Thesis (MPhil (Political Science))--Stellenbosch University, 2008. / This study undertakes to look at the relationship between peace agreements and the violence that follows these agreements. Throughout modern history, there are examples of peace agreements between two warring internal factions that ended in post-conflict violence and in extreme cases, to the end of the peace agreement. It does not necessarily lead to full out war, but can manifest in riots, like Malaysia and criminal violence in South Africa. This study attempts to compare both South Africa and Malaysia by looking specifically at the reasons for post conflict violence. South Africa has faced a growing problem with violent crime after the negotiations of the early 1990’s and its result, the new constitution of 1993, that functioned as the peace agreement. Malaysia moved through several constitutions to arrive at their constitution of 1957 that which viewed as their constitutional agreement. This constitutional agreement went to great lengths to protect the sons of the soil, the bumiputra. The uneasy peace only lasted until 1969, when race riots followed the general elections and left hundreds dead or injured. By studying South Africa and Malaysia and looking at the underlying factors of violence, with special focus on ethnic factors and especially poverty, can we move closer to the underlying causes of post conflict violence. Malaysia tried to address these problems by making constitutional amendments, following the 1969 riots. These amendments were implemented in 1972. Since then the problem of post conflict violence has been addressed to some extent. There are however, still factors of violence that have not been completely eradicated, that might lead to a flaring of violence again one day. The question that this thesis tries to address in the end is, if we need to consider and implement constitutional amendments, like Malaysia, to address our growing problem of post conflict violence. I attempt here to answer this question, comparing the histories of South Africa and Malaysia and the underlying factors of violence to see exactly how similar these states are and if the same solution can work for both.

Pourquoi certains crimes d’État ou de masse sont-ils jugés au sortir d’un régime autoritaire ou d'une guerre civile, tandis que d'autres épisodes de violence voient leur traitement judiciaire en suspens ? Pourquoi passe-t-on parfois par des procédures ou institutions dites de « réconciliation » ? Ces dernières constituent-elles des formes de contournement de la justice ? La thèse tente de répondre à ces questions à l'aune d'un cas de violence survenu en 1984 en Indonésie. Tranchant avec un climat national souvent qualifié d'impunité des auteurs suspectés de violations graves passées, la « tragédie de Tanjung Priok » n'est pas restée sans suites. En 2003, cinq années après la démission de Suharto, quelque quinze militaires qui avaient été déployés sur les lieux lors du massacre furent jugés pour « crimes contre l'humanité » devant un tribunal national ad hoc des droits de l’homme. Or, une charte de « réconciliation », dite charte d'ishlah, se référant au droit islamique, signée avant le procès par les accusés et une partie des victimes, a déclenché une controverse et suscité l'embarras des acteurs institutionnels. Pour comprendre les enjeux de cette « réconciliation », ce travail fait dialoguer une revue comparative des mécanismes de justice transitionnelle à l'échelle internationale, avec un portrait de l'Indonésie en transition et une reconstitution historique des scènes-clés et polémiques ayant marqué l'ensemble d'une l'affaire qui s'étend sur plus de vingt ans. La thèse se démarque des descriptions surplombantes des lendemains de violence en insistant sur les dynamiques locales à l’œuvre sur une temporalité longue, à partir de sources variées (entretiens, tracts, procès, presse), depuis la contestation souterraine de la violence sous Suharto jusqu'aux années 2000. L'approche ici développée se distingue néanmoins des analyses centrées sur le déterminisme des structures pour mettre en lumière les effets de concaténation générés par la mondialisation des pratiques de justice transitionnelle. / Why are some state or mass crimes judged in courts after a civil war or the fall of an authoritarian regime, while other episodes of violence see their judicial treatment suspended ? Why do they sometimes go through so-called “reconciliation” procedures or institutions? Are these forms of circumvention of justice ? This thesis is an attempt to answer these questions in the light of a case of violence in 1984 in Indonesia. In full contrast with a national climate often referred to as impunity of suspected perpetrators of serious past violations since the transition, the “tragedy of Tanjung Priok” has not remained without judicial consequences after the fall of Suharto in 1998. In 2003, about fifteen soldiers who were deployed on the scene during the bloody events were charged and tried for “crimes against humanity” before a national ad hoc human rights court. However, a charter of “reconciliation”, called ishlah charter, referring to Islamic law, signed before the trial between suspected perpetrators and some of the victims sparked off a controversy and the embarrassment of institutional actors. To understand the stakes of this “reconciliation”, this work makes an extensive review of the evolutions of transitional justice mechanisms on an international scale dialogue with a portrait of Indonesia in transition and a historical reconstitution of the key scenes and the controversies that have arisen over the course of this whole affair, which extends over more than twenty years. Thus, this thesis departs from disembodied descriptions of post-violence in order to insist on local dynamics at work on a long temporality, this being based on manifold sources (interviews, tracts, trials, press), from underground contests of State violence during Suharto's era up to the 2000s. Yet, it should also be distinguished from analysis in terms of determinism of structures and, conversely, puts the stress on the concatenation effects generated by the globalization of practices of transitional justice.