Accountability in Northern Uganda: Understanding the Conflict, the Parties and the False Dichotomies in International Criminal Law and Transitional Justice

The conflict in northern Uganda presents a unique study in comparing international, domestic and traditional responses to justice and stability amid prolonged conflict. This article explains the colonial and political background of the country and the emergence of the parties to the fighting, and describes the violations of international humanitarian and human rights law committed by all armed groups. It examines the various responses to these violations, focusing on Uganda's Amnesty Act, International Criminal Court indictments, the Juba peace talks, and traditional conflict resolution and reconciliation ceremonies, and explores how these mechanisms for negotiating peace and instilling justice are facilitating or interfering with each other. Overall, it attempts to discover how this interplay between international idealism, regional and national politics, cultural influences and logistical feasibility not only presents important lessons concerning the conflict in Uganda, but also reflects and informs false dichotomies in international criminal law and transitional justice.