The Human Rights Institute of the Ukrainian Bar Association held an expert discussion on transitional justice in the context of international armed conflict and colonisation. Moderated by Inna Liniova, Director of the Human Rights Institute of the UBA, the event explored how transitional justice principles can be adapted to Ukraine’s unique context — shaped by both historical and contemporary challenges, including colonisation and the legacy of the Soviet past.

In his opening remarks, Mykola Stetsenko, President of the Ukrainian Bar Association, emphasised the strategic importance of transitional justice in the UBA’s agenda. He underscored that the war is not only a consequence of decades of colonial policies but also a threat to the entire international legal order established after the Second World War.

“We do not view transitional justice as merely a legal or technical construct, but rather as a tool for political, social, and legal transformation,” Mr Stetsenko stated. According to him, despite the fragmented nature of current efforts, Ukraine is already making progress in accountability, reparations, memorialisation, and guarantees of non-recurrence. Now is the time to bring these individual steps together into a comprehensive system.

The UBA sees transitional justice as a long-term strategic priority for its Human Rights Institute. The focus lies on cooperation with state institutions, civil society, and international partners to overcome the consequences of war and colonial legacy.

UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion of truth, justice, reparation and guarantees of non-recurrence, Bernard Duhaime, delivered a keynote address on transitional justice in the context of international armed conflicts and colonisation.

“The Ukrainian context compels us to move beyond the traditional view of transitional justice as a post-conflict tool. We must approach it as a dynamic system that responds to ongoing violations while simultaneously laying the groundwork for sustainable peace and reconciliation,” Mr Duhaime emphasised.

He outlined the key priorities of his mandate, including cross-border justice, interdisciplinary approaches, combating denial and revisionism, and the use of new technologies. The Special Rapporteur also stressed the importance of bottom-up approaches and perspectives from the Global South.

The mandate currently held by Bernard Duhaime was established in 2011 by the UN Human Rights Council. Its purpose is to promote transitional justice approaches grounded in international law, with a focus on the experiences of victims, gender dimensions, and the voices of marginalised groups. The Special Rapporteur’s work involves ongoing engagement with states, international institutions, human rights organisations, and UN system mechanisms.

Mr Duhaime also highlighted that Ukraine’s experience presents the transitional justice framework with new, conceptually complex challenges that cannot be addressed through classical state-centric approaches.

“International armed conflicts — particularly those not accompanied by political transition — demand a rethinking of existing justice mechanisms. We are dealing with a broader scale of violence, challenges in establishing accountability, the influence of new technologies, and a multi-layered institutional landscape,” the Rapporteur noted.

He stressed that most existing models are built around a single-state framework, which, in the context of multilateral aggression, leads to fragmented justice and creates additional barriers for victims.

Among the priorities of his mandate, Bernard Duhaime highlighted the need for a comprehensive rethinking of the role of all five pillars of transitional justice — truth, justice, reparation, guarantees of non-recurrence, and memorialisation — in response to large-scale human rights violations occurring in the context of international conflicts.

Technology, Denial, and Human Rights: Challenges of Transitional Justice in Times of War

In his address, Bernard Duhaime drew attention to a range of critical challenges facing the system of transitional justice today — from restricted access to archives and the spread of historical revisionism, to the rapid development of technology.

“Blockchain, artificial intelligence, drones — these are not only tools for protection or documentation of violations. They also pose potential threats that can exacerbate conflicts, fuel disinformation, and retraumatise affected populations,” the Rapporteur stressed. He also underscored the need to regulate emerging technologies in accordance with human rights standards, enhance corporate accountability in the tech sector, and promote information literacy.

Mr Duhaime paid particular attention to the problem of denial and historical revisionism, which erode collective memory, reinforce impunity, and undermine the lived experience of victims. In his view, the coordinated work of truth commissions, memorial programmes, and educational initiatives is crucial in countering these harmful trends.

The event moderator, Inna Liniova, reminded participants that the Ukrainian Bar Association, together with the Human Rights Institute of the International Bar Association, had submitted an official statement in preparation for the UN report on transitional justice and violations of social and economic rights in Ukraine.

“We believe that Russia is weaponising these rights. This is the militarised use of social and economic rights as a tool of coercion,” she emphasised.

Ms Liniova called on the UN to address this issue and consider establishing implementation mechanisms to uphold the core elements of transitional justice — particularly the right to truth, accountability, reparations, and guarantees of non-recurrence.

She noted that while Ukraine’s experience is unique, it is also comparable to other conflict contexts — notably Syria, where Russian military presence is also a factor.

Malek Abohousene, Syria Program Officer at the International Center for Transitional Justice (ICTJ), shared lessons from the Syrian conflict that could be relevant for Ukraine. He outlined the key phases of the war in Syria — from the peaceful protests of 2011 to chemical attacks, Russian intervention, mass displacement, and the resulting deep humanitarian crisis.

“The conflict in Syria lasted for over a decade. The Assad regime, with active support from Russia, pursued a strategy of terror while blocking accountability efforts at the UN. This was accompanied by widespread human rights violations that profoundly impacted millions of lives,” Mr Abohousene stated.

He noted that in the most difficult moments, it was civil society that assumed the roles of documenting crimes, assisting victims, advocating for justice, and preserving memory. This experience offers a valuable reference point for Ukraine, where war crimes are also being documented in real time.

International Mechanisms Gave Syrians a Sense That They Were Not Alone in Their Struggle

In his presentation, Malek Abohousene emphasised the importance of international support that Syria’s civil society began receiving in 2014–2015. Through sustained advocacy and cooperation with international partners, three key institutions were established: the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Syria, the International, Impartial and Independent Mechanism for Syria, and the institution dedicated to the issue of missing persons.

“The very process of establishing these mechanisms was already a form of justice. It sent a signal that the international community sees and hears us,” the speaker stressed. This experience taught Syrian activists how to work with national mandates, build an institutional foundation for locating missing persons, and lay the groundwork for future justice — even amid ongoing conflict.

Another milestone, according to Malek Abohousene, was the initiation of legal proceedings against Syrian war criminals in European courts — particularly in Germany and France — as well as the joint case brought by Canada and the Netherlands against the Assad regime before the International Court of Justice. “These are not just legal precedents. They are proof that even without control over our country, we can still fight for truth and justice,” he noted.

Following the fall of the Assad regime in December last year, most Syrian civil society organisations returned to the country. Two national commissions have already been established — one on transitional justice and another on missing persons. According to Mr Abohousene, this phase marks not just a continuation of the struggle, but the realisation of years of sustained effort.

In closing, the speaker shared initial outcomes from the newly formed Syrian commissions, including the Missing Persons Commission, which already has a strategy, a dedicated team, and has initiated active dialogue with victims' families and international partners.

He outlined three key lessons that, in his view, could be particularly valuable for Ukraine:

1. Early preparation for the “day after” — the process of building a transitional justice system should not be postponed until the war is over. It must begin today.

2. Victim-centred approaches — victims of the conflict must not be reduced to statistics. They should be active participants in drafting laws, designing strategies, and establishing institutions.

3. Justice as a process — this is a journey that requires shifting approaches, flexibility, dialogue, and continuous learning.

“We listened to people in Damascus and other cities. Their understanding of justice often differed from legal or activist frameworks. And that must be the foundation — when victims feel heard, and society builds a collective memory and truly understands what happened,” Malek Abohousene concluded.

Anton Korynevych, Director of the Department of International Law at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine, Ambassador-at-Large, and Ukraine’s representative at the International Court of Justice, emphasised that transitional justice is not an abstract future concept — it is already a lived reality for Ukraine.

According to him, elements of transitional justice have been implemented since the very beginning of Russia’s armed aggression in 2014 — particularly in areas related to internally displaced persons. In this sense, Ukraine is effectively a pioneer in applying transitional justice approaches during an international armed conflict, in contrast to traditional cases where such mechanisms are introduced post-conflict and in the context of non-international armed conflicts.

However, he drew attention to a major challenge: Ukraine still lacks a unified strategic document that would define the state’s policy framework for transitional justice. According to legal experts, such a document is essential to ensure coherence in the decisions and actions of public authorities.

Mr Korynevych recalled that between 2019 and 2021, a working group under the Legal Reform Commission developed a draft Presidential Decree on transitional justice. The document was finalised in 2021 but was never adopted. Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022 shifted the government’s priorities to more urgent matters.

“Now is a good time to return to the concept of transitional justice. What matters most is not the form, but the substance,” he stressed. In his view, the draft can serve as a foundation for a future strategy, adapted to the new realities brought about by the full-scale war — particularly regarding the situation in temporarily occupied territories, internally displaced persons, and Ukrainians forced to flee abroad.

In conclusion, Anton Korynevych noted that transitional justice remains relevant for Ukraine regardless of the nature of the conflict — whether international or non-international.

The elements of transitional justice can:

• facilitate the reintegration of temporarily occupied territories;

• support internally displaced persons;

• include Ukrainians abroad.

Mr Korynevych expressed confidence that state authorities, the expert community, and civil society will continue working in this direction.

______

Transitional justice is a strategic priority for the Human Rights Institute of the Ukrainian Bar Association. If you would like to contribute expert commentary on this topic, please contact us at pr@uba.ua. Contact person – Daria Sydorchuk.