Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

What Are the Limits of Blockchain? Considerations on the Use of Blockchain in Transitional Justice Processes

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Blockchain and the Law

Part of the book series: Information Technology and Law Series ((ITLS,volume 37))

  • 206 Accesses

Abstract

Blockchain technology has the capacity to change how people live, communicate with each other, acquire products, store information, and exchange data. Such a technology—one that is able to perform in different segments and which is being called a general-purpose technology, just like the internet,—can be useful in transitional justice processes. This chapter intends to analyze the use of blockchain technology as a new component within transitional justice processes (see Sect. 3.3.2), understand how blockchain would behave as part of a transitional justice scenario (see generally Sect. 3.3), by considering a state-of-the-art situation (see Sect. 3.3.5). More specifically, the chapter analyzes how blockchain could be incorporated into important aspects of transitional justice: criminal prosecutions, truth commissions, reparations, the restoration of democratic institutions, and reconciliation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 69.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 89.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    Pham and Aronson 2019.

  2. 2.

    Sarkin 2017.

  3. 3.

    Gavshon and Gorur 2019.

  4. 4.

    General-purpose technologies (GPT) can influence several sectors simultaneously, like electricity and the internet. Werbach 2018, p. 72.

  5. 5.

    Piracés 2018.

  6. 6.

    Nakamoto 2009.

  7. 7.

    Users can trust the system without having to trust in other users or a third party.

  8. 8.

    Lamport et al. 1982.

  9. 9.

    Harber and Stornetta 1991; Bayer et al. 1993.

  10. 10.

    Rauchs et al. 2018, p. 15.

  11. 11.

    The definition of Andreas Antonopoulos is: “A block is a container data structure that aggregates transactions for inclusion in the public ledger, the blockchain”. Antonopoulos 2017, p. 196.

  12. 12.

    Rauchs et al. 2018, pp. 72–74.

  13. 13.

    Ibid., p. 73.

  14. 14.

    Ibid., p. 502.

  15. 15.

    Antonopoulos 2017, p. 197.

  16. 16.

    According to the Ethereum Whitepaper the Proof-of-Work “was a breakthrough in the space because it simultaneously solved two problems. First, it provided a simple and moderately effective consensus algorithm, allowing nodes in the network to collectively agree on a set of canonical updates to the state of the Bitcoin ledger. Second, it provided a mechanism for allowing free entry into the consensus, while simultaneously preventing sybil attacks”. Buterin 2021.

  17. 17.

    It is the resolution of the Byzantine Generals, problem described above. Blind trust in the system ensures that good decisions are made that do not harm the network.

  18. 18.

    Werbach 2018, p. 501.

  19. 19.

    Antonopoulos 2017, p. 195.

  20. 20.

    Ibid., p. 196.

  21. 21.

    Werbach 2018, p. 503.

  22. 22.

    For a deeper understanding of smart contracts in the judicial world: Herian 2018.

  23. 23.

    Fink 2018, p. 670.

  24. 24.

    There are several definitions of what a smart contract is as well as different applications and variations of smart contracts. Also, smart contracts represent the term “code is law”, which means that one is bound by code to fulfil what is disposed of in code. However, it may generate judicial issues in the case of miscoding or bad faith.

  25. 25.

    Fleuret and Lyons 2020, p. 15.

  26. 26.

    Werbach 2018, pp. 213–214.

  27. 27.

    Ølnes et al. 2017.

  28. 28.

    Although the owner of the system grants access, the protection measures such as consensus, PoW and encryption remain the same. The only difference is that there is a central authority that chooses who can participate in the network and who cannot.

  29. 29.

    United Nations Secretary-General 2004.

  30. 30.

    United Nations Secretary-General 2010.

  31. 31.

    Ibid., p. 2.

  32. 32.

    Ibid.

  33. 33.

    Villalba 2011, p. 2.

  34. 34.

    To understand some of the critics of the U.N. understanding and approach to Transitional Justice, please see: Nagy 2008. And Lambourne 2014a.

  35. 35.

    Classification used by some scholars such as Jeremy Sarkin.

  36. 36.

    In that sense, authors such as Wendy Lambourne call for another perspective on Transitional Justice, namely “Transformative Justice”. For a deeper understanding, please see: Lambourne 2014b.

  37. 37.

    González and Varney 2013, p. 4.

  38. 38.

    However, in some cases truth commissions can be established outside the States apparatus.

  39. 39.

    González and Varney 2013, p. 9.

  40. 40.

    Avruch 2010, p. 34.

  41. 41.

    González and Varney 2013, pp. 10–12.

  42. 42.

    Avruch 2010, pp. 39–40.

  43. 43.

    Bickford 2007, p. 1026.

  44. 44.

    Ibid., p. 1002.

  45. 45.

    Ibid., pp. 1004–1005.

  46. 46.

    Villalba 2011, p. 8.

  47. 47.

    Hayner 2011, p. 217.

  48. 48.

    Ibid.

  49. 49.

    Bickford 2007, pp 1028–1029.

  50. 50.

    Cai 2018, pp. 974 and 985.

  51. 51.

    To more fully understand crowdfunding issues, please see Belleflamme et al. 2013.

  52. 52.

    A collateral issue that may arise is the case of tokens issued by TCs being traded in secondary markets. On the one hand, this could promote the entrance of the TCs into a quasi-financial system (not unlike a stock market). On the other hand, the tokens could be programmed with an expiration date, and be automatically destroyed after a specific date or event.

  53. 53.

    Salazar et al. 2015.

  54. 54.

    Bickford 2007, p. 1030.

  55. 55.

    González and Varney 2013, p. 49.

  56. 56.

    Gavshon and Gorur 2019, pp. 72–73.

  57. 57.

    Lambourne 2014b, p. 20.

  58. 58.

    United Nations Secretary-General 2010, p. 7.

  59. 59.

    Meron 2006, p. 91.

  60. 60.

    Investigatory, prosecutorial, judicial, defensive, witness and victim protection and support.

  61. 61.

    Hybrid courts have a mixed characteristic of being composed of national and international elements, usually operating in the jurisdiction where the crimes occurred: Office Of The United Nations High Commissioner For Human Rights 2008a.

  62. 62.

    According to Article 17 of the Rome Statute.

  63. 63.

    Villalba 2011, p. 3.

  64. 64.

    Ibid., p. 4.

  65. 65.

    One example is the old DOI/CODI in Brazil, symbol of the Brazilian military dictatorship and torture practices during the regime, scrapped as part of the Brazilian democratization process.

  66. 66.

    United Nations Secretary-General 2010, p. 9.

  67. 67.

    Villalba 2011, p. 8.

  68. 68.

    Vetting and lustration are processes that are designed to remove from office public servants who have been implicated in human rights abuses, normally as part of a previous regime. See De Greiff 2007.

  69. 69.

    Sarkin 2016, p. 327.

  70. 70.

    Ibid.

  71. 71.

    To understand more about blockchain in the fight against corruption, please see: Aggarwal and Floridi 2019.

  72. 72.

    To understand more about the e-Voting system, please see: Lyons et al. 2018.

  73. 73.

    To understand more about land titles via blockchain, please see Eder 2019, and Kshetri 2017.

  74. 74.

    Ølnes et al. 2017, p. 357.

  75. 75.

    United Nations General Assembly 2006.

  76. 76.

    Villalba 2011, p. 5.

  77. 77.

    United Nations General Assembly 2006, pp. 7–9.

  78. 78.

    Office Of The United Nations High Commissioner For Human Rights 2008b, p. 15.

  79. 79.

    Villalba 2011, p. 6.

  80. 80.

    Kshetri 2017.

  81. 81.

    Roht-Arriaza 2013, p. 21.

  82. 82.

    Maupin 2017.

  83. 83.

    Rella 2019.

  84. 84.

    With this method, each identity is provided with unicity (no two people will have the same identifier characteristics) and singularity (each person will have one identifier) by the technology.

  85. 85.

    The WFP also promotes an acceleration program for several start-ups that work in disrupting hunger. Please see: World Food Programme 2020.

  86. 86.

    Wang and De Filippi 2020.

  87. 87.

    Hayner 2011, p. 180.

  88. 88.

    United Nations Secretary-General 2010, p. 9.

  89. 89.

    Nagy 2008 and Lambourne 2014a.

  90. 90.

    Avruch 2010 and Aiken 2014.

  91. 91.

    In that sense Nevin Aiken proposes contact, dialogue, promotion of truth, justice, and the amelioration of socioeconomic inequalities. Aiken 2014, p. 57.

  92. 92.

    Ibid.

  93. 93.

    Skaar 2012.

  94. 94.

    Werbach 2018, p. 77.

  95. 95.

    Lindman et al. 2020.

References

  • Aggarwal N, Floridi L (2019) The Opportunities and Challenges of Blockchain in the Fight Against Government Corruption. 19th General Activity Report of the Council of Europe Group of States against Corruption (GRECO). GRECO 82. March 2019

    Google Scholar 

  • Aiken NT (2014) Rethinking Reconciliation in Divided Societies. A social learning theory of transitional justice. In: Buckley-Zistel S et al. (eds) Transitional Justice Theories. Routledge

    Google Scholar 

  • Antonopoulos AM (2017) Mastering Bitcoin. Programming the Open Blockchain, 2nd edn. O’Reilly

    Google Scholar 

  • Avruch K (2010) Truth and Reconciliation Commissions: Problems in Transitional Justice and the Reconstruction of Identity. Transcultural Psychiatry

    Google Scholar 

  • Ayed AB (2017) A Conceptual Secure Blockchain-Based Electronic Voting System. International Journal of Network Security & Its Applications (IJNSA). Vol. 9. No 3

    Google Scholar 

  • Balasco LM (2013) The International Criminal Court as a Human Security Agent. Praxis: The Fletcher Journal of Human Security. XXVIII. 46. January 2013

    Google Scholar 

  • Bayer D et al. (1993) Improving the Efficiency and Reliability of Digital Time-Stamping. In: Capocelli R, De Santis A, Vaccaro U (eds) Sequences II: Methods in Communication Security, and Computer Science. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Belleflamme P et al. (2013) Crowdfunding: Tapping the right crowd. Journal of Business Venturing

    Google Scholar 

  • Bickford L (2007) Unofficial Truth Projects. Humans Right Quarterly. Vol. 29. No. 4. https://doi.org/10.1353/hrq.2007.0036

  • Brounéus K (2003) Reconciliation. Theory and Practice for Development Cooperation

    Google Scholar 

  • Buterin V (2021) Ethereum Whitepaper https://ethereum.org/en/whitepaper/#a-next-generation-smart-contract-and-decentralized-application-platform. Accessed 30 May 2021

  • Cai CW (2018) Disruption of financial intermediation by FinTech: a review on crowdfunding and blockchain. Accounting and Finance, Vol 58, Issue 4

    Google Scholar 

  • Chinkin C (2007) The Protection of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights Post-Conflict. Report Commissioned by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR)

    Google Scholar 

  • De Greiff P (2007) Vetting and Transitional Justice. In: De Greiff P, Mayer-Rieckh A (eds) Justice as Prevention: Vetting Public Employees in Transitional Societies. Social Science Research Council

    Google Scholar 

  • Eder G (2019) Digital Transformation: Blockchain and Land Titles. Vienna International Development network. 2019 OECD Global Anti-Corruption & Integrity Forum

    Google Scholar 

  • Fink M (2018) Blockchains: Regulating the Unknown. German Law Journal, 19(4)

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischer M (2011) Transitional Justice and Reconciliation: Theory and Practice. In: Austin B, Fischer M, Giessmann HJ (eds) Advancing Conflict Transformation. The Berghof Handbook II. Barbara Budrich Publishers, Opladen/Framington Hills

    Google Scholar 

  • Fleuret F, Lyons T (2020) Blockchain and the Future of Digital Assets. The European Union Blockchain Observatory & Forum, February 2020

    Google Scholar 

  • Gavshon D, Gorur E (2019) Information Overload: How Technology Can Help Convert Raw Data into Rich Information for Transitional Justice Processes. International Journal of Transitional Justice, Vol 13

    Google Scholar 

  • González E, Varney H (2013) Truth Seeking. Elements of Creating an Effective Truth Commission. International Center for Transitional Justice (New York). Amnesty Commission of the Ministry of Justice of Brazil (Brasília)

    Google Scholar 

  • Harber S, Stornetta WS (1991) How to Time-Stamp a Digital Document. Journal of Cryptology, Vol. 3, Nº 2

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayner PB (2011) Unspeakable Truths: Transitional Justice and the Challenge of Truth Commissions, 2nd edn. Routledge, New York/London

    Google Scholar 

  • Herian R (2018) Legal Recognition of Blockchain Registries and Smart Contracts

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobovitz O (2016) Blockchain for Identity Management. Technical Report #16-02. The Lynne and William Frankel Center for Computer Science Department of Computer Science, Ben-Gurion University

    Google Scholar 

  • Ko V, Verity A (2018) Blockchain for the Humanitarian Sector: Future Opportunities. Digital Humanitarian Network (DH)

    Google Scholar 

  • Kshetri N (2017) Will blockchain emerge as a tool to break the poverty chain in the Global South? Third World Quarterly, 2017. Vol. 38, Nº 8, 1710-1732. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2017.1298438

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lambourne W (2014a) What are the Pillars of Transitional Justice? The United Nations, Civil Society and the Justice Cascade in Burundi. Macquarie Law Journal. Vol 13

    Google Scholar 

  • Lambourne W (2014b) Transformative justice, reconciliation and peacebuilding. In: Buckley-Zistel S et al. (eds) Transitional Justice Theories. Routledge

    Google Scholar 

  • Lamport L et al. (1982) ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems. Vol 4. No. 3

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindman J et al. (2020) The uncertain promise of blockchain for government. OECD Working Papers on Public Governance. No 43

    Google Scholar 

  • Lyons T et al. (2018) Blockchain for Government and Public Services. The European Union Blockchain Observatory & Forum

    Google Scholar 

  • Maupin J (2017) Blockchain and the G20: Building an Inclusive, Transparent and Accountable Digital Economy. Center for International Governance Innovation, Policy Brief No 101

    Google Scholar 

  • Meron T (2006) The Humanization of International Law. The Hague Academy of International Law Monographs, Volume 3. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers

    Google Scholar 

  • Nagy R (2008) Transitional Justice as a Global Project: critical reflection. Third World Quarterly. Vol. 29, No 2. https://doi.org/10.1080/01436590701806848

  • Nakamoto S (2009) Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System. Available at https://bitcoin.org/en/bitcoin-paper. Accessed 29 May 2021

  • Nouwen SMH (2006) “Hybrid Courts”: The hybrid category of a new type of internationals crimes courts. Utrecht Law Review, Vol. 2, No 2

    Google Scholar 

  • Office Of The United Nations High Commissioner For Human Rights (2008a) Rule-Of-Law Tools For Post-Conflict States. Maximizing the Legacy of Hybrid Courts. United Nations. HR/PUB/08/2

    Google Scholar 

  • Office Of The United Nations High Commissioner For Human Rights (2008b) Rule-Of-Law Tools For Post-Conflict States. Reparations Programmes. United Nations. 2008b. HR/PUB/08/1

    Google Scholar 

  • Ølnes S et al. (2017) Blockchain in government: Benefits and implications of distributed ledger technology for information sharing. Government Information Quarterly, Vol. 34, Issue 3

    Google Scholar 

  • Pham PN, Aronson JD (2019) Technology and Transitional Justice. International Journal of Transitional Justice, Vol 13

    Google Scholar 

  • Piracés E (2018) The Future of Human Rights Technology. A Practitioner’s View. In: Land M, Aronson J (eds) New Technologies for Human Rights Law and Practice. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316838952.013

  • Rauchs M et al. (2018) Distributed Ledger Technology Systems: A Conceptual Framework. Cambridge Center For Alternative Finance

    Google Scholar 

  • Rella L (2019) Blockchain Technologies and Remittances: From Financial Inclusion to Correspondent Banking. Frontiers in Blockchain

    Google Scholar 

  • Roht-Arriaza N (2013) Reparations and Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights. UC Hasting Research Paper no 53. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2177024

  • Salazar J et al. (2015) Crowdfunding for Emergencies, United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs. Think Brief. OCHA POLICY AND STUDIES SERIES

    Google Scholar 

  • Sarkin J (2016) Refocusing Transitional Justice to Focus Not Only on the Past, But Also to Concentrate on Ongoing Conflicts and Enduring Human Rights Crises. Journal of International Humanitarian Legal Studies. Vol. 7. No 2. https://doi.org/10.1163/18781527-00702002

  • Sarkin J (2017) How developments in the science and technology of searching, recovering and identifying the missing/disappeared are positively affecting the rights of victims around the world. Human Remains and Violence: An Interdisciplinary Journal. Vol 3. No 1

    Google Scholar 

  • Skaar E (2012) Reconciliation in a Transitional Justice Perspective. Transitional Justice Review. Vol. 1. Issue 1. https://doi.org/10.5206/tjr.2012.1.1.4

  • United Nations General Assembly (2006) Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy for Victims of Gross Violations of International Human Rights Law and Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law. Resolution 60/147

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations Secretary-General (2004) The Rule of Law and Transitional Justice in Conflict and Post-Conflict Societies. Report of the Secretary-General. S/2004/616

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations Secretary-General (2010) United Nations Approach to Transitional Justice. Guidance Note of the Secretary-General

    Google Scholar 

  • Villalba CS (2011) Transitional Justice: Key Concepts, Processes and Challenges. Briefing Paper. Institute for Democracy and Conflict Resolution (IDCR)

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang F, De Filippi P (2020) Self-Sovereign Identity in a Globalized World: Credentials-Based Identity Systems as a Driver for Economic Inclusion. Frontiers in Blockchain. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fbloc.2019.00028

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Werbach K (2018) The Blockchain and the New Architecture of Trust, Kindle edn. MIT Press

    Google Scholar 

  • World Food Programme (2020) Building Blocks: Blockchain for Zero Hunger. World Food Programme. Available at https://innovation.wfp.org/project/building-blocks. Accessed 20 May 2021

  • Zwitter A, Boisse-Despiaux M (2018) Blockchain for humanitarian action and development aid. Journal of International Humanitarian Action, Vol. 3, No 16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41018-018-0044-5

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Eça de Queiroz Street, 279, Ap 4 Vila Mariana, São Paulo, SP, 04011-031, Brazil

    Renato Gomide M. de Almeida

Authors
  1. Renato Gomide M. de Almeida
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Renato Gomide M. de Almeida .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Law, Nova School of Law, Lisbon, Portugal

    Francisco Pereira Coutinho

  2. Department of Law, Universidade Católica Portuguesa, Lisbon, Portugal

    Martinho Lucas Pires

  3. World Bank Group, Lisbon, Portugal

    Bernardo Correia Barradas

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2024 T.M.C. Asser Press and the author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Gomide M. de Almeida, R. (2024). What Are the Limits of Blockchain? Considerations on the Use of Blockchain in Transitional Justice Processes. In: Pereira Coutinho, F., Lucas Pires, M., Correia Barradas, B. (eds) Blockchain and the Law. Information Technology and Law Series, vol 37. T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6265-579-9_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6265-579-9_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague

  • Print ISBN: 978-94-6265-578-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-6265-579-9

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation