APCJ_1528_Win2010_00i_122_4 12/30/10 3:22 PM Page 70 70 AFRICA PEACE AND CONFLICT JOURNAL tems of legal justice often lose sight of the victim, who is supposed to take solace in the state prosecuting the offender. Reconciliation is generally not a goal, nor are healing and reconstruction of affected relationships within the community.47 In examining western liberal systems closely, the various loopholes and negative elements become clearer, yet most citizens accept these justice mechanisms as legitimate and support their work. On the other hand, in Rwanda, Uganda, and some non-African locations, such as Kosovo and Timor-Leste, the international community’s capacity to build peace and create institutions that are considered legitimate and just by the population continues to be a topic of discussion; much debate has been sparked between scholars regarding the superiority of internationally versus internally led peacebuilding and state rebuilding.48 Some scholars, including James Meernik, contend that international instruments like the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia have had no significant impact on post-conflict populations. Meernik argues that the Yugoslavian tribunal did nothing to improve ethnic relations in Bosnia after the war.49 No system of dealing with conflict—including traditional African, western and hybrid ones—is perfect. The key is that it be viewed as legitimate within the culture and context in which it exists. The African peacebuilding techniques noted here have some common elements. Most important, because the majority of the cultures are collectivist, whole communities are usually involved in the ceremonies, whether they resemble courts, healing rituals, or large family gatherings at which a problem is shared, discussed, and possibly resolved. Furthermore, they all seem to involve elders, chiefs, or other individuals, such as the curandeiros, held in high regard by the community. Additionally many of the processes have spiritual elements to them. This is something that western cultures are likely most uncomfortable with, as westerners emphasize logic, or reasoning, and scientific proof in the context of trials. Although a small element of spirituality remains in the form of religious references, the system is based primarily on logic and science. Not so in African cultures where ancestors who have long passed away remain an important part of the community and are invoked in the healing and transformation process. Four additional objectives are significant in many African approaches: reconciliation, accountability, truth, and reparation.50 Roger Mac Ginty cautions against romanticizing indigenous conflict resolution practices, noting that ‘traditional’ does not always imply good. Some of these methods arguably perpetuate existing power relationships and have proven to be unable to prevent the conflicts in question for a variety of reasons.51 The cases here also demonstrate that some of the methods used are not always successful in dealing with the new, large-scale crises that the societies confront or have faced. 47. Martha Minow, Between Vengeance and Forgiveness: Facing History after Genocide and Mass Violence (Boston, Massachusetts, Beacon Press, 1998). 48. Doe, ‘Indigenizing post-conflict state reconstuction in Africa’. 49. James Meernik, ‘Justice and peace? How the international criminal tribunal affects societal peace in Bosnia’, Journal of Peace Research, 42:3 (2005), 271–89. 50. Huyse, ‘Introduction: Tradition-based approaches’. 51. Mac Ginty, ‘Indigenous peace-making’.