In partnership with The International Nuremberg Principles Academy
In association with The UK Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO)
Executive summary
In July 2026, eighty years since the International Military Tribunals at Nuremberg, Wilton Park and the International Nuremberg Principles Academy convened a diverse group of experts, officials, and advocates to address Transitional Justice (TJ) in contemporary conflict resolution. Around 50 participants from 18 countries came together to exchange perspectives and propose responses to the evolving foundations of TJ, the adaptations needed to deliver justice for today’s conflicts, and the intersection between justice, mediation, and conflict resolution. Particular focus was given to the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region, the role of faith in justice, accountability for Conflict-Related Sexual Violence (CRSV), and incorporation of gender lenses into TJ frameworks. A three-day programme of plenary discussions, breakout sessions, and informal interactions made space for candid reflections on justice in a world in transition. It also generated practical proposals for action.
The overarching insight was that TJ itself is in a state of transition. It is still seen as key to preventing cycles of violence, because it focuses on ‘the consequences of conflict long after the fighting has stopped.’ However, the foundations that have sustained the growth of TJ over the last 40 years, including multilateralism, democracy, international law, and development assistance, are weakening as the international order evolves. In some places, trust in TJ is actually at an all-time low, perceived as serving the interests of the victors in conflict (as observed regarding the pioneering Nuremberg tribunals); it is also associated with a prescriptive, Global North approach that cannot discern or deliver what is required on the ground. This narrative endures despite TJ’s origins in Civil Society movements in the Global South. It could be said that TJ is itself ‘on trial’ in the court of global opinion, with its relevance and ability to adapt in serious question. The challenge for policymakers and practitioners is not just where TJ fits within conflict resolution, but whether the term ‘transitional justice’ is still useful today. Discussions also identified specific initiatives to reinforce and renew TJ approaches. For TJ to be effective, participants advocated for case-specific strategies, informed by ongoing engagement with a spectrum of local stakeholders, including victims and survivors, and international ones, including mediation and conflict-resolution actors. The event concluded that, despite many challenges, victim-centric[1] justice remains necessary for a world of proliferating conflict and geopolitical contestation.
[1] The term ‘victim’ is used here instead of ‘survivor’ due to its use in legal frameworks.