Hostname: page-component-8678677fb7-7wlfr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-10-10T00:14:01.423Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Violence, partisanship and transitional justice in Zimbabwe*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 August 2011

Michael Bratton*
Affiliation:
Department of Political Science, Michigan State University, 303 South Kedzie Hall, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA

Abstract

What determines people's willingness to consider punishment for human rights abusers? This article investigates this question in the context of Zimbabwe in the aftermath of the country's violent presidential election campaign of June 2008. Based on a national probability sample survey, the paper shows that exposure to violence was reportedly widespread and that attitudes to transitional justice are mixed. In considering how to handle abuses, Zimbabweans weigh the pros and cons carefully and, recognising that peace and justice are difficult to obtain simultaneously, generally prefer the former. The article analyses the various factors that together predict a citizen's proclivity to claim transitional justice in its most demanding retributive form. Reflecting power relations, the results indicate that political partisanship is almost as important as individuals’ personal experience of actual and threatened acts of violence.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)