This study analyzes the institutional variation across domestic legal systems, with a focus on common law system’s adherence to precedent and reduced recourse to judicial deference, as well as on the degree of independence afforded to courts. These institutional qualities of judiciaries provide the opportunity for courts to play a more active role in the implementation of post-conflict justice, increasing uncertainty for other policymakers concerning the ultimate contours of post-conflict justice processes. To reduce such uncertainty, policymakers ensconced in these types of institutional contexts will be less likely to implement post-conflict justice. Using data from the Post-Conflict Justice dataset, we find that states with common law systems are less likely to pursue and implement post-conflict justice compared to states with civil or Islamic law systems. Moreover, independent courts will be less likely to pursue mixed or restorative forms post-conflict justice, though the impact of judicial independence is weak overall.

本研究分析了国内法律制度的制度差异，重点关注普通法制度对先例的遵守和减少对司法尊重的诉诸，以及法院的独立程度。司法机构的这些制度品质为法院在冲突后司法的实施中发挥更积极的作用提供了机会，增加了其他决策者对冲突后司法程序最终轮廓的不确定性。为了减少这种不确定性，处于这类制度环境中的政策制定者将不太可能实施冲突后司法。使用来自冲突后司法数据集的数据，我们发现，与拥有民法或伊斯兰法制度的国家相比，拥有普通法制度的国家不太可能追求和实施冲突后司法。此外，独立法院不太可能在冲突后寻求混合或恢复性司法形式，尽管司法独立的影响总体上较弱。