Geneva – Local human rights organizations, in cooperation with international partners, have released an extensive field study aimed at exploring the local community's perspective on transitional justice, its mechanisms, and the feasibility of its implementation. The study calls for the adoption of a comprehensive path to transitional justice as a fundamental necessity for achieving lasting peace and genuine societal reconciliation.
According to the study, “The Path Towards Peace”, issued by SAM for Rights and Liberties, and the Abductees’ Mothers Association, as part of the SPARK project supported by the DT Institute, Yemen has, for nearly a decade, been witnessing a series of grave violations against civilians amidst a weakened state, the presence of multiple local and regional conflict actors, and a widespread culture of impunity. The report emphasizes that transitional justice—embodying principles of fairness, accountability, reparations, and truth-telling—must be the cornerstone of any future political process or peace agreement.
The study adopted a qualitative methodology, incorporating individual interviews and focus group discussions. A total of 122 interviews were conducted, including 109 with citizens from various demographics and 13 with transitional justice experts. In addition, 20 focus group discussions were held, involving 203 participants of both genders, across six major governorates: Sana’a, Aden, Taiz, Al Hudaydah, Marib, and Hadhramaut. Data was collected using digital tools like Kobo Toolbox and analyzed with SPSS and Maxqda software to ensure reliability.
Patterns of Violations and Their Impact on Victims
The study found that 79% of victims surveyed reported either direct personal experience or that a family member had suffered a violation. These ranged from arbitrary arrest, enforced disappearance, torture, property looting, sexual harassment, domestic violence, child recruitment, shelling of residential neighborhoods, to workplace abuses. Discriminatory practices based on region or political affiliation were also noted. Several participants highlighted that women, minorities, displaced persons, and marginalized groups are disproportionately affected and face greater challenges accessing justice.
Proposed Transitional Justice Pathways
Regarding the key aspects of transitional justice that are most suitable for the Yemeni context, participants stressed the importance of mechanisms for victim compensation (82%), institutional reforms (79%), initiatives promoting reconciliation and peaceful coexistence (75%), truth-telling (75%), increased international oversight and assistance (70%), and holding perpetrators accountable (70%).
Challenges to Compensation Implementation
According to participants in the focus group discussions, compensating the victims of violations is considered one of the fundamental pillars of the transitional justice process. However, this process faces significant and multiple challenges. 28.3% of participants pointed to the absence of an independent, trustworthy national body responsible for assessing and determining compensation as the main challenge. 21.4% noted that favoritism, discrimination, and corruption hinder the fair implementation of compensation. 19.5% attributed the challenges to a lack of financial resources, while 11.3% mentioned the lack of awareness among both officials and the public, as well as the indifference of authorities. 8.2% expressed the victims' skepticism toward the idea of compensation due to the severity of the violations, such as murder, rape, and enforced disappearance. Meanwhile, 5.7% viewed the continued presence of perpetrators in the public scene and the failure to lift their immunity, along with the ongoing conflict, as real obstacles to achieving justice and reparations.
Proposed Solutions for the Justice Process
When discussing proposed solutions for achieving transitional justice, participants in the focus group discussions highlighted the importance of adopting a comprehensive approach that addresses the root causes of the crisis. 39.4% of participants believed that ending the conflict, dismantling militias, and establishing a unified state capable of enforcing its legal and security sovereignty are essential steps. Meanwhile, 21.1% called for garnering support from international organizations and donor countries, providing experts and resources within a transparent and unbiased framework. 18.3% considered community awareness of transitional justice values and past experiences as crucial for preventing the recurrence of violations. 9.9% emphasized the importance of establishing a national fund for compensating victims and providing reparations, while 7% stressed the need for a collective effort from both official and popular sectors. Additionally, 4.2% highlighted the importance of involving the victims themselves in managing this process, as they are most familiar with its details and actual needs.
The Reconciliation vs. Accountability Divide
The study recorded a divide in participant views: 64.3% prioritized reconciliation and ending the war, while 35.7% favored accountability and justice first. This split, the report notes, illustrates the necessity for a flexible model that balances victims’ demands for justice with the need for reconciliation and ending impunity.
Representation of Marginalized Groups
The study showed significant support for involving marginalized groups in transitional justice processes. Most participants advocated for the representation of women, displaced persons, and minorities on relevant committees, along with ensuring safe spaces for their voices and building their legal and rights capacities. The participants also suggested forming local reconciliation committees reflecting diverse social groups and providing legal and financial support to these communities.
Barriers to Justice for Victims
Participants outlined major barriers hindering victims' pursuit of justice: fear of perpetrators and retaliation (91%), lack of legal protections (76%), weak legal awareness (63%), and financial constraints (59%). Women, in particular, highlighted social customs and traditions as major obstacles, citing fear of stigma and social ostracism should they reveal their experiences.
Roles of Local Actors
A majority of the 13 experts interviewed agreed that political parties should focus on drafting supportive legislation, promoting national reconciliation, and facilitating victim compensation. However, some focus group participants questioned the parties’ readiness, citing their narrow interests and lack of political will.
The role of civil society was strongly emphasized as crucial to supporting transitional justice. Participants advocated for strengthening civil society capacities in documentation, advocacy, and legal aid for victims, and for organizing public awareness campaigns. Sustainable funding and international partnerships were also deemed necessary to ensure civil society’s independence and its reach to affected populations.
The Houthis: Exclusion or Inclusion?
Views on the involvement of the Houthi group in the transitional justice process were sharply divided. Several participants—particularly from Sana’a—viewed the group as a key obstacle to any reconciliation or dialogue due to its rigid ideological stance and total rejection of transparency and accountability. Others argued that excluding any major actor would lead to fragile and incomplete agreements, calling instead for international pressure to push the group toward unconditional participation.
The Debate Over Tribal Leaders and Customary Norms
Participants were split on the role of tribal leaders and customary norms in transitional justice, with 70% supporting their involvement versus 30% opposing. Proponents cited their social standing and influence, with 30.4% stating they are respected, 26.8% noting their power could contribute to security and peace, and 14.3% recognizing their positive impact. Opponents, however, viewed tribal leaders as conflict instigators who operate outside state authority (43.8%) and reinforce regionalism and undermine the rule of law (18.8% each). Despite these differences, all 13 experts agreed that tribal leaders should be involved due to their strong influence (30%) and potential role in facilitating transitional justice (15%), especially in the absence of state institutions and within Yemen’s deeply rooted tribal context.
Opportunities and Future Foundations
The study concluded that despite the formidable challenges facing Yemen’s transitional justice pathway, promising opportunities remain. Notably, the consensus-based outcomes of the National Dialogue Conference were seen as a foundational framework adaptable to current political realities. Local reconciliation experiences also present practical assets that can be harnessed at the community level. Moreover, ongoing international interest and support for accountability and reconciliation mechanisms offer strategic leverage to pressure Yemeni actors into engaging in a comprehensive and fair process, rooted in local foundations and governed by national consensus and independent oversight.
The study warned that ignoring transitional justice would entrench impunity, deepen societal divisions, and jeopardize the prospect of sustainable peace in Yemen. It called for urgent, responsible action from all local and international stakeholders to ensure justice for victims and to build a more equitable and just future.
Final Recommendations
The field study concluded with a set of detailed recommendations aimed at supporting a comprehensive and effective transitional justice pathway in Yemen. Chief among them was the need to incorporate transitional justice principles into any future peace agreement, asserting that addressing past violations, uncovering the truth, and providing reparations must not be deferred but rather integral to any political settlement.
It emphasized the establishment of a national court specialized in war crimes and severe human rights violations to ensure accountability and end impunity, with technical and logistical support from international actors.
The study also called for empowering victims and civil society to lead the justice process by enabling their active participation in designing and implementing transitional justice mechanisms and engaging them in national discussions about the future of justice and reconciliation.
Furthermore, it stressed the importance of supporting local reconciliation initiatives and linking them to national frameworks, thereby transforming limited efforts into institutional, transparent, and sustainable tracks. This is seen as key to building trust among various social and political groups.
The study urged the provision of psychological and material support for victims and their families, including physical rehabilitation, mental health care, and economic empowerment, recognizing these as essential components of reparative justice and social cohesion.
Regarding civil society, The Road to Peace study underscored the importance of capacity-building in monitoring, documentation, and advocacy, alongside training and partnerships that enhance its field presence and influence—especially in light of challenges such as limited resources and lack of legal protections.
The SPARK project, which underpins this effort, aims to promote national reconciliation and sustainable justice by assessing civil society awareness and capacities, exploring community perceptions of transitional justice mechanisms, and proceeding through three phases: field assessment, capacity-building, and piloting local restorative justice initiatives, in addition to knowledge exchange and advocating for international investment in the justice pathway.