Record Detail

Following civil war, (re)establishing operational, legitimate and
accessible justice systems for resolving disputes is touted as critical for sustainable
peace. While rule of law programming has gained significant traction as
the favoured solution internationally, questions remain as to what approach such
programming should take, and how complex dynamics in societies emerging
from civil war affect local populations trying to access justice, particularly in
legally plural settings. This article sheds light on these questions by examining a
case study of a programme that took an alternative approach to the ‘rule of law
orthodoxy’. The programme, known as PEACE Foundation Melanesia, engaged
with customary justice systems in post-conflict Bougainville, and took into
account some of the contextual realities faced by local populations. In particular,
the material presented in this study—drawn from 42 interviews—shows how
post-conflict insecurity, and related concerns about related psychological illhealth
and cycles of retaliation played a significant part in preferences, experiences,
and impact of the programme for local populations.