How do international donors actually work with non-state justice and security actors?

'Legal Pluralism and International Development Interventions, Special Issue of the Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law', nr. 63 (2011) edited by Helene Maria Kyed (DIIS), explores the interface between international development interventions and non-state mechanisms of justice and security. Examples are drawn from South Sudan, Northern Somalia, South Africa, Liberia, Botswana, Sierra Leone and Vanuatu. The point of departure is the recent international recognition of the need to involve non-state actors in justice and security sector reforms. This departs for former state-centric approaches and supports a broader acceptance of 'legal pluralism' as an empirical fact- i.e. that the state (and its laws) are but one among a number of institutions that regulate society.

However, the shift towards more pluralistic understandings of justice and security provision is often more rhetorical than real. There are many normative and practical challenges to working with non-state actors when it comes to actual programming. Much of what goes on in practice still supports a strong state building agenda, even when this undermines local understandings and needs. The vast majority of donor resources continue to be poured into formal state courts and police, which struggle to meet even the most basic justice needs of the population or which sustain elite interests and serve political agendas.

The eight article contributions to the special issue have in common a critical stance towards state-centric models of intervention. Some of them illustrate the negative consequences of such models for ordinary citizens’ access to justice and security in post-conflict contexts (Liberia, Sierra Leone and South Sudan). Others give examples of alternative approaches that build on local experiences and relations (in Vanuatu, Somaliland, Botswana and South Africa). A key argument is that there is a need to fundamentally change the way that 'the State' and statehood is (still) conceptualised by international agencies (and beyond), so as to enable more sustainable solutions that build on empirical manifestations of plurality rather than ideal models.

The articles bring into play a number of alternative concepts that challenge the state centric-optic, such as 'hybridity', 'plurality', 'networks', 'nodes' and 'webs'. The issue also highlights the need to focus on 'the politics of legal pluralism'. This is informed by an understanding of justice and security provision, and by extension social ordering, as deeply political phenomena, being both the product of broader power relations as well as part of (re)producing such relations.

The Introduction to the Special Issue by DIIS researcher Helene Maria Kyed, provides an overview of past and present donor policies on justice and security, as well as synthesizes the alternative concepts and approaches presented in the articles. DIIS guest researcher Louise Wiuff Moe contributes with an article on Northern Somalia, which provides an interesting example of how a very low level of international intervention can produce positive results in terms of peace building.

The special issue is based on a selected number of the papers presented at the 1-3 November, 2010 Conference in Copenhagen: Access to Justice and Security. Non-State Actors and Local Dynamics of Ordering. The conference was organised by the Danish Institute for International Studies (DIIS) with support from the Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs and with additional funding from the International Development Law Organisation (IDLO).

For more information on and outputs from the conference see the justice and security theme page.

For more information on the Journal issue and article abstracts