Significant tensions exist between constitutional strategies central to contemporary peacemaking in ‘deeply divided places’ and human rights law (HRL). These tensions are generally framed as a peace versus justice dilemma. Such framing is built on a narrow, individualistic conception of justice that fails to account for the meaning and requirements of justice in such places, and is consequently blind to the possible ‘justness’ of peacemaking strategies. In response, this article offers the conce…
Read moreSignificant tensions exist between constitutional strategies central to contemporary peacemaking in ‘deeply divided places’ and human rights law (HRL). These tensions are generally framed as a peace versus justice dilemma. Such framing is built on a narrow, individualistic conception of justice that fails to account for the meaning and requirements of justice in such places, and is consequently blind to the possible ‘justness’ of peacemaking strategies. In response, this article offers the concept of Collective Equality as a new theoretical basis for the law of peace. Collective Equality endorses national groups as legitimate actors and sets proper relations among them based on equality and non-domination. Collective Equality builds on emerging trends in self-determination law and provides a normative yardstick for political arrangements in deeply divided places. Collective Equality aims to decrease tensions between HRL and peacemaking practice, and to support HRL to better serve justice in such places.
