As global transitional justice norms strengthen, governments face increasingly pressure to enact formal transitional justice mechanisms to resolve domestic conflict. This article examines how Bahrain, Morocco, and Sri Lanka attempted to exploit these norms to appease demands and stave off international transitional justice intervention by employing truth commissions. Governments framed truth commissions and their responses to their investigations as sufficient to address the past. To varying degrees, though, domestic audiences and the international community refused to accept this framing. As such, truth commission investigations and their reports failed to resolve the respective conflicts. Rather, they prolonged attention on governments’ past and present misdeeds. For governments, the risk this strategy backfires is higher when human rights violations have been more extensive and extreme, when governments construct a more obviously biased truth-seeking process and display little interest in enacting recommendations, and when governments have failed to cultivate strong ties with Western powers.

中文翻译：

---

全球过渡司法规范和在没有过渡的情况下建立真相委员会

随着全球过渡司法规范的加强，各国政府面临越来越大的压力，要求制定正式的过渡司法机制来解决国内冲突。本文探讨了巴林、摩洛哥和斯里兰卡如何试图利用这些规范来安抚需求，并通过聘请真相委员会来阻止国际过渡时期司法干预。各国政府将真相委员会及其对调查的回应视为足以解决过去的问题。然而，国内观众和国际社会在不同程度上拒绝接受这种框架。因此，真相委员会的调查及其报告未能解决各自的冲突。相反，他们延长了对政府过去和现在的不当行为的关注。对于政府来说，