Topics for working papers (in the framework of the lecture „Transitional Justice”)
Students, who need credit for the lecture “Transitional Justice”, should deliver a paper of between
5 and 15 pages (12sized characters, 1,5 distance between the lines, including footnotes and title
page, no bibliography) which deals with one of the following issues:
Papers must be delivered until March, 15th, 24.00 by mail to the address:
k.bachmann@feps.pl
Attention: Students who want to leave Wroclaw for another university at the end of the Winter
semester, must deliver their paper at least two weeks before they leave.
Papers will be evaluated according to the following criteria:
1. formal:
Papers must have footnotes, which are clear and enable the reader to identify the quoted position
without any doubts and problems
2. contents:
Papers must answer one or several research questions or test one or several hypotheses on the
basis of a precisely defined research material. The cannot be purely descriptive or narrative. They
must explain the methods used, provide the reader with an introduction and a final conclusion,
and contain an empirical part.
Students are strongly encouraged to use their cultural, national and linguistic advantage and take
profit on their knowledge about the country or region they come from in order to elaborate
comparative papers. It is most welcome if they use their access to libraries and other resources of
their country. Comparative approaches should be based on a precisely defined aim (“what does
the comparison contribute to our knowledge”). Comparisons should be based either on comparing
extremely different issues – in order to discover similarities or in comparing similar cases in
order to find differences.
Papers must address issues of Transitional Justice. Students can develop own topics other than
listed below, but they must fulfill all the criteria mentioned above (and should be consulted with
the professor).
Attention, second year students!
You can combine Your paper for the lecture and Your final Master thesis. In this case, You
should chose a topic from below (or one of Your own) and extend it to the length of more or less
60 – 80 pages.
Students, who want to write their paper in the framework of the seminar (and with Klaus
Bachmann as their supervisor), will have to deliver about 30 pages (the first part of their Master
Thesis) until March 15th anyway. So it does make sense (and is economic) to combine both:
Write one paper, get two grades!
Topics for papers:
1. Russia’s government and public opinion about ICTY and ICTR
(How did Russian diplomacy and public opinion react to the project of founding ICTY and
ICTR? How can the Russian governments behavior towards both tribunals be explained?
How can one explain the difference in attitude towards the ICTY, ICTR and the ICC?)
2. The legitimacy of the Tokyo Trial for Japanese public opinion
(How did the public in Japan react to the erection of the Tokyo tribunal? How did the
interpretation of the Tribunal change in the post war area?)
3. Transitional Justice in Chile
(Which shifts in public opinion made the prosecution of former members of the Pinochet
government possible and what are the limits of transitional justice in Chile?)
4. Transitional Justice in Latin America: Argentina and Chile compared
(How did both countries conduct transitional justice and how can one explain the
differences?)
5. National and international transitional justice – the case of Augusto Pinochet
(Former Chilean president Augusto Pinochet was subject to prosecution in several foreign
countries – like Great Britain and Spain – but not in his home country. Can we speak about
“international” or “internationalized” transition justice? Which impact did these proceedings
have on public opinion in Chile?)
6. The Special Tribunal for Cambodia (1)
(Can the emergence of the STC be better explained by value shifts in Cambodia or by the
interests of the countries involved in its founding?)
7. Special Courts compared – the STC and the SCSL (2)
(How can one explain the differences in the creation and functioning of the Special Tribunal
for Cambodia and the Special Court for Sierra Leone)
Attention: This paper can be written by two students together (but then it should have
between 15 and 25 pages!)
8. China’s government and public opinion about ICTY and ICTR
(How did Chinese diplomacy and public opinion react to the project of founding ICTY and
ICTR? How can the Russian governments behavior towards both tribunals be explained?
How can one explain the difference in attitude towards the ICTY, ICTR and the ICC?)
8. China and the Special Tribunal for Cambodia
(How to explain the Chinese government’s attitude towards the STC? How did the Chinese
government (try to) influence the structure and rules of the tribunal? What are Chinese
interests in the proceedings?)
9. Vetting in Poland and the Czech Republic compared
(Can the differences in the number of persons subject to “lustacja / lustrace” and in the
proceedings between both countries be explained by differences in the transition process, by
the structure of the party system or by social changes or value changes in both countries?)
10. The legitimacy of Polish vetting procedures
(Explaining the trends in public opinion concerning vetting)
11. Reconciliation at the ICTY
(Is there a consistent meaning of reconciliation as used in the verdicts and pleas of and before
the ICTY or is this used as an “empty signifier” in order to justify different strategies of
prosecution and judgment?)