Projects / Programmes
Dealing with the past: putting Slovenia in comparative perspective
| Code |
Science |
Field |
Subfield |
| 7.00.00 |
Interdisciplinary research |
|
|
| Code |
Science |
Field |
| S220 |
Social sciences |
Cultural anthropology, ethnology |
| Code |
Science |
Field |
| 6.04 |
Humanities |
Arts (arts, history of arts, performing arts, music) |
transitional justice, politics of memory, dealing with the past, wars of Yugoslav succession, World War II, war crimes, violations of human rights
Researchers (1)
| no. |
Code |
Name and surname |
Research area |
Role |
Period |
No. of publicationsNo. of publications |
| 1. |
32090 |
PhD Jovana Mihajlović Trbovc |
Culturology |
Head |
2016 - 2017 |
155 |
Organisations (1)
Abstract
The project stands at the intersection of the disciplines of transitional justice and memory studies, which is a novel approach. It examines whether/how the processes of establishing facts about the past criminal events changes the dominant historical perceptions in a society. Hence, the project challenges one of the basic assumption of transitional justice theory which claims that once the ‘truth’ is publicly presented, it becomes a part of public memory, which demands a new "politics of memory" of the state.
Informed by the findings of memory studies, the project puts under scrutiny the presumption of the 'reformatory' potential that politics of memory may play in the process of dealing with the crimes committed by the state in the past. The project examines when acts of memory politics (e.g. public commemorations, history textbooks etc.) play the reconciliatory role in the society, and when the nation-building momentum leads the process into deepening social division, pushing it further away from the ideal of what 'dealing with the past' should be.
Thus, the project poses twofold research question: a) have achievements of transitional justice influenced politics of memory?, b) has official reproduction of public memory been conducted in the spirit of 'dealing with the past'?
The project examines these conceptual questions through analysis of ten case-studies in the region of former Yugoslavia (Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, and Montenegro). The project focuses on two temporal periods of history which are particularly contested in the contemporary post-Yugoslav states and relate to: 1) crimes committed during and in the aftermath of the Second World War; 2) violations of human rights connected to the dissolution of Yugoslavia and wars of Yugoslav succession.
Within each case study of the project, a causal analysis will be made on the issue whether particular achievement of transitional justice (such as factual finding of a particular legal investigation) influenced politics of memory, as well as a qualitative evaluation whether particular instant of public memory reproduction (for instance, at a commemorative event) is conducted in the spirit of dealing with the past.
Significance for science
The main research question of the project is whether/how the processes of establishing facts about the past criminal events changes the dominant historical perceptions in a society – taking for example a number of case studies, including Slovenia. That question is situated within ongoing debates (among scholars and activists) on the concept of transitional justice – the concept that encompasses range of legal, political and social mechanisms that are applied in societies transforming from authoritarianism to democracy, as well as from violent conflict to peace-building, and address the crimes and violations of human rights, committed by the state (or in the name of the state). The project challenges one of the basic assumption of the theory of transitional justice: that once the ‘truth’ is publicly presented, it becomes a part of public memory, which demands a new "politics of memory" of the state. Through the analysis of various case studies, the results of the project demonstrate that certain mechanisms of transitional justice (e.g. International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia) do not influence on the memory politics in the countries of former Yugoslavia in accordance with the projections of the academic literature. The mainstream thought of transitional justice theory presupposes that the court’s judgments ‘fortify’ knowledge about historical events in the community that identifies with the victims, while in the community that identifies with the perpetrators, they contribute to ‘dealing with the past’ by influencing change in the dominant historical interpretation towards acknowledgement and condemning the crimes committed ‘in our name’. This research has proven these presuppositions wrong, which is its main academic contribution. The project clearly demonstrates that the memory politics are formed quite independently from the decisions of the court (or other institutions establishing historical facts, such as forensic commissions), and that the key factor for a change in these politics is the ‘dialogical’ interaction among competing memory agents (such as ethno-national political elites or various civil-society organisations). Still, it does not mean that local memory politics do not ‘react’ to the work of transitional justice institutions, such as in the case of the important ICTY judgments: memory agents reject, adopt or reinterpret findings of the judgments, which leads to some change in the historical narratives that they promote. Project’s importance for the development of science is in that it shows ontological difference between two main principles of the concept of transitional justice: achieving ‘national reconciliation’ and ‘dealing with the past’. The project demonstrates that, in the region of former Yugoslavia, the process of achieving ‘national reconciliation’ by the rule goes against the values of the principle of ‘dealing with the past’, which demands acknowledgment and condemnation of the crimes committed by the state.
Significance for the country
Within the project that analyses how post-Yugoslav states dealt with the legacy of 1) the crimes committed during and in the aftermath of the Second World War; and 2) the violations of human rights connected to the dissolution of Yugoslavia and wars of Yugoslav succession, there were two topics connected to Slovenia. The first one relates to the issue of mass executions of the political opponents to the Communist party in Yugoslavia immediately after the end of the Second world war. The analysis first took overview of the all institutional mechanism for establishing the facts about those historical events that took place since 1991. This project is the first case where anlaysis of this topic is situated within the concept of transitional justice, which enables international comparative analysis. Such an approach is also justified by the research results which show that some of those institutional mechanism were driven by the idea of 'national rather than 'dealing with the past'. Precisely the intersection of these two principles is an important factor in explaining why some mechanism of establishing the facts about criminal events from the past have only limited influence on the dominant historical narratives and memory politics. The other case study is the issue of the erasure from the registry of permanent residents of Slovenia that took place in 1992, and was later declared by the courts as mass violation of human rights. The researcher analysed the activities towards establishing the facts about those events, that were conducted by the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Slovenia, European Court of Human Rights and the international commission of the Ministry of the Interior of the Republic of Slovenia. By the nature of these institutional activities, they could be considered as mechanisms of transitional justice, even though they were not named as such by the Slovenian academic and general community. The research showed how the findings of these institutions partially influenced on the change in public memory of the Erasure in Slovenia, and why they were insufficient for true 'dealing with the past' that would subsume also accepting the responsibility for the violations of human righst that took place as the consequence of the Erasure.
Most important scientific results
Interim report,
final report
Most important socioeconomically and culturally relevant results
Interim report,
final report
