for transitional justice processes.

A truly inclusive approach has great potential to leverage more of the constructive energy of young people, who, in addition to being generally future-oriented, stand to gain a lot from transitional justice measures, are open to new ideas and innovation and make effective use of media and technology to amplify voices and advance change.

Dedicated efforts to foster inclusion from the outset are paramount, as there is a strong likelihood that exclusion will create an environment that drives young people to resort to violent means as they are — and feel — excluded from important processes determining their future. This issue was captured prominently in resolution 2419 (2018), in which the Security Council followed up on resolution 2250 (2015) and stressed that youth’s “marginalization is detrimental to building sustainable peace and countering violent extremism”.

In that connection, in its resolution 2250 (2015), the Security Council urged Member States “to consider ways to increase inclusive representation of youth in decision-making at all levels … for the prevention and resolution of conflict, including institutions and mechanisms to counter violent extremism, which can be conducive to terrorism …”. In resolution 2419 (2018), the Council makes explicit reference to the inclusive representation of youth in relation to the negotiation and implementation of peace agreements.

In its resolution 2250 (2015), the Security Council requested the preparation of an independent progress study on youth and peace and security. The resulting recommendations were put forward as “the starting point of large-scale transformation”, offering a framework for action to support young people’s innovation and build sustainable peace (A/72/761–S/2018/86, para. 74). The recommendations were grouped into three strategies: (a) investing in the capacities, agency and leadership of young people; (b) from exclusion to meaningful inclusion; and (c) national, regional and global partnerships for youth and peace and security (ibid., paras. 59–73).

Furthermore, the fact that in a number of countries cases of gross violations in the past predate the current generation of youth also poses specific challenges. What can be observed at times is a lack of even basic information about a country’s violent past. In several cases, it is neither a topic of public discourse nor part of the school curriculum. Narratives about these periods are then often transmitted through the family and communities — a means through which opposing narratives are perpetuated and likely to contribute to renewed violations in the future.

Given the lack of reliable information, it becomes evident that youth can easily be carried away by incorrect accounts, misused for partisan or other purposes or co-opted by different sides. In the absence of available accurate factual information, the intergenerational effect of violence and gross violations tends to be amplified in magnitude, at times with an impact for several generations.

Against this background, and as already highlighted in the report to the Human Rights Council (A/HRC/39/53), the reform of education (both formal and informal), in particular history education, and of educational approaches is crucial to addressing the perpetuation of contradictory narratives, which with time heighten the risk of refuelling conflict and enabling gross violations.

This concern was captured by resolution 2419 (2018), in which the Security Council stressed the need for access to education by all, including marginalized youth, and highlighted the protection of educational institutions as spaces free from all forms of violence.

Beyond educational reform, the transmission of memory has a crucial role in attempting to break the cycles of violence. Again, the aim would be to proactively take advantage of the creative potential of youth, including young artists and other actors engaged in memorialization and cultural initiatives, in the shaping of strategies to redress violent pasts.

Complementary to the Special Rapporteur’s intention to place continued and reinforced emphasis on the gender perspective (see A/HRC/39/53) in the implementation of his mandate, in accordance with Human Rights Council resolutions 18/7, 27/3 and 36/7, he plans to accentuate the gender perspective in relation to transitional justice efforts, in the context of prevention, in his engagements with the General Assembly.

Building on the landmark Security Council resolution 1325 (2000), in which Member States were urged to increase women’s representation at all decision-making levels in institutions and mechanisms for the prevention, management and resolution of conflict, as well as relevant successive Security Council resolutions, in particular resolution 2242 (2015), and the global study on the implementation of resolution 1325 (2000) carried out in 2015,⁷ the Special Rapporteur plans to study and address in his activities the main observations and recommendations of the study, as they pertain to his mandate.

7. Radhika Coomaraswamy, Preventing Conflict, Transforming Justice, Securing the Peace: A Global Study on the Implementation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325 (United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women, 2015). ↩

The global study sets out how the empowerment of women contributes to strengthening peace operations, attaining peace agreements, improving humanitarian assistance, countering violent extremism and achieving sustainable peace. It is also emphasized that the importance of national and communal healing as part of holistic justice and accountability processes, including truth-seeking, reconciliation, memorialization and reparations, is increasingly understood by the international community and Member States.⁸

8. Ibid., executive summary. ↩

At the same time, it is observed in the study that only initial steps have been taken in terms of progress on a number of the topics referred to in the successive resolutions. Those areas relate to the participation of women as negotiators in formal peace processes; the formulation of inclusive national action plans on women and peace and security; the very low rate of prosecutions for sexual violence, in particular at the national level; the rise of violent extremism that has led to a real threat to the lives of women, a cycle of militarization and significant obstacles for women peacebuilders; and the still small amount of financial aid provided to fragile States with regard to gender issues.

In his forthcoming thematic and country-related work, the Special Rapporteur will follow up on the topics of the various resolutions and the recommendations of the global study, as they pertain to the specific context of his mandate. In that connection, he also plans to establish regular working relations with the Informal Expert Group on Women and Peace and Security, which was established pursuant to Security Council resolution 2242 (2015) to facilitate a more systematic approach to women and peace and security in the Council’s own work and to enable greater Council oversight and coordination of the implementation efforts of the United Nations system.

In conjunction with resolution 1325 (2000), successive resolutions and the global study, and in the spirit of cooperation with other human rights mechanisms, notably the United Nations treaty bodies, the Special Rapporteur would like to draw attention to general recommendation No. 30 (2013) on women in conflict prevention, conflict and post-conflict situations of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women.

In its general recommendation, the Committee stressed that all areas of concern addressed in those resolutions found expression in the substantive provisions of the Convention, and therefore reiterated the need for a concerted and integrated approach that placed the implementation of the Security Council agenda on women and peace and security into the broader framework of the implementation of the Convention and its Optional Protocol (general recommendation No. 30, para. 26).

The Committee placed the onus on State parties to focus on the prevention of conflict and violence, and highlighted that doing so entailed, inter alia, effective early warning systems, preventive diplomacy and mediation, and efforts that address the root causes of conflict. The Committee highlighted that there was a correlation between the increased prevalence of gender-based violence and discrimination and the outbreak of conflict, stating that rapid increases in the prevalence of sexual violence could serve as an early warning of conflict. It concluded, therefore, that efforts to eliminate gender-based violations also contributed in the long term to preventing conflict, its escalation and the recurrence of violence in the post-conflict phase (ibid., para. 29). The Committee expressed concern that conflict prevention efforts often excluded women’s experiences as not relevant for predicting conflict (ibid., para. 30).

Lastly, the Special Rapporteur would like to recall that the Committee drew attention to the importance of participation. It underscored that while women often took on leadership roles during conflict as heads of households, peacemakers, political leaders and combatants, their voices were silenced and marginalized in post-conflict and transition periods and recovery processes. Consequently, the Committee emphasized the difference that could be made by including a critical mass of women in international negotiations, peacekeeping activities and at all levels of preventive diplomacy, mediation, humanitarian assistance, social reconciliation and peace negotiations, as well as in the criminal justice system (ibid., para. 42).

This concern links up with one of the main issues of interest to the Special Rapporteur, as outlined in his recent report to the Human Rights Council, namely victim participation in transitional justice measures and the question of ownership (A/HRC/39/53, paras. 64–66).

On the basis of the aforementioned areas, and in the spirit of cooperation, the Special Rapporteur will strive to apply a more pronounced gender perspective to achieve synergies between the framework of the Security Council resolutions on women and peace and security, the human rights system, in particular with regard to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, and his mandate to work towards the congruent implementation of the aforementioned main concerns, with the participation of civil society.

Gross human rights violations and serious violations of international humanitarian law are often fuelled by, and frequently cause, developmental shortfalls. As indicated in his report to the Human Rights Council (A/HRC/39/53), during his mandate, the Special Rapporteur intends to address the intersection between transitional justice, economic social and cultural rights and development, an area that is being increasingly explored, but demands sustained attention from scholars, experts and the international community.

In 2009, the Human Rights Council, in its resolution 12/11 on transitional justice and human rights, adopted by consensus, emphasized the importance of addressing “violations of all human rights, including economic, social and cultural rights”.

In March 2010, the Secretary-General issued a guidance note on the United Nations approach to transitional justice. In the note, he underscored that transitional justice should seek to “take account of the root causes of conflicts and repressive rule, and address violations of all rights, including civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights”.⁹

9. See United Nations, “Guidance note of the Secretary-General: United Nations approach to transitional justice”, March 2010, sect. A (9). ↩

In the last decade, several experts in the field of transitional justice have pointed out how violations of economic, social and cultural rights can spark tensions that lead to conflict and repression, for example, where a conflict situation has resulted from a previous failure to fulfil the economic and social rights of certain groups. Or, conversely, how such contexts can lead to violations of those rights, for example, where a conflict has resulted in the deliberate devastation of the infrastructure necessary to realize economic and social rights.

Whether seen as deep-rooted causes of a conflict, or more largely as violations that contribute to triggering conflict or violence, concerns relating to economic, social and cultural rights have featured prominently in recent transitions. Several commentators have underscored how the Arab Spring was fuelled in some countries by economic and social demands, such as that of Mohamed Bouazizi, who self-immolated in protest against the confiscation of his source of livelihood, spearheading protests in Tunisia; or as reflected in the motto of the 2011 revolution in Egypt, which called for “bread, freedom, social justice”.¹⁰ Others have pointed to peaks in food prices coinciding with the timing of riots and protests in North Africa and the Middle East in 2008 and 2011; or to the successive droughts in the north-eastern region of the Syrian Arab Republic, and the subsequent migration of 2 million farmers to urban areas, as one of the catalysts for the country’s civil war.¹¹

10. Evelyne Schmid and Aoife Nolany, “‘Do no harm’? Exploring the scope of economic and social rights in transitional justice”, International Journal of Transitional Justice, vol. 8, No. 3 (November 2014), p. 363. ↩
11. Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), “Early warning and economic, social and cultural rights”, 2016, p. 6. ↩

Truth commissions had been criticized in the past for narrowly focusing on civil and political rights abuses. However, in more recent times, truth commissions have begun to examine economic and social rights and broader socioeconomic issues. For example, the Truth, Reception and Reconciliation Commission in Timor-Leste identified the violations of the rights to health, education and to an adequate standard of living as root causes of the conflict. Similarly, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in Sierra Leone pointed to the greed and corruption that reduced the population to poverty, thereby “violating their economic, social and cultural rights”,¹² as the underlying cause of the conflict. In Peru, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission described how the conflict was prompted by a political and acute economic crisis underpinned by hyperinflation. It further noted that the conflict, in turn, led to the massive destruction of the productive infrastructure and the loss of social capital and economic opportunities, indicating that the areas most affected by the conflict went on to occupy the lowest rankings in the poverty and human development indices.¹³

12. Ibid., p. 5. ↩
13. “Final report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Peru”, general conclusions, paras. 96 and 154, available at www.cverdad.org.pe/ingles/ifinal/conclusiones.php. ↩

In the wake of conflict, unresolved problems such as disputes over land or property, systemic discrimination, pervasive corruption, lack of access to essential services or unequal distribution can prevent durable solutions, threatening peace and undermining transitional justice efforts. An effective strategy to achieve sustainable peace must address holistically the underlying causes of conflict through an array of public policy measures.

The indivisibility, interdependence and interrelated nature of economic, social, cultural, civil and political rights is a well-established element of international human rights law, and its relevance in transitional justice contexts cannot be overemphasized. In the guidance note, the Secretary-General reflects on this, noting that to be effective and sustainable, transitional justice efforts should seek to address violations of all human rights in an integrated and interdependent manner, including by addressing violations of economic and social rights in the work of truth commissions, criminal courts, reparation programmes, constitutional and legislative reforms, peace agreements and victims’ access to services.¹⁴

14. United Nations, “Guidance note of the Secretary-General: United Nations approach to transitional justice”, March 2010, sect. C (1). ↩

While transitional justice processes may not be positioned to provide a response to broader socioeconomic issues, they can certainly be aimed at addressing the shortfalls in the realization of economic, social and cultural rights that have prompted or stem from conflict or repression. Effective transitional justice processes must seek to redress these deficiencies from a human rights-based approach. These processes should take into account the full range of obligations stemming from these rights, considering existing legal standards in the development of transitional justice processes. Addressing the roots of violence through the lens of economic social and cultural rights can constitute a powerful preventive tool and a guarantee of non-recurrence.

During the discussions on the post-2015 development agenda, the mandate holder made a case for firmly anchoring justice and rights-related concerns in the new development agenda (A/68/345), underscoring that justice, security and development cannot be promoted individually, at the expense of the others. Transitional justice and human development aim at building just, peaceful and inclusive societies, and therefore complement and mutually reinforce each other.

Transitional justice measures can contribute to mitigating developmental deficiencies by providing recognition of rights, fostering individual and institutional trust and building positive social capital (ibid., summary).

Moreover, as noted in the most recent report of the Special Rapporteur to the Human Rights Council (A/HRC/39/53), comprehensive transitional justice measures can contribute to the fulfilment of the Sustainable Development Goals pertaining to the economic and social rights sphere, such as ensuring inclusive and equitable quality education (Goal 4); achieving gender equality and empowering all women and girls (Goal 5); and reducing inequality within and among countries (Goal 10).

This constitutes an area of interest for the future substantive work of the mandate holder, in particular, exploring how to undertake transitional justice processes that are responsive to the socioeconomic needs of the population that they aim to assist, in terms of both developmental requirements and the realization of rights.

In some resolutions, the Security Council has addressed the linkages between conflict, development and poverty eradication; however, it has not referred explicitly to the realization of economic, social and cultural rights. For example, in preambular paragraph 12 of resolution 2282 (2016) on post-conflict peacebuilding, the Council emphasizes the importance of a comprehensive approach that addresses the root causes of conflict and promotes the rule of law, sustainable development, economic growth and poverty eradication. Similarly, acknowledging the role that socioeconomic problems played in the conflict in Sierra Leone, in paragraph 1 (a) (i) of resolution 1620 (2005), the Council pressed for building State capacity to address the root causes of the conflict, provide basic services and accelerate progress towards the Millennium Development Goals through poverty reduction and sustainable economic growth.

To reinforce the links between these elements, the Special Rapporteur intends to undertake a practice-oriented study on the effectiveness of the measures under the mandate in redressing violations of economic, social and cultural rights and contributing to the development of the communities affected by gross human rights violations.

Underlining the importance of the twin resolutions of the General Assembly (resolution 70/262) and the Security Council (resolution 2282 (2016)), in which a “comprehensive approach to transitional justice” is emphasized as a key component of efforts to sustain peace, the Special Rapporteur expresses his intention to thoroughly study the inclusion of transitional justice measures, or components thereof, in the context of prevention, human rights and transitional justice, in Security Council resolutions relating to a number countries in conflict and post-conflict settings.

In that connection, he also intends to work on the conceptualization of the areas of promotion of healing and reconciliation, two themes that have been recurrent in Security Council resolutions in recent years, also comparing them with their usage in practice, and to examine issues surrounding and intersecting with them.

Referring to Security Council resolutions 2250 (2015) and 2419 (2018) on youth and peace and security, and highlighting, on the one hand, the yet underutilized agency and role that youth are capable and willing to take on, and the number of limitations that youth face in their engagement with and for transitional justice measures, on the other, the Special Rapporteur indicates his aim to undertake a study on the question of how to more effectively harness the creative agency of youth for transitional justice processes. In that connection, he intends to examine possible structures and approaches designed to enable youth to play a central role as agents of change in and for transitional justice processes.

It is the Special Rapporteur’s conviction that a more cohesive and genuinely inclusive approach would more successfully harness the creative potential of young people in their engagement for lasting peace and their contributions towards justice and reconciliation. Furthermore, efforts to foster inclusion from the outset are also paramount, as there is a strong likelihood that exclusion will create an environment that drives young people to resort to violent means as they are — and feel — excluded from important processes determining their future.

With the aim of accentuating the gender perspective in transitional justice efforts, the Special Rapporteur intends to follow up on the topics contained in the landmark Security Council resolution 1325 (2000) on women and peace and security, and successive resolutions, as well as the recommendations of the global study on the implementation of resolution 1325 (2000) of 2015, as they pertain to the mandate, in his forthcoming thematic and country-related work.

Drawing attention to general recommendation No. 30 of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, in which it concluded, inter alia, that women’s voices remained silenced and marginalized in post-conflict and transition periods, he plans to shed light on possible avenues to address this shortcoming. The Committee also stresses that efforts to eliminate gender-based violations also contribute in the long term to preventing conflict, its escalation and the recurrence of violence in the post-conflict phase. It is with this perspective in mind that the Special Rapporteur will liaise frequently with the Committee on these two areas in the course of his mandate.

The Special Rapporteur reiterates that — whether seen as deep-rooted causes of a conflict or more broadly as violations that contribute to triggering conflict or violence — concerns relating to economic, social and cultural rights have featured prominently in recent transitions. In particular in the wake of conflict, there is significant potential for disputes over land or property, systemic discrimination, pervasive corruption, lack of access to essential services or unequal distribution to prevent durable solutions, threatening peace and undermining transitional justice efforts.

The Special Rapporteur underlines that while transitional justice processes cannot be expected to provide a response to broader socioeconomic issues, they can contribute to addressing the shortfalls in the realization of economic, social and cultural rights that have prompted or stem from conflict or repression. In that connection, he points out that addressing the roots of violence through the lens of economic, social and cultural rights can constitute a powerful preventive tool and a guarantee of non-recurrence.

It is in that connection that the Special Rapporteur intends to undertake a practice-oriented study on the effectiveness of the measures under the mandate in redressing violations of economic, social and cultural rights and contributing to the development of the communities affected by gross human rights violations.