Vetting as an Element of Institutional Reform and Transitional Justice

Abstract

Reforming institutions in countries emerging from conflict or authoritarian rule contributes to achieving a central objective of an effective and legitimate transitional justice policy: the prevention of recurrence of human rights abuses. Therefore, vetting as an element of institutional reform and transitional justice should be considered as a measure to reform institutions responsible for human rights violations, thus it calls for individual responsibility of those who were involved in the past human rights abuses. As a key measure of institutional reform, vetting, to a great extent, affects the functioning of the institution to be reformed, and thus relates to the other institutional reform processes. I argue in this article that the necessity to approach institutional reform processes holistically and coherently is justified by the convergence and mutual reinforcement of the mechanisms of institutional reform processes. Failing to implement one of the measures may instigate failure to implement another. Accordingly, a coherent and holistic approach to transitional justice mechanisms in post-conflict and/or post-authoritarian settings is of great significance for the achievement of sustainability of transitional justice policy. However, little systematic attention has been paid to the topic of vetting as an institutional reform and transitional justice measure. The main reasons for such a lack of attention and familiarity with the term come from a misconception of the meaning of the process, a lack of its clarity in the literature, and minor efforts taken to distinguish it from massive dismissals or purges. The discussion in this article strives to fill this gap by offering a comprehensive approach to the subject of research.