## The Lingering Shadow of Conflict
Libya’s descent into civil war in 2011, triggered by the overthrow of Muammar Gaddafi, unleashed a complex web of armed factions, international interference, and a catastrophic loss of life. The subsequent collapse of state institutions left a power vacuum filled by militias, vying for control of resources and territory. The protracted conflict has resulted in a staggering number of missing persons, largely due to the deliberate concealment of bodies and the difficulty of identifying remains amidst widespread destruction. The 2017 UN Security Council Resolution 1973, authorizing a no-fly zone to protect civilians, significantly exacerbated the situation, creating a landscape of aerial bombardment and displacement. The resolution, while intended to prevent further violence, demonstrably contributed to the destruction of infrastructure and the escalation of the conflict.
## Key Stakeholders and Divergent Priorities
Several key stakeholders have shaped Libya’s transitional justice landscape, each with distinct motivations and often operating at cross-purposes. The internationally recognized Government of National Accord (GNA), based in Tripoli, led by Prime Minister Abdul Hamid Dbeibah, has expressed a commitment to transitional justice, particularly through its engagement with the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) and the United Nations Support Mission in Libya (UNSMIL). However, the GNA’s efforts are frequently hampered by the sustained opposition of the Libyan National Army (LNA), led by General Khalifa Haftar, who views reconciliation efforts as a threat to his authority.
Furthermore, the presence of numerous foreign powers – including Turkey, Russia, Egypt, and the UAE – has introduced competing agendas. Turkey provides support to the GNA, primarily through military and security assistance, while Russia has expanded its influence through private military contractors and support for the LNA. Egypt’s involvement stems from concerns about Islamist extremism and maintaining security in the Sinai Peninsula, while the UAE’s strategy aligns with broader regional ambitions. These external actors complicate the process of establishing a unified approach to transitional justice, pushing Libya further away from genuine self-determination.
## The OHCHR Report and the Challenges of Accountability
The OHCHR’s latest report, released six months prior to this correspondence, details a catalogue of abuses, including arbitrary detention, enforced disappearances, and systematic torture perpetrated by various armed groups and security forces. The report’s emphasis on limited accountability – the lack of effective investigations and prosecutions – underscores a core deficiency in Libya’s governance. “The systemic failure to address human rights violations,” stated a recent report from the International Crisis Group, “fuels a culture of impunity and undermines any prospects for genuine reconciliation.”
The report’s call for international support for the establishment of a comprehensive, rights-based transitional justice process highlights the need for victim-centred mechanisms. The United Nations has been working to establish a Libya Transitional Justice Steering Committee, but its progress has been slow, hampered by political divisions and a lack of funding. “Without a genuine commitment from all Libyan stakeholders to prioritize justice and accountability,” observed a specialist in conflict resolution at Chatham House, “any transitional justice process will be inherently fragile and unlikely to deliver lasting results.” The inclusion of women and girls – disproportionately affected by violence and discrimination – and the protection of migrant communities remain critical elements often neglected.
## Short-Term and Long-Term Outlooks
Within the next six months, the situation is likely to remain fluid and precarious. The protracted political stalemate between the GNA and the LNA will continue to prevent the formation of a unified government capable of implementing a comprehensive transitional justice strategy. The risk of further violence, particularly in areas with significant armed group presence, remains high. Funding for transitional justice initiatives is also likely to remain insufficient, hindering the capacity of local organizations to deliver services and support victims.
Looking five to ten years into the future, the success of Libya’s transitional justice efforts hinges on a fundamental shift in the country’s political landscape. Achieving a sustainable peace will require a genuine commitment to democratic governance, the rule of law, and the protection of human rights. Furthermore, the international community must recognize that short-term interventions are unlikely to be effective. A long-term commitment to supporting Libyan-led initiatives, coupled with sustained pressure on all stakeholders to uphold human rights, is essential. Without this, the potential for lasting instability and further human rights abuses will remain profoundly significant. The question remains: can the international community maintain the focus and strategic resources needed to support Libya’s arduous journey toward a future founded on justice and accountability?