Abstract
This study addresses sequencing in transitional justice, comparing cases that began with accountability against those that began with reparations. It concludes that sequence matters less than the clarity and funding of the mandate, and that ambiguity in either track costs both their credibility.
Specimen document reader
The attached file is a shared technical specimen for the reader. It is not the full text of this research.
Open document preview
Loading the document…
Shortcuts: arrows to move, + and − to zoom, 0 to fit width, F for full screen.The reader renders the document visually. To read the text with a screen reader, download the file or open it in its own tab.
My notes — saved on this device
My notes
Your notes are saved on this device only. They are never sent to the institute and nobody else can see them.
No notes yet. Write your first note as you read, and it will be saved with its page number.
References
- Al-Otaibi, H. (2024). Mandating and funding truth commissions. Institute Policy Papers, 3, 14–38.
Cite this specimen
Basel Nima. (2026). Sequencing Transitional Justice: Accountability Before Reconciliation, or After?. EISSL.
