Discussion paper: "New Trajectories for Peace in Northern Ireland"

I have produced a new discussion paper entitled "New Trajectories for Peace in Northern Ireland". 

This discussion paper outlines new trajectories for peacebuilding in Northern Ireland, assessing the current context and its key challenges. It argues that the government-level model is ill-conceived, fragmented and conceptually deficient: a thin model of peace that favours coexistence and negative peace, largely accepts division and fosters only small pockets of integration. It rests on an insufficiently understood focus on economic development—“peace by prosperity”—and an uncritical faith in growth that normalises division and inequality. The paper calls for a transformative approach to sustainable peace, grounded in inclusion, renewed civic energy and political leadership no longer rewarded for maintaining social division or presenting one-dimensional economic development as a panacea. This requires new thinking about peace, led by younger voices, to address the past and respond to challenges including ongoing division and sectarianism, climate change, mental health, education, human rights, gender and LGBTQI+ rights, and racism. The focus should be on developing transferable, politically informed capacities and consciousness for social transformation, rather than relying on narrow conceptions of peace and a limited repertoire of methods..

Comments and thoughts are welcome.

Pathways to youth critical action for sustainable peace

We have recently published a new article in the Journal of Social Issues: 

Hamber, B., & McArdle, E. (2026). Peacebuilding, politicization, and youth work: Pathways to youth critical action for sustainable peace in Northern Ireland. Journal of Social Issues, 82, e70073. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.70073. 

The article is open access and can be downloaded here.

Abstract

While Northern Ireland is praised as a successful peace process with valuable lessons, peacebuilding is incomplete. The responsibility increasingly falls on young people to address the unfinished business of the past, despite questions of capacity and the complex political and social dynamics of today. This article examines youth sector peacebuilding in Northern Ireland, highlighting shifts in youth policy and the emergence of a dominant contact hypothesis approach. It is argued that this approach is unsuitable for the current context, where new issues extend beyond the Catholic-Protestant divide, and structural problems such as inequality and social, cultural and political division persist. A critical action approach to peacebuilding is proposed, identifying methodologies to enhance this through consultations, workshops, and interviews with youth leaders and young people. Four pathways to engage young people's critical consciousness for action by youth workers (YWs) are outlined: the appreciation of and adaptation to contexts, instituting deliberative long-term processes, peer-to-peer learning between young people, and all driven by the self-reflexive, politicized and motivating YW.

Irish President, Catherine Connolly Speaks

Great to hear Irish President, Catherine Connolly, speak today at Ulster University. 

A takeaway: "in a world unfortunately that is ever-more consumed with war and militarism...a lesson that we should all tell the world: that peace is normal and that war is not normal and that peace is possible".

Full speech is here if you are interested.

Irish President, Catherine Connolly, Ulster University, 4 Feb 2026

Response to Draft Programme for Government

Myself and Eliz McArdle from Ulster University and on behalf of the Peace Summit Partnership submitted a responses to the Draft Programme for Government for Northern Ireland 2024. Our response focused on contemporary peacebuilding issues for young people in Northern Ireland. It can be downloaded here.

The response was launched with the Peace Summit Partnership response at Stormont on 4 November 2024.

Inaugural John Hume and Thomas P. O’Neill Chair Peace Lecture

The inaugural John Hume and Thomas P. O’Neill Chair Peace Lecture took place on 20 September 2024 at the Derry-Londonderry Campus of Ulster University, in partnership with the Hume O’Neill Chair and the John and Pat Hume Foundation.

The lecture was delivered by Taoiseach Simon Harris TD, who paid tribute to the peacebuilding efforts of John Hume and Tip O’Neill while reaffirming the Irish Government's commitment to deepening peace on the island.

In his address, Taoiseach Harris stated:

"We are also witnessing a new era in British-Irish relations. My recent meetings with Prime Minister Keir Starmer have set in motion a much-needed reset of relations between our two Governments. I have always believed – and this remains unshakable – that the peace process thrives when the British and Irish Governments act in full partnership as co-guarantors of the Good Friday Agreement. Unilateralism failed in the past... Today, we are restoring a genuine sense of partnership, ensuring we address the critical issues that underpin lasting peace, progress, and reconciliation."

The lecture highlighted the importance of collaboration in fostering peace and rebuilding trust across political traditions on the island.

A Truth Commission for Northern Ireland?

This week the BBC has been focusing on dealing with the past in Northern Ireland. The most startling thing about this debate has been how issues have been narrowed before genuine discussion has started. Concepts like truth and justice have been bandied about as if they were mutually exclusive and as if they meant the same to everyone.

The South African model has been used as a benchmark for discussion, with little recognition of what it was about. The other twenty or so truth commissions, in societies as diverse as Ghana, Peru, Argentina, Chile and Sierra Leone, have meanwhile been ignored.

Suddenly, out of nowhere, it seems we all should have an opinion on whether there should be a truth commission for Northern Ireland. Ground work already done on these issues has been neglected, and more measured approaches circumvented.

Debate on this issue is vital, and the more the better. But some key points have been lost in the media circus.

First, dealing with decades of conflict is long-term, complex and time-consuming. It cannot be summed up in a few interviews or emails. It will not entail a single approach or model. International lessons suggest it takes decades. We should not look for any quick fixes.

We should not rush into opinions on different methods before we have agreed that remembering, acknowledgement, truth and justice are important issues for victims and society at large. We must interrogate what we mean by these terms and debate our different perspectives.

The past can only be dealt with if all concerned enter the debate in an inclusive way, aimed at entrenching peace. We should not underestimate the importance of getting this right, ensuring that the discussion is aimed at reconciliation and not point-scoring.

If we do not first agree the underlying principles, all discussion will be contorted and subject to political wrangling. This will ultimately result in mechanisms that will continue the conflict by different means, rather than finding ways constructively to resolve it.

The most extensive consultation on this issue to date has been carried out by the Healing Through Remembering Project. This sought to document possible mechanisms and realisable options for how remembering should occur, so that healing could take place for all those affected. This took two years of discussion.

Importantly, this consultation was run by a board reflecting a range of very diverse backgrounds. The project received over 100 written submissions and recorded thousands of hits on its website.

Many submissions endorsed the value of remembering and spoke of the importance of finding ways to move society forward. But others expressed concerns about the potential pitfalls. The idea of remembering also evoked an emotional response, indicative of much hurt and unresolved pain. The project’s recommendations include a focus on truth recovery, but extend well beyond it.

This is the second point: dealing with the past needs to be seen as wider than a truth-recovery process. Any such mechanism should run alongside other initiatives, such as storytelling, a living museum about the conflict, an annual day of reflection and a network of commemoration projects. Many community projects are also part of the picture.

In the same vein, although victims are central in dealing with the past, thorough engagement demands a focus on the entire society. This is vital when considering the issue of responsibility for the hurts suffered.

It was pointed out in several of the submissions that the need to revisit the past was not confined to those who saw themselves as primarily involved in the conflict: politicians, victims and those who carried out violent acts. For any collective remembering to be helpful it needs to engage the entire society and particularly those who saw themselves as ‘uninvolved'. The whole society has a responsibility to deal with the past.

Thirdly, the Healing Through Remembering Project does recommend that a formal truth-recovery process should be given careful consideration, though only as one part of dealing with the past. But it stipulates that an important first step is a process of acknowledgement, by all, of acts of commission and/or omission.

Political parties, the British and Irish states, republican and loyalist paramilitaries and other institutions would all need fully to acknowledge the extent of their particular culpability. In fact, we should all consider what we have done and have not done to prevent loss of life. Sincere acknowledge

ment is the key foundation for exploring truth recovery in an even-tempered, self-effacing and responsible manner.

Published by Brandon Hamber, Democratic Dialogue, 11 June 2003

Brandon Hamber works as an independent consultant to the Healing Through Remembering Project and is a research associate of Democratic Dialogue in Belfast.

It’s official: The planning system in Northern Ireland is broken (in so many ways)

You would think that in a small place like Northern Ireland prioritising the environment would be a critical government concern, but seemingly it is the opposite.

The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) review of planning in Northern Irelandpublished this month is damning, to say the very least. The PAC was “alarmed” and “appalled” by the planning system. It is failing in its role to protect the environment, be an economic driver or deliver places that people want to live and work in.

The review vindicates the views and experiences of all the campaigners who have raised problems with the system over the years. The report notes that the planning system in Northern Ireland is not working, suffering from entrenched problems.

Prehen Woodland, Brandon Hamber

Like my father-in-law George McLaughlin, some have been trying to get these issues recognised for decades, particularly in relation to the Prehen Ancient Woodland. Finally, some acknowledgement.

Some specific findings include:

• the planning system lacks transparency and public trust; 
• the PAC was “alarmed by the volume of concerns around transparency” the PAC was “appalled by the performance statistics” there is a lack of accountability for poor performance;
• the PAC was “alarmed by the Department’s misunderstanding of accountability”;
• the planning system is one of the worst examples of silo-working within the public sector;
• the Department’s leadership of the planning system has been weak;
• members of the public feel excluded and often believe they have no choice but to launch legal proceedings; 
• the planning committees appear “to take an interest” in particular developments; 
• the PAC was “alarmed to hear that lobbying is happening, even though it shouldn’t be”. 

The PAC recommends that a Commission is established to undertake a fundamental review to ascertain the long-term and strategic changes that are needed to make the system fit for purpose.

Let’s hope this Commission is established, and proper planning can be put in place that protects the environment. The current dysfunctional bureaucracy with its unaccountable and untransparent governance that routinely supports destructive (lobbied-for) development must go.

Well done the 60-strong group, the Gathering, who have shone a light on this failed system.

Published by Brandon Hamber, Slugger O’Toole, 5 April 2022. Also on Medium.

Advocacy Services Research Report

 Today the Commission for Victims and Survivors of Northern Ireland (CVSNI) and Ulster University (INCORE & TJI) launched the Advocacy Services Report focusing on advocacy and dealing with the past. The report was authored by Dr Maire Braniff, Professor Brandon Hamber, Dr Catherine O'Rourke, Dr Philip McCready and Dr John Bell. 

The Report found that while the needs of victims and survivors are not homogenous there are core principles that underpin effective service provision. Essentially they should be victim-led, build trust, not create dependency, be compassionate and empathetic and value the lived experience and perspective of the individual. The groups offering advocacy were led by such principles. Further provision for dealing with the past should draw on and learn from the scale, diversity and experience of advocacy practice to date. 

Equally, however, our research found that this was challenging work. There was unanimity amongst all service users and service providers that the biggest challenge was the systemic delay and the slow nature of legacy investigation and information recovery. The biggest scope for improvement in advocacy services was the accessibility of information and more streamlined and quicker responses from statutory agencies. 

• Download the Full Report
• Download the 4 Page Summary

Amnesty a line in the sand? It’s not even close

If we know anything about the Johnson government in the UK, they are not great at sticking to agreements or taking the views of the devolved nations seriously. The recent statement by the Secretary of State, Brandon Lewis, proposing new legislation to enforce a statute of limitations for all conflict-related violations in Northern Ireland fits this mould.

In July 2019, following a 15-month consultation on the legacy proposal in the Stormont House Agreement (SHA) of 2014 agreed by all political parties, the British Government committed to its full implementation. Two years later, it is now proposing to pull the SHA apart.

The recent proposals remove a focus on justice and investigation, favouring information recovery and storytelling under an undefined banner of reconciliation. All of Northern Ireland’s five main political parties, the Irish government, civil society organisations and most victims’ groups are heavily critical of what amounts to an amnesty for conflict-era offences. Yet, the views of the people of Northern Ireland, and especially victims of both state and non-state violence, seem to matter little.

Ostensibly, Northern Ireland victims are less important than a Tory manifesto pledge to stop so-called “vexatious” legal cases against former British soldiers, even if the price is also a paramilitary amnesty.

Yet, the actual case for amnesty in Lewis’ statement is rather flimsy.

Firstly, Lewis points out that criminal investigations are increasingly unlikely to deliver in court. We know as time passes this is not incorrect. But because justice is unlikely, should prosecutions be abandoned? Could we imagine doing the same for other crimes such as rape because it has a low conviction rate? Choosing to abandon prosecution is not a logistical issue but a political one.

Secondly, it is stated that the current system is not working. But there is no current system. It is a mishmash of processes. No systematic and over-arching attempt has been made to deal with the past in Northern Ireland, despite a set of agreed proposals being put forward in the SHA.

Thirdly, it is implied that amnesty is the only viable route. Yet the British consultation on the SHA points out that the overwhelming view from the 17,000 responses was that amnesty was not appropriate. Two years ago, it was perfectly feasible for the other SHA mechanisms such as storytelling and information recovery to run alongside justice processes, yet suddenly this is off the table.

There are other options under discussion. For example, British soldiers remain eligible for the same deal as paramilitaries in terms of early release under the Belfast Agreement. If convicted, a maximum of two years can be served for conflict crimes. A discussion on reducing the length of this requirement to zero is an option. More radically, another option is to consider amnesty in exchange for truth as per the South African model.

Finally, Lewis argues that it is the criminal justice process that is hampering reconciliation. Is the implication that offering a blanket amnesty will lead to those who committed crimes miraculously coming forward, sharing the truth and seeking reconciliation with those they harmed? If so, this is devoid of reality.

Furthermore, contrary to Lewis’ assertion of amnesty fostering reconciliation, the British government’s own consultation on the SHA points out that curtailing the right to justice would “risk progress towards reconciliation”, not promote it.

What we also know internationally is that amnesties can create a short-term hiatus in a political process, but when justice is evaded, it simply festers and re-emerges rather than creating reconciliation.

The Spanish 1977 amnesty or “pact of forgetting”, following the Franco regime, has not stopped recent attempts to prosecute those responsible. Spain remains deeply divided. In Chile, the amnesty passed by Pinochet in 1978 was overturned in 1998. This led to dozens of prosecutions of those responsible for disappearance and torture over the following decades. Even in South Africa, there are new moves to prosecute those who did not avail of the amnesty offered by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.

In this context, the current proposals are not the product of some difficult soul-searching and the only option left on the table. It is a cynical and calculated political move.

It fits a pattern of political evasion of truth that has been and continues to be fundamentally unjust to all victims. It demonstrates how little Northern Ireland victims mean to the UK government.

The major stumbling block to reconciliation and dealing with the past in Northern Ireland is not victims trying to exercise their rights to justice, but 50 years of avoidance, untruths and injustice.

What is needed now is courageous leadership that fulfils previous commitments and confronts the past head-on, not politicians trying to draw fanciful lines in the sand.

Far from dealing with the past, the proposed amnesty will simply redraw the battle lines for the future.

Published by Brandon Hamber in the Belfast Telegraph, 15 July 2021.

Photo credit: “The Troubles,Belfast, Northern Ireland 1970–2 Coldstream Guards” by Kaspar C Licensed CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

Moment of Truth…Victims of Northern Ireland’s Troubled Past Can’t Wait Forever

I started working in Northern Ireland in 1996, the first question I was always asked was: “Did Northern Ireland need a South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC)?” This was understandable, as I was at the time working in South Africa with victims testifying before the TRC that ran from 1995 until 2003. The troubling thing, however, is that I am still regularly asked that same question nearly 25 years later. During this time, how many victims have died without knowing the truth, or obtaining justice for atrocities?

The failure to deal effectively with the past remains a stain on the copybook of the Northern Ireland peace process. A potted history of the saga highlights how punishingly slow it has been.

The most significant Government-backed process was the Consultative Group of the Past that delivered its report in January 2009. But it ended up shelved, mainly due to its controversial recommendation around compensation for all those who lost relatives in the conflict.

"PM holds Northern Ireland talks" by UK Prime Minister Licensed under CC BY-NC-ND 2.0

Creeping headway was made over the following years, building upon the report in the failed Haass O’Sullivan talks in 2013 and subsequently. In December 2014, the political parties devised the Stormont House Agreement (SHA). It made a comprehensive set of proposals. The recommendations included setting up structures to collect the stories of the conflict in and about Northern Ireland, investigating unresolved cases, seeking information for victims from responsible groups, ensuring statements of acknowledgment for past hurts and identifying steps to build reconciliation. The SHA was put in a draft Bill in 2016. A public consultation started some two years later in May 2018. Over 17,000 written responses were received in the 21-week consultation. In between, the UN Special Rapporteur responsible for transitional justice significantly made two visits to Northern Ireland, tabling recommendations in November 2016. The British Government responded, “the recommendations can be best achieved through the full implementation of the SHA”.

In July 2019, a detailed summary of the consultation on the SHA was published. The British Government noted there was “an obligation to seek to address the legacy of the past” and it remained fully committed to the SHA.

But in March 2020, apparently motivated by political pressures from British Army veterans, the Government rowed back. The Secretary of State essentially proposed to pull the SHA apart, largely removing a focus of justice and investigation, favouring information recovery and storytelling under a broad, and undefined, banner of reconciliation. The Northern Ireland Affairs Committee rightly took issue with the approach, but then they argued for yet another consultation. Reading this abridged history, it is hard not to conclude that the dealing with the past process is nothing more than a protracted and shameful tale of delay and avoidance. How painfully frustrating must this be for victims and survivors.

This does not mean that a South African-style truth commission is the right answer. The exact structure of the South African commission, including its ability to grant amnesty to perpetrators who confessed to gross violations of human rights, is unlikely to work in Northern Ireland. Amnesty meant that some victims had to forgo retributive justice for truth in the name of the wider peace process. Closing down the potential for victims to get their cases to court, or preventing public inquiries, in exchange for a truth-recovery process is an unlikely (and arguably unnecessary) option in Northern Ireland. The public nature of parts of the South African process, with perpetrators and victims testifying openly, might also be a tall order for the more closed culture in Northern Ireland.

Handing over of the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission Report

The South African process had other failings. The administrative treatment of victims and the lack of follow-up was a problem. Sometimes a simplistic language of reconciliation and healing was used that implied that truth and testimony alone could mend a deeply divided society, rather than coupling this with a long-term political process and socio-economic transformation, ensuring equality between black and white South Africans.

On the positive side, South Africans were confronted on television and radio directly with the past and could not ignore it. We had to face the harm we did to one another and listen to the stories of survivors. The five volumes of the South African TRC report, built on the testimony of approximately 22,000 victims (not just the 1,800 who testified publicly), tells a detailed and thematic story of human rights violations. The report and the extensive archive provide a historically authoritative record that cannot be erased.

One of the biggest successes of the process, however, was when the TRC challenged narrow assumptions about the past. I recall a survivor whom we worked with over many years. She believed, as did most of us who knew her, that the police were responsible for her 18-year-old son’s assassination as they had routinely threatened him. Through the TRC it transpired, however, that her son, an underground ANC operative, was shot dead by his own Umkhonto we Sizwe (MK) unit, the then military wing of the ANC. His killers, who the family knew well, accused him of being a spy. Whether these allegations were correct or not, as they have never been proved, the news was shattering for the family. The personal price of truth was enormous. However, as much as it pains me to write this, the TRC did its job in this case.

There were many cases of this kind that challenged dominant narratives. For example, during apartheid it was common to hear about MK activists who had killed themselves in operations. It turned out through the TRC that some of these deaths were the result of state entrapment. The state also carried out what were called “false flag operations”. Sections of the security police undertook illegal acts, such as sabotage and arson, to give credibility to their agents; they also blamed MK activists for bomb blasts they had planted. It was these types of cases that brought home how “dirty” the war was in South Africa. But they also helped to create a “grey” picture of the past, challenging the blinkered view some had of the state and political groups they supported. Arguably, this loosened the narratives of the past, opening the door for new understandings.

Confronting the truth in this way is risky and unsettling. But is foot-dragging risk-free? In Northern Ireland, the past continues to dominate the present. Every day, we hear stories of tensions concerning unresolved cases, memorials and commemorations. Politicians and the public are in continuous narrative battles about who was the most responsible for the hurts of the past and why. Victims also cannot be asked to forget. A significant amount of work has been done by the community sector to fill the gap created by political indecisiveness. But still the unresolved past remains a threat to a stable future, particularly as new challenges, such as Brexit or border polls, loom.

International lessons unequivocally suggest the past will not go away over time. Many countries, where little has been done politically to address the past, such as those in the Balkans, remain polarised. Unresolved cases, as we have seen in Chile and Argentina, are also transferred generationally with new family members continuing the struggle for truth and justice. By any international standards, the undeniable pattern of evasion and political obfuscation of truth is fundamentally unjust to all victims seeking answers. Inaction on the past is not a neutral act, it is an active denial of rights to victims. It is also creating ongoing political tensions in itself. Something must be done.

The South African process is not a blueprint and had its problems, but South Africans developed it to meet their specific set of needs at a critical historical moment. South African politicians showed leadership and courage to undertake a concerted and holistic attempt to deal with the past. In Northern Ireland, a set of workable, locally developed and previously politically agreed proposals have been made in the Stormont House Agreement. These proposals are not perfect, but surely it is time for the governments and political parties to show some backbone and act in unison finally, supporting a way forward on dealing with the past? At the very least, no one can accuse them of rushing into anything.

Published by Brandon Hamber in the Belfast Telegraph, 12 December 2020.

Dealing with the past in Northern Ireland: Resources

This is an ever-growing list of resources I have compiled on dealing with the past in Northern Ireland.  First published 29 June 2012. My last update, following the release of the most recent government policy consultation, was reposted and updated on 18 November 2025.

Key Policy Documents & Resources

Sequential list of key policy documents & resources

• 
  The Northern Ireland Troubles Bill 2024-26 was introduced in the House of Commons on 14 October 2025. The second reading for the bill took place on 18 November 2025. More [External]
• CAJ Briefing Document on UK-Ireland Joint Framework. Download [External]
• The Legacy of the Troubles: A Joint Framework, 19 September 2025. Download [External]
• On 21 January 2026, MPs voted 373 to 106 to remove the contentious conditional immunity clause from the Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act 2023, following a court ruling that the immunity provisions violated human rights and the Windsor Framework.
• The Model Bill Team’s Response to the NIO Proposals, May 2022. Download [External]
• In May 2022, the UK government put forward the Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Bill. Download [External]
• The Model Bill Team’s Response to the NIO Proposals, September 2021. Download
• Addressing the Legacy of Northern Ireland’s Past, July 2021, Command Paper CP 498. Download
• Veterans of the Northern Ireland Troubles protected (newspaper article on British Government "proposals" as no official sources exist at this point) (6 May 2021). Read [External]
• Addressing the Legacy of Northern Ireland's past Northern Ireland Affairs Committee consultation (Interim Report) and Evidence (26 October 2020). Download [External]
• Addressing the Legacy of Northern Ireland's past Northern Ireland Affairs Committee consultation: The UK Government's New Proposals (open to 1 June 2020). Download [External]
  
• Ministerial Statement: Addressing Northern Ireland Legacy Issues: Written statement - HCWS168 (18 March 2020). Download [External]
  
• Analysis of the Stormont House Agreement (SHA) consultation responses (July 2019). Download [External]
  
• Consultation: Addressing the Legacy of Northern Ireland's Past (closed 10 September 2018). Download
• Draft Northern Ireland (Stormont House Agreement) Bill (10 March 2016). Download [External]
• Healing Through Remembering: Guide to the Stormont House Agreement (SHA) (2016). Download [External]
• Report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion of truth, justice, reparation and guarantees of non-recurrence on his mission to Northern Ireland: Comments by the State (16 Nov 2016). Download
• Report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion of truth, justice, reparation and guarantees of non-recurrence, on his mission to the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (March 2016). Download
• 'Model Bill Team' based at Queen's University Belfast and Committee on the Administration of Justice. Stormont House Agreement – Model Implementation Bill and Explanatory Notes (17 September 2015). Download [External]
• Stormont House Agreement (23 December 2014). Download
• Proposed Agreement (31 December 2013). An agreement among the parties of the Northern Ireland Executive on Parades, Select Commemorations, and Related Protests; Flags and Emblems; and Contending with the Past (also known as Haas O'Sullivan Proposals). Download [External]
• House of Commons Northern Ireland Affairs Committee (December 2009). The Report of the Consultative Group on the Past in Northern Ireland. Response. Download [External]
• Report of the Consultative Group of the Past (January 2009). Download [External]
  
• House of Commons. Northern Ireland Affairs Committee. (2008). Session 2007-08, evidence from Brandon Hamber, Cate Turner, Alan McBride and Sandra Peake. Download
• Healing Through Remembering (2006). Making Peace with the Past: Options for truth recovery regarding the conflict in and about Northern Ireland. Download
  
• House of Commons. Northern Ireland Affairs Committee (October 2005). Ways of Dealing with Northern Ireland's Past: Government Response to the Committee's Tenth Report of Session 2004-05. Download
• House of Commons Northern Ireland Affairs Committee  Ways of Dealing with Northern Ireland's Past: Interim Report - Victims and Survivors  Tenth Report of Session 2004–05. Download
  
• Healing Through Remembering Consultation on Dealing with the Past (2002). Download
  
• "We Will Remember Them": Report of the Victims Commissioner (April 1998). Download [External]
  

Articles by Brandon Hamber and Colleagues

• Hamber, B. (2021, 15 July). Amnesty a line in the sand? It’s not even close. Belfast Telegraph.
• Hamber, B. (2020, 12 December). Moment of Truth…Victims of Northern Ireland’s Troubled Past Can’t Wait Forever. Belfast Telegraph.
• O'Neill, S. & Hamber, B. (2020). Response on Mental Health to Dealing with the Past Consultation. Northern Ireland Affairs Committee Consultation on "Addressing the Legacy of Northern Ireland's past: The UK Government's New Proposals". INCORE, University of Ulster. Submitted online 31 May 2020.
• O'Neill, S. & Hamber, B. (2018). The need for a victim and survivor centred, trauma-informed approach: A Response to the Addressing the Legacy of Northern Ireland's Past Consultation. INCORE, University of Ulster. Submitted online 5 October 2018.
• Hamber, B. and Kelly, G. (2018). Response on Reconciliation to the Consultation Paper: Addressing the Legacy of Northern Ireland's Past. INCORE, University of Ulster. Submitted online 5 October 2018. 
• Hamber, B., & Kelly, G. (2018). Reconciliation: A Northern Ireland Case Study. In Kofi Annan Foundation and Interpeace (Eds), Challenging the Conventional: Can Post-Violence Reconciliation Succeed? (pp. 98-148). New York/Geneva: Kofi Annan Foundation & Interpeace.
• Brandon Hamber, 2008, Submission to the Consultative Group on the Past in Northern Ireland. (Submission, January). Belfast, Northern Ireland.
• Brandon Hamber, 2006, Getting to the Truth Through Talking, Daily Ireland, 14 March 2006.
• Brandon Hamber, 2004, Time to stop permissible lies about the past, Polity, 26 November.
• Brandon Hamber, 2004, Submission to the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee. Reconciliation: Ways of dealing with Northern Ireland's Past (Submission, December). London: Northern Ireland Affairs Committee.
• Brandon Hamber, 2003, A Truth Commission for Northern Ireland, Blog Post, 11 June 2003
• Hamber, B. (2002). Rights and Reasons: Challenges for Truth Recovery in South Africa and Northern Ireland. [Journal Article]. Fordham International Law Journal, 26(4), 1074-1094.
• Hamber, B. (Ed.). (1998). Past Imperfect: Dealing with the Past in Northern Ireland and Societies in Transition. Derry/Londonderry: University of Ulster, INCORE.

Websites

• Healing Through Remembering
• Transitional Justice Institute
• CAIN
• CAIN (Section on Victims and Commemoration)
• Bloody Sunday Inquiry
• Commission for Victims and Survivors
  
• Committee for the Administration of Justice
• Consultative Group on the Past
• Historical Inquiries Team
• Pat Finucane Centre

Publications

List of key academic papers on Northern Ireland, dealing with the past and transitional justice, review the annotated list (56 references).

Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) BillNorthern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) BillNorthern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) BillDownloadDownloadDownload More

On the Passing of John Hume

John Hume is undoubtedly one of the most significant politicians of the last 50 years. It was sad to hear of his passing today, and my thoughts are first with Pat Hume and the family.

John Hume was the product of social upheaval linked to the conflict in and about Northern Ireland from 1960s onwards, and he rose to prominence from humble roots when he took a stand against violence, in many ways similar to those that significantly influenced his thinking, such as Martin Luther King Jr. and Mahatma Gandhi.

Growing up in South Africa, and moving to Northern Ireland only in 2001, I came late to the work and philosophy of John Hume. However, when I first started to work in Derry in 1996, his home city, his legacy was impossible to ignore. This continues and is no more acute than today as he leaves the political stage forever.

In 1998, shortly after the signing of the Belfast Agreement, when I was still based in South Africa but was in Northern Ireland over the winter, I first met Pat Hume. She called at the door of my wife's sisters house where we were having a New Year's Eve party, just to say hello and wish us well. The down to earth nature of the Hume family was immediately apparent. Little did I know at the time that my history would become tied into the work of John Hume.

John Hume at the unveiling of a plaque to mark those he brought to Derry as part of the Tip O'Neill lecture series at Ulster University including Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Mary McAleese, John Kerry and Kofi Annan, among many others

 

 

In 2015, I was appointed the John Hume and Thomas P. O'Neill Chair in Peace at Ulster University. The Chair honours John Hume and his pivotal role in the peace process, and Thomas P. O'Neill who, as Speaker of the House of Representatives, was a significant force for enlisting the United States in advancing peace in Northern Ireland. The two men worked together to bring the US into the peace process. The Chair recognises the contribution of both men to conflict transformation and peacebuilding by recording and sharing the lessons learned and continuing the process of peace and reconciliation for future generations. The Chair's reach extends now to South Africa, Colombia, Sierra Leone, Liberia, Basque Country and Uganda, among others.

Every activity I, therefore, undertake in my professional life is tied to John Hume's legacy, and hopefully my contribution to peace locally and globally, as modest as it is, is a fitting tribute to his life and work, along with that of Tip O'Neill.

On hearing of the death of John, I wanted to make a few personal reflections, mostly about his work, which I have tried to better understand since being appointed the Hume O'Neill Chair. In the last few years, in particular, I have been reading some of Hume's speeches and watching video clips. His contribution is immense. Anyone who says that John Hume only ever made one speech, has never taken the time to mull over his words. I was also fortunate enough to be asked to write the Foreword to Sean Farren's edited book "John Hume: In His Own Words". This book, which is a collection of original speeches, particularly helped me to develop a deeper understanding of Hume's politics. Some of my reflections below I also recorded in the book but wanted to share some today.

I was fortunate enough to meet John and Pat Hume many times since 1998 thanks to their association with Ulster University and the Magee Campus in particular. What always came across is their strong belief in social justice, political tolerance and the peaceful resolution of conflict. I have further identified four key approaches routinely mentioned by John Hume to achieve this.

Firstly, Hume is committed to the idea that dialogue is essential and that conflicts can only be resolved through open discussion, even in contexts of sharp differences of opinion. Underpinning this is the idea that, certainly in Ireland, there is an inter-dependency between people that is inescapable.

Secondly, he believes that inter-dependence stretched globally. The European Union was an example of how unity and inter-dependence could be fostered. This also led Hume to recognise the importance of the US and its familial and historical connections to Ireland, as key to the peace process and stimulating economic growth, which was necessary to ensure and ultimately sustain peace. This global commitment, in part, explains his relationship with Tip O'Neill. But more profoundly this global commitment developed into Hume's form of nationalism, that is, a conviction that people and not place or geography defined nationhood.

Thirdly, Hume opposes the use of violence. In his speeches, Hume continually highlights with great compassion the cost of violence to individuals routinely quoting statistics of death. He also notes other impacts, i.e. that violence "has cost us jobs" and that peace cannot be built on "the ruins of a shattered economy". There are other elements of practicality in his views on non-violence, that is, that republican violence distracted from the social injustices in the society and would "only strengthen Unionism".

Finally, he consistently speaks of reconciliation. Hume's view seems to start instrumentally concerning reconciliation, that is that Irish Unity is only possible through different traditions coming together. A United Ireland for Hume would be achieved not by overcoming "the Northern Protestant but to seek his help and cooperation". However, as his thinking develops, it is clear he becomes more committed to the principle of reconciliation at all costs. Hume sees the "road of reconciliation" as the only "real road forward".

At the core of these beliefs, however, is a profoundly pragmatic view of the world, not a rose-tinted idea of social harmony. Reconciliation for Hume is not only people-to-people relationship building. Hume sees reconciliation as needing institutional, political and social support. Hume noted in 1983 that many "furiously abhor the work of reconciliation" for this very reason. We know today, not only in Northern Ireland but globally, that some still see reconciliation negatively: a sop to the aggressors; a false coming together; selling out one's principles; or some idealistic peacenik concept. However, John Hume suggests we have no other choice than to foster reconciliation if we are, for better or worse, destined to share our society with others.

John Hume challenges us all to recognise that reconciliation is profoundly difficult and tricky yet at the heart of sustainable peace, noting in a speech at Dublin Castle in 1983: "Let that reconciliation start today in this room – between ourselves. Goodwill alone – and I know we have with us today the goodwill of the mass of the people of this island – will not suffice. We must apply all the resources of our collective intelligence, imagination, generosity and determination to this great enterprise and be seen to do it. We must mean business and we must be seen to desperately mean business".

To this end, as I reflect sadly today on the passing of John Hume, I am reminded of these weighty words and feel inspired to play my small part in upholding his legacy. I hope others with more political influence will use this moment to reflect and rise to the challenge. Rest in peace, John, and thank you for all the hard lessons you continue to teach us, and for the hope your words and deeds continue to convey.

Policy Brief: Historical Institutional Abuse and Transitional Justice

Professor Patricia Lundy and I have now published a Policy Brief based on work on historical institutional abuse and transitional justice.

This policy briefing draws upon the Northern Ireland Historical Institutional Abuse Inquiry to explicate the nexus of historical institutional abuse inquiries with transitional justice approaches. Through detailed analysis of empirical research with those who gave testimony to the Inquiry, the briefing explores to what extent the Inquiry was victim-centric, participatory and responsive. Drawing on lessons from transitional justice, the brief outlines five recommendations that could strengthen the victim-centred nature of approaches to dealing with the legacy of historical child abuse. The brief concludes that addressing victims' needs should be the linchpin for both transitional justice and historical institutional abuse approaches.

To download the Policy Brief, click here.

To download the longer Research Article, click here.

Seminar: Trauma-Informed Approach

The second seminar in the Dealing with the Past series was hosted online on 18 May 2020, with some 250 people joining online. I chaired this important online event.

The seminar was entitled "The need for a trauma-informed approach to address the conflict's legacy" and was delivered by Professor Siobhan O'Neill on 18 May 2020. In this seminar Professor O'Neill presents the evidence on the transgenerational impact of trauma, and highlights the importance of a "trauma-informed" approach to addressing the conflict's legacy to protect the population from further harm.

The seminar is part of the Transitional Justice Institute (TJI) and INCORE, in partnership with Healing Through Remembering and the John Hume and Thomas P. O'Neill Chair in Peace, online seminar series. The seminar was chaired by Professor Brandon Hamber.

Bibliography: Northern Ireland and transitional justice

List of key academic papers on Northern Ireland, dealing with the past and transitional justice, review the annotated list (56 references).

• Aiken, N. T. (2010). Learning to Live Together: Transitional Justice and Intergroup Reconciliation in Northern Ireland. International Journal of Transitional Justice, 4(2), 166-188.
• Aiken, N. T. (2015). The Bloody Sunday Inquiry: Transitional Justice and Postconflict Reconciliation in Northern Ireland. Journal of Human Rights, 14(1), 101-123. 
• Christine Bell, 'Transitional Justice, Interdisciplinarity and the State of the "Field" or "Non-Field",' International Journal of Transitional Justice 3(1) (2009): 5–27.
• Bell, C. (2003). Dealing with the Past in Northern Ireland. Fordham International Law Journal, 26(4), 1095-1147.
• Brown, K. (2012). 'What It Was Like to Live through a Day': Transitional Justice and the Memory of the Everyday in a Divided Society. International Journal of Transitional Justice, 6(3), 444-466. 
• Brown, K., & Ní Aoláin, F. (2014). Through the Looking Glass: Transitional Justice Futures through the Lens of Nationalism, Feminism and Transformative Change. International Journal of Transitional Justice. 
• Campbell, C., & Ni Aolain, F. (2003). Local Meets Global: Transitional Justice in Northern Ireland. Fordham International Law Journal, 26(4), 871-892. 
• Campbell, C., Ni Aolain, F., & Harvey, C. (2003). The Frontiers of Legal Analysis: Reframing the Transition in Northern Ireland. Modern Law Review, 66(3), 317-345. 
• Campbell, C., & Turner, C. (2008). Utopia and the doubters: truth, transition and the law. Legal Studies, 28(3), 374-395.
• Campbell, C., Ni Aolain, F. (2003). Local Meets Global: Transitional Justice in Northern Ireland. Fordham International Law Journal, 26(4), 871-892.
• Duffy, A. (2010). A Truth Commission for Northern Ireland? International Journal of Transitional Justice, 4(1), 26-46.
• Gawn, R. (2007). Truth cohabitation: a truth commission for Northern Ireland?, Irish Political Studies, 22(3), pp. 339 –361.
• Hackett, C., & Rolston, B. (2009). The burden of memory: Victims, storytelling and resistance in Northern Ireland. Memory Studies, 2(3), 355-376. 
• Hamber, B. (Ed.). (1998). Past Imperfect: Dealing with the Past in Northern Ireland and Societies in Transition. Derry/Londonderry: University of Ulster, INCORE.
• Hamber, B. (2003). Rights and Reasons: Challenges for Truth Recovery in South Africa and Northern Ireland. [Journal Article]. Fordham International Law Journal, 26(4), 1074-1094.
• Hamber, B., & Lundy, P. (2020). Lessons from Transitional Justice? Toward a New Framing of a Victim-Centered Approach in the Case of Historical Institutional Abuse. Victims & Offenders, 15(6), 744-770.
• Healing Through Remembering. (2002). Report of the Healing Through Remembering Project. Belfast: Healing Through Remembering.
• Healing Through Remembering. (2005). Storytelling audit: An audit of personal story, narrative and testimony initiatives related to the conflict in and about Northern Ireland (Compiled by Gráinne Kelly). Belfast: Healing Through Remembering.
• Healing Through Remembering. (2006). International Experiences of Days of Reflection and Remembrance. Belfast: Healing Through Remembering.
• Healing Through Remembering (2006). Making Peace with the Past: Options for truth recovery regarding the conflict in and about Northern Ireland. Belfast: Healing Through Remembering. 
• Hearty, K. (2015). Legislating Hierarchies of Victimhood and Perpetrators: The Civil Service (Special Advisers) Act (Northern Ireland) 2013 and the Meta-Conflict. Social & Legal Studies, 25(3), 333-353. 
• Hegarty, A. (2003). The Government of Memory: Public Inquiries and the Limits of Justice in Northern Ireland. Fordham International Law Journal, 26(4), 1148-1192.
• Hegarty, A. (2004). Truth, Law and Official Denial: The Case of Bloody Sunday. Criminal Law Forum, 15, 1990246.
• Jankowitz, S. (2018). The 'Hierarchy of Victims' in Northern Ireland: A Framework for Critical Analysis. International Journal of Transitional Justice, 12(2), 216-236.
• Kinder, E. (2020). Non-recurrence, reconciliation, and transitional justice: situating accountability in Northern Ireland's oral history archive. The International Journal of Human Rights, 1-20.
• Lawther, C. (2013). Denial, Silence and the Politics of the Past: Unpicking the Opposition to Truth Recovery in Northern Ireland. International Journal of Transitional Justice, 7(1), 157-177.
• Lawther, C (2017) The truth about loyalty: Emotions, ex-combatants and transitioning from the past. International Journal of Transitional Justice 11(3): 484–504.
• Dempster, L. (2019). 'Quiet' Transitional Justice: 'Publicness', Trust and Legitimacy in the Search for the 'Disappeared'. Social & Legal Studies, 29(2), 246-272. doi:10.1177/0964663919833027
• Lawther, C. (2020). Haunting and transitional justice: On lives, landscapes and unresolved pasts. International Review of Victimology, 0269758020945144. 
• Lundy, P., McGovern, M. (2006). A Truth Commission for Northern Ireland? Northern Ireland Life and Times Survey: Research Update, 46.
• Lundy, P., McGovern, M. (2008). Whose Justice? Rethinking Transitional Justice from the Bottom Up. Journal of Law and Society, 35(2), 265-292.
• Lundy, P., McGovern, M. (2008). A Trojan Horse? Unionism, Trust and Truth-telling in Northern Ireland. IJTJ, 2(1), 42-62.
• Lundy, P. (2009). 'Can the past be policed? Lessons from the Historical Enquiries Team Northern Ireland. Journal of Law and Social Challenges, 11, 109-171.
• Lundy, P. (2011). Paradoxes and challenges of transitional justice at the 'local level': historical enquiries in Northern Ireland. Contemporary Social Science, 6(1), 89-105.
• Lundy, P., & McGovern, M. (2008). Whose Justice? Rethinking Transitional Justice from the Bottom Up. Journal of Law and Society, 35(2), 265-292. 
• Lundy, P. and M. Mcgovern (2008). "Truth, Justice and Dealing with the Legacy of the Past in Northern Ireland, 1998–2008" Ethnopolitics, 7(1), 177-193.
• Lundy, P. (2010). Commissioning the Past in Northern Ireland. Review of International Affairs, LX(1138-1139), 101-133.
• Mallinder, L. (2019). Metaconflict and international human rights law in dealing with Northern Ireland's past. Cambridge International Law Journal, 8(1), 5-38. 
• McDowell, S. (2018). Transitional Justice and the Politics of Inscription: Memory, Space and Narrative in Northern Ireland. The AAG Review of Books, 6(4), 260-262.
• McEvoy, K. (2007). Beyond Legalism: Towards a Thicker Understanding of Transitional Justice. Journal of Law and Society, 34(4), 411-440. 
• Kieran McEvoy, 2010, Making peace with the past in Northern Ireland, The Guardian, October, 2010
• McEvoy, K. (2010). Truth, Transition and Reconciliation: Dealing With the Past in Northern Ireland. London: Willan Publishing.
• McEvoy, K. (2018). Travel, Dilemmas and Nonrecurrence: Observations on the 'Respectabilisation' of Transitional Justice. International Journal of Transitional Justice, 12(2), 185-193.
• Kieran McEvoy and Anna Bryson, 'Justice, Truth and Oral History: Legislating the Past "from Below" in Northern Ireland,' Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly 67(1) (2016): 67–90.
• McEvoy, K., & McConnachie, K. (2013). Victims and Transitional Justice: Voice, Agency and Blame. Social & Legal Studies, 22(4), 489-513. 
• McEvoy, K., Holder, D., Mallinder, L., Bryson, A., Gormally, B., & McKeown, G. (2020). Prosecutions, Imprisonment and the Stormont House Agreement: A Critical Analysis of Proposals on Dealing with the Past in Northern Ireland.
• McEvoy, Kieran ;  Bryson, Anna; Gormally, Brian; Holder, Daniel; Greenberg, Daniel; Hill, Jeremy;  Mallinder, Louise (2016). Stormont House Agreement: Model Implementation Bill. Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly 67(1): 1-36.
• Ní Aoláin, F. (2002). Truth Telling Accountability and the Right to Life in Northern Ireland Issue. European Human Rights Law Review, 5, 572.
• O'Rourke, C. (2008). The Shifting Signifier of 'Community' in Transitional Justice: A Feminist Analysis. Wisconsin Women's Law Journal, 23(2).
• Rolston, B. (2002). Assembling the jigsaw: truth, justice and transition in the North of Ireland. Race and Class, 44(1), 87-106.
• Rolston, B. (2006). Dealing with the Past: Pro-State Paramilitaries, Truth and Transition in Northern Ireland. Human Rights Quarterly, 28(3), 652-675.
• Bill, R., & Fionnuala Ní, A. (2018). Colonialism, Redress and Transitional Justice: Ireland and Beyond. State Crime Journal, 7(2), 329-348.
• Rooney, E., & Aoláin, F. N. (2018). Transitional Justice from the Margins: Intersections of Identities, Power and Human Rights. International Journal of Transitional Justice, 12(1), 1-8. 
• Slugger O'Toole, Debating Dealing with the Past in the Assembly, 10 October 2010.
• Simpson, K. (2009). Truth Recovery in Northern Ireland: Critically Interpreting the Past. Manchester: Manchester University Press.

 "The Troubles,Conway Street ,Belfast,Northern Ireland -1970,(The Peace Line)" 
by Kaspar C is licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0A

Dealing with the Past Seminar Series

Despite the challenging current context debates about how to address Northern Ireland's past continue. I am delighted to be organising in my capacity as John Hume and Thomas P. O'Neill Chair in Peace - with the Transitional Justice Institute (TJI) and INCORE and in partnership with Healing Through Remembering - and important seminar series on this issue.  This online seminar series will explore the Stormont House Agreement and dealing with the past in Northern Ireland and run for the remainder of the year.

Find out more and review the schedule of seminars.

Screenings of Two Indonesian Films

The lastest screenings "Screening Violence" project took place in Dungannon on 16 January 2020, with the support of the Dungannon Film Club, showing two Indonesian films followed by a discussion with participants. The films were Sowan (The Visit) which documents the friendship of two young women, Mien and Murti, who end up on different sides of the political troubles of the mid-1960s. The second film Provocator Damai (Peace Provocateur) is short documentary charts the experiences of Christians and Muslims residing with families of the opposite faith. The second film, in particular, raised an important discussion about the impact of cross-community work in Northern Ireland, with a range of divergent views.

Scene from The Visit (Sowan)

The AHRC Project "Screening Violence: A Transnational Study of Post-Conflict Imaginaries" is undertaken with partners in Newcastle and Bristol University, and works with co-investigators and partners in Algeria, Argentina, Colombia, Northern Ireland and Indonesia.

BBC Archive on the Troubles

On 8 November 2019, I worked with the BBC Rewind team to launch on the Magee Campus the Ten Chapters Of The Northern Ireland Troubles. The Ten Chapters, produced by the BBC Rewind editorial and technology team, is an online, multi-media series of episodes covering the conflict in Northern Ireland from the 1950s to the 1990s. As part of the launch a workshop was run with 14-22 year olds from the City. The BBC project came about as a result of discussions with the INCORE/CAIN project teams at Ulster University and Queen's University Belfast, and as part of the tripartite agreement between the BBC and the academic institutions.

Click here to check out the Archive

Screening Violence: Argentinian Films

The lastest screenings of the Screening Violence Project took place in Dungannon on 7 November 2019, with the support of the Dungannon Film Club, showing two Argentinian films followed by a discussion with participants.

The films shown were "Padre/Father" (Director Santiago Bou Grasso), a short stop motion animation piece that portrays the day-to-day life of a woman who looks after her bedridden military father. The second film was "Who am I?/Quién soy yo?"(Director Estela Bravo), a documentary about the stolen babies of the 1976-83 military dictatorship in Argentina who have recovered their true identity. Needless to say, the films provoked an interesting discussion.

The Argentinian animation can see below, and if you further questions on the project or want to participate contact me.

PADRE from opusBou on Vimeo.

The Chair has continued work on AHRC Project "Screening Violence: A Transnational Study of Post-Conflict Imaginaries" with partners in Newcastle and Bristol University, and works with co-investigators and partners in Algeria, Argentina, Colombia, Northern Ireland and Indonesia.

Exodus at New Gate Fringe Festival

The "Screening Violence" project partnered with the New Gate Fringe Festival in Derry/Londonderry, which included a screening of the film "Exodus" and focus group discussion after on 31 July 2018. A panel discussing the movement of Protestants from the City side of Derry was then undertaken and filmed in the evening including panelists Gregory Campbell, Eamon McCann, Pauline Gardiner, Niall Gilmartin, and Adrian Grant.

Panelists Gregory Campbell, Eamon McCann, Pauline Gardiner
Niall Gilmartin, and Adrian Grant

This event was part of the AHRC Project "Screening Violence: A Transnational Study of Post-Conflict Imaginaries" with partners in Newcastle and Bristol University, and works with co-investigators and partners in Algeria, Argentina, Colombia, Northern Ireland and Indonesia.