Hostname: page-component-546b4f848f-lx7sf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2023-05-31T16:33:33.162Z Has data issue: false Feature Flags: { "useRatesEcommerce": true } hasContentIssue false

Response to James L. Gibson's Review of Skeletons in the Closet: Transitional Justice in Post-Communist Europe

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 May 2012


Vigorous exchanges between those who study charged topics like transitional justice using different approaches can be very helpful in progressing our understanding of the complex issues. But those reading this exchange between James Gibson and me could be left puzzled. While my review of Gibson's work shows how our two approaches can be harmonized, Gibson's review of Skeletons may urge readers to question whether, given such seemingly irreconcilable differences, transitional justice remains one field.

Critical Dialogue
Copyright © American Political Science Association 2012

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.)


Bassiouni, M. Cherif. 2010. The Pursuit of International Criminal Justice: A World Study on Conflicts, Victimization, and Post-Conflict Justice. Antwerp: Intersentia.Google Scholar
Green, Donald, and Shapiro, Ian. 1994. Pathologies of Rational Choice Theory: A Critique of Applications in Political Science. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Nalepa, Monika. 2008. “Punish the Guilty and Protect the Innocent: Comparing Truth Revelation Procedures.” Journal of Theoretical Politics 20 (April 2008): 221245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Przeworski, Adam. 1992. Democracy and the Market. Political and Economic Reforms in Eastern Europe and Latin America. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar