Hi, my goals for taking this course are to try once and for all to decide whether ADR is actually a workable option for me to be offering in resolving human rights cases. Over the last 20-something years I have worked in several contexts that span from Central and South America, Africa and now Asia and mainly alongside human rights defenders and vicitms of human rights violations. Very few of these people have ever advocated for anything they considered "less" than justice. However the last few years in Asia have opened to my eyes to the possibilty of other mechanisms that can provide forms of remedy to the vicitms. Contextually, at least here in Mindanao, where access to the formal justice system is both difficult and often regarded as belonging to the "colonizers". The role of ADR in Aceh has served in the absence of any wider transitional justice programme. This course I am hoping will give me an idea of how to look at ADR in the build up, during and after the transitional justice programme here in Mindanao.
The question whether I see myself as either a human rights or a conflict resolution practioner or both I find interesting given that human rights often go largely ignored in peace processes and when recognised are widely considered as obstacles to peace. Human rights practioners, advocates or defenders are often branded as troublemakers opposing the necessary compromises that bring peace. It that respect I think I would identify myself as a trouble maker considering there is still much ground to cover to ensure peace is built on the protection of human rights.