Previous academic research has operated in a paradigm whereby women, the raped, are pitted against men, the aggressor, meanwhile this research is slightly more complex. This thesis aims to...Show morePrevious academic research has operated in a paradigm whereby women, the raped, are pitted against men, the aggressor, meanwhile this research is slightly more complex. This thesis aims to investigate if the victim's rights are honoured, not just in practice but most importantly in reality - is justice truly received? The paper seeks to reveal this through feminist literature in understanding justice. Two particularly interesting cases to which gender-based atrocities took place, were the Japanese Imperial Army’s sexual slavery and prostitution of Korean women in The Second World War (hereafter, WWII) and Jean-Pierre Bemba Gombo of the Democratic Republic of Congo (hereafter DRC) involvement in war crimes having taken place during the Second Congo War in 2002. Both cases pursued different justice mechanisms. The case of Japan-Korea adopted a reconciliation process they having only recently confronted their war past, while Bemba faced the International Criminal Court being trailed for crimes against humanity. The dominant narrative dealing with sexual crimes in the post-war era are present in both cases of Japan-Korea and Congo, and employ similar motifs where the prosecution rests after charging those accused. Without carrying out further inquests to support and determine justice for the victims and further their integration within society. This begs the question: Who actually benefits from the current justice system? To what extent do these opposing techniques ultimately provide justice for the victims and in changing the justice system? And what are the factors prohibiting justice? These sub-questions are important as they break down and help answer the broader research question of: To What Extent do Current Post-Conflict Justice Mechanisms Provide Justice for Victims of Sexual Violence During Armed Conflict in the Cases of The DRC and Japan-Korea?Show less
This article investigates rebel opportunity structures in non-ethnic civil wars. It argues rebel leaders act rationally and decide on war and peace on the basis of security and economic...Show moreThis article investigates rebel opportunity structures in non-ethnic civil wars. It argues rebel leaders act rationally and decide on war and peace on the basis of security and economic considerations. Rebel leaders only demobilize if the net benefits of peace are greater than the net benefits of war. Third-party interventions, such as United Nations peacekeeping operations, are only able to end civil war when it offers credible security guarantees to the rebel group and sufficiently alters the incentives rebel leaders face through the disruption of the rebel war economy. Only if an outside intervention manages to curb profits emanating from autonomous rebel financing, such as illicit resource extraction and trade or outside state support, will war no longer pay and will rebels comply with provisions offered in a negotiated peace settlement. The theory is supported by case studies of United Nations peacekeeping efforts during the Sierra Leone civil war (1991-2002) and the Second Congo War (1998-2003) in the Democratic Republic of Congo.Show less
