Transitional Justice and Reconciliation Processes: Examining Ethiopia and Somalia

The Horn of Africa faces some of the world’s most intractable and protracted conflicts, where decades of violence have deeply scarred communities. In Somalia, clan divisions persist and terrorism continually reignites unrest, while Ethiopia contends with recurring ethnic tensions and violence. These conflicts, rooted in historical grievances and political marginalization, create instability that conventional peacebuilding efforts alone cannot resolve. This is where transitional justice (TJ) and reconciliation become essential — breaking the cycle of violence by acknowledging past wrongs and addressing deep-rooted grievances.  

TJ refers to the formal and non-formal policy measures and institutional mechanisms societies adopt through an inclusive process to address past violations, divisions, and inequalities, promoting security and democratic, socio-economic transformation. According to the African Union Transitional Justice Policy (AUTJP), transitional justice and reconciliation help societies move from conflict to peace, ensuring stability by preventing future violence and fostering inclusive governance. Without TJ and reconciliation processes, unresolved grievances and mistrust can fuel ongoing conflict. 

National initiatives like Somalia's National Reconciliation Framework (NRF) and Ethiopia's TJ Policy mark progress toward a recognition of cultivating peace and justice by genuinely addressing past conflicts, promoting accountability, and enhancing inclusive dialogue. However, the initiative’s success depends on inclusive, well-supported processes. Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) play a pivotal role in this—representing the voices of many, including marginalized communities, bridging the gap between practice and policy, and ensuring that the path to TJ and reconciliation is rooted in accountability and local needs. 

This article examines Somalia's NRF and Ethiopia's TJ Policy to highlight the key role of CSOs in TJ and reconciliation processes in enhancing accountability, community engagement, and prospects for long-term peace.  

Ethiopia’s Transitional Justice Policy and Role of CSOs in Ethiopia 

In November 2022, the Government of Ethiopia and the Tigray People’s Liberation Front signed the Pretoria Peace Agreement, ending the two-year civil war in Ethiopia's northern region. The peace agreement includes a pledge to initiate a TJ process. Through the negotiations, both parties acknowledged the need for reconciliation, healing, and addressing decades of historical and political grievances in Ethiopia. Following the peace agreement, the Ministry of Justice formed the Transitional Justice Working Group of Experts (TJWGE), marking the start of Ethiopia's first-ever TJ process. In 2023, the TJWGE conducted 80 public consultations and collected input for TJ policy options from different stakeholders, including CSOs. Following the consultation, the Council of Ministers adopted Ethiopia's National TJ Policy in 2024. The policy seeks to address both current and past violations and grievances, with the goal of guiding the country toward lasting peace and democracy. 

Since the enactment of Proclamation 1113/2019, an updated civil society law, Ethiopia has had a more open civic space, allowing CSOs to engage in advocacy, human rights, democracy, and peacebuilding. Furthermore, the TJ policy and the Implementation Roadmap highlight the key role of local CSOs in capacity building, advocacy, implementation, and monitoring. The policy’s ratification has strengthened CSO networks and aligned their advocacy with the TJ initiative. This has led to the formation of platforms like the Transitional Justice Consortium (TJC-Ethiopia) to support these efforts. 

Despite efforts by CSOs to regain momentum, concerns persist that bureaucracy and lack of political commitment may limit the ability of CSOs to monitor and engage with TJ institutions. The initial green paper on TJ policy options for Ethiopia proposed the direct involvement of international experts in the implementation process, but the ratified TJ policy restricts their role to an advisory position. This limits independent stakeholders to a monitoring role in the process. Furthermore, ongoing conflicts, lack of resources and restrictions by government institutions make it difficult for CSOs to engage actively and advocate freely for the marginalized and affected community, even with the recent policy advances. Without CSO ownership, the process risks lacking inclusivity, transparency, and meaningful participation. 

The National Reconciliation Framework and the Role of CSOs in Somalia 

The case of Somalia provides an interesting point of comparison for the peace and reconciliation process in Ethiopia. The conflict in Somalia has evolved from a civil war in the 1980s to state collapse, clan factionalism, and warlordism in the 1990s, and then into a globalized ideological conflict in the early 2000s. The persistence of conflict is rooted in deep historical, political, and clan-based divisions. Further, ongoing instability and fragmentation have obstructed effective resolution efforts, while various localized reconciliation attempts have failed to fully address the impacts of the civil war on Somali communities. 

In 2017, the Mohamed Abdullahi administration launched the NRF as a strategic and proactive measure for reconciliation. However, the NRF encountered significant delays, particularly because of electoral disputes in 2022. In 2023 and early 2024, the new Hassan Sheikh administration reviewed the NRF process. Since its relaunch in 2024, the NRF has gained renewed momentum and aims not only to respond to ongoing conflict but also to recognize the need for a structured and culturally appropriate approach to reconciliation. 

The NRF aims to tackle historical grievances and structural injustices by promoting national reconciliation, restoring trust, and rebuilding confidence in government. It integrates traditional and modern conflict resolution methods to foster peace and counter-extremism. Developed with nationwide consultations, including CSO inputs, the NRF highlights the crucial role of various stakeholders, including CSOs in driving societal change, conflict transformation, and genuine reconciliation. In part because of limited government involvement for more than 30 years, CSOs have been instrumental in reducing violence, promoting peace, and enhancing stability, filling the governance gap after the 1991 collapse. Their local knowledge, commitment to inclusivity, and trusted grassroots engagement make them essential to the NRF’s implementation process. They can oversee reconciliation efforts, mobilize resources, and advocate for peacebuilding, fostering support and addressing grievances.  

Some CSOs were involved in the initial consultation process, and those that were are prepared to actively contribute to its implementation, emphasizing inclusivity, transparency, and accountability. However, there is a general lack of awareness of the NRF, including among a broader group of CSOs. Additionally, resource constraints have reduced outreach and engagement, particularly to groups supporting marginalized populations. These limitations, if unaddressed, will hinder the ability to effectively address social issues, advocate for change, and implement the NRF. 

Comparative Analysis of TJ and Reconciliation in Ethiopia and Somalia 

Somalia and Ethiopia have both initiated processes to address historical grievances, promote accountability, and enhance peace. Ethiopia’s TJ policy and Somalia’s NRF focus on inclusive dialogue, public consultation, and engaging diverse stakeholders such as CSOs, traditional leaders, women, and youth. Both frameworks seek to rebuild trust, enhance governance, and establish a foundation for sustainable peace. Additionally, they acknowledge the vital role of CSOs in TJ and reconciliation processes. 

Both countries can leverage CSO networks to extend their reach within communities. Given their established trust, CSOs are well-positioned to lead community dialogues, civic education, truth-telling, and reconciliation initiatives. To enhance these efforts, governments need to establish genuine and open platforms that actively support CSO-led initiatives advancing these important government policies by including grassroots voices. Strengthening the opportunities for CSOs to include insights into justice, national reconciliation, and conflict resolution is crucial for meaningful participation.  

The framework implementation processes must be intentional to include associations dedicated to women, youth, and other marginalized groups. Keylessons from both frameworks highlight the effectiveness of inclusive consultations and public engagement, which increase stakeholder buy-in and emphasize the importance of local voices in TJ processes. However, limited resources and capacity support for CSOs—especially those led by women—as well as bureaucratic barriers and restrictions on international CSO participation, hinder meaningful engagement. Even though national ownership is essential, it is equally important to ensure meaningful engagement by enhancing the trustworthiness of the process. 

Moreover, global expertise supporting both processes is essential to ensure transparency and collaboration. It is also important that these processes align with international standards, such as the Guidance Note of the UN Secretary-General on TJ and the AUTJP. Additionally, policymakers should prioritize incorporating long-term peacebuilding strategies within the TJ frameworks that extend beyond the immediate reconciliation period to ensure lasting impact. 

These initiatives, combined with a strong political will to improve transparency, accountability, and the effectiveness of TJ and reconciliation processes, can make definitive strides towards lasting peace in Ethiopia and Somalia.