Transitional justice consolidated in the early 2000s into what came to be called ‘mainstream transitional justice paradigm’, amalgamating prosecution, truth, reparations and institutional reform into a toolbox of mechanisms to be deployed in the aftermath of conflict or violence, in different parts of the word, as the most appropriate response to help societies turn the page to past atrocities. That paradigm put the spotlight mostly on state-sponsored atrocities and state-induced human rights abuses, of civil or political nature, during periods of political upheaval or conflict. This standardization of transitional justice came at the expense of a deeper engagement with the dynamics, factors and actors that bred, exacerbated and sustained violence, as well as with the particularities of each setting. Business actors comprise an example of such a prevalent but nevertheless marginalized actor. Their operations, despite widespread knowledge of their involvement in conflict, have remained in the background, and transitional mechanisms have either ignored them or improperly addressed their accountability.