Situating the Place for Traditional Justice Mechanisms in International Criminal Justice: A Critical Analysis of the implications of the Juba Peace Agreement on Reconciliation and Accountability

On the 29th of June 2007, the representatives of the Government of Uganda (GoU) and the representatives of the Lord's Resistance Army/Movement rebels (LRA/M) signed an Agreement on Reconciliation and Accountability (AAR). The AAR provided for the use of both International Criminal Law (ICL) and Traditional Justice Mechanisms (TJMs) as part of the framework on accountability and reconciliation due to the conflict in Northern Uganda. Since warrants of arrest had already been issued against the top leaders of the LRA/M prior to the signing of this AAR, a rift arose between those who supported the ICC and those who supported the AAR. The former group argued that the AAR was promoting impunity while the latter group viewed the AAR as a vehicle for a sustainable post conflict transition. This project argues that a critical legal pluralist interpretive framework (CLP) for implementing Agenda Item III of the Juba peace accord is more responsive to the complexities of Uganda's history and politics than the interpretive frameworks of mainstream international criminal law (ICL) or traditional legal pluralism (TLP). In adopting a CLP interpretive framework, critics of the AAR will be able to see that the AAR is not promoting impunity.