97some basic agreement about what actually happened (and what continues to be
happening). From this perspective, truth may appear crucial for achieving the
fundamental goal of peace.
The problem, however, is that at least in the initial phase, truth-seeking efforts
can be rather unilateral (conducted by Ukrainian authorities). It is thus important
that the whole process should be transparent and also effectively communicated
to the wider public. For example, ongoing criminal prosecutions can be a tool to
present the microscopic/logical truths about the conflict from the perspective
of the Ukrainian state; but such prosecutions can also be the first steps towards
establishing dialogical truth. In turn, the wider the area of agreement, the better
are the opportunities to calibrate properly the functioning of institutions (those
already in existence as well as those eventually to be established) aimed at achiev-
ing justice. In the end, it is not sequencing, but rather a more flexible approach
based on sequencing plus proper scaling between truth and justice which seems
to be the basic formula of an effective post-war justice strategy.
The text is based on the chapter prepared by the authors for the forthcoming
volume The Situation in Ukraine since 2014: jus ad bellum, jus in bello, jus
post bellum, eds. S. Sayapin and E. Tsybulenko (T.M.C. Asser Press).Gerhard Kemp is a law professor at Stellenbosch University in South Africa. He has
published widely on South African and regional criminal justice, international
criminal law, international humanitarian law, and transitional justice.Igor Lyubashenko is an assistant professor at the University of Social Sciences and
Humanities (SWPS) in Warsaw. His academic interests are different aspects of
transition to democracy in post-communist states, in particular Poland and Ukraine.Is it too early to speak about justice in Donbas?, Gerhard Kemp and Igor Lyubashenko Opinion & Analysis