In societies emerging from prolonged conflict or deep economic crises, corruption is rarely just an administrative flaw or an abuse of power. It often evolves into a parallel system governed by intertwined networks – business figures linked to political authority, economic institutions financing armed or security groups, monopolies and protection rackets, and informal financial systems operating beyond oversight. For years, transitional justice has been associated mainly with human rights violations, war crimes, and the aftermath of violent conflict. Yet a growing global debate is now pushing a new concept to the forefront – economic justice as a core pillar of post-crisis recovery.
Corruption is no longer seen as a series of individual offences, but as a deeply rooted structure that produces systemic injustice, drains development, and entrenches poverty. This shift has led economists and legal experts to ask whether countries emerging from crisis need a form of “economic transitional justice” – one that seeks to uncover economic truth, hold corrupt actors accountable, recover public funds, and reform institutions, much as traditional transitional justice mechanisms aim to address political and human rights abuses. If transitional justice is essential for political and social reconciliation, the question becomes whether economic transitional justice is equally necessary to address accumulated economic harm and secure a fairer future for coming generations.
Some analysts point to South Africa’s post-apartheid model of “truth in exchange for acknowledgment” as a possible reference – suggesting that, in economic terms, major corruption figures could be encouraged to disclose hidden wealth in exchange for financial settlements rather than prolonged legal battles.
Economists and legal specialists argue that corruption’s impact extends far beyond direct financial losses. It creates a privileged parallel economy for those close to power, granting unjustified advantages and undermining fair competition. They warn that without genuine economic transitional justice, political reform efforts are likely to fail, as citizens who see no tangible improvement in their living conditions will struggle to trust official narratives about fighting corruption.
From transitional justice to economic justice
Transitional justice emerged as a legal and moral framework designed to heal societies after conflict through accountability, acknowledgment, and reparations. But what happens if the same logic is applied to the economic sphere?
According to economist Dr Ali Al-Rashid, corruption in this context should not be viewed merely as a legal violation, but as an infringement on a collective right to development. He argues that combating corruption must be understood as a process of social and economic reconciliation – aimed at recovering stolen wealth, reforming financial institutions, and redistributing opportunities more fairly. In his view, economic justice begins when society recognises corruption as an organised phenomenon rather than a series of isolated acts, requiring mechanisms similar to those used in transitional justice commissions.
Speaking to +963, Al-Rashid explains that if transitional justice rests on truth-telling, accountability, reparations, and guarantees of non-recurrence, applying this framework to the economy raises fundamental questions – who benefited from public funds, who monopolised subsidies and contracts, and how much wealth was accumulated through illegitimate political influence? Addressing these questions, he says, would require the creation of economic truth commissions capable of reviewing major contracts and public deals, publicly explaining how wealth was generated, and identifying those responsible for looting public resources.
Such an approach would also demand judicial processes that move beyond prosecuting minor figures and instead target decision-makers and the political cover that protected corruption networks. In parallel, clear mechanisms would be needed to recover stolen assets and redirect them into development projects, particularly in marginalised regions, as a form of collective compensation. This would have to be accompanied by legislative and institutional reform to ensure transparency, traceability of public spending, and the prevention of future abuse.
Al-Rashid stresses that this does not mean reckless privatisation but rather restructuring the public sector by dismantling illegitimate privileges, reforming subsidy systems, breaking monopolies, and addressing dysfunction in key sectors such as energy. He outlines three essential stages for economic transitional justice – uncovering economic truth through comprehensive audits, accountability by dismantling networks of influence, and rebuilding trust through financial transparency, tax reform, and the empowerment of disadvantaged groups. Economic justice, he argues, is not simply a matter of budget figures, but a national project to restore dignity and opportunity. When recovering public funds becomes as meaningful as recovering national memory, a true phase of economic transitional justice has begun.
Corruption as economic violence
Dr Adnan Al-Saadoun, an expert in institutional economics, describes corruption in post-conflict states as a form of violence. “We are not dealing with individual corruption,” he says, “but with a parallel system that sometimes holds more power than the state.”
In comments to +963, Al-Saadoun argues that conventional anti-corruption tools are insufficient in such contexts. Instead, he calls for a methodology resembling transitional justice, starting with uncovering economic truth – who accumulated wealth, who received privileges, and how institutions collapsed. In environments where power and money are deeply intertwined, crises often become opportunities for rapid enrichment, making it difficult to rebuild without addressing these structural dynamics.
He emphasises that corruption is frequently transnational, requiring international cooperation to track offshore accounts and exchange financial intelligence. In this sense, economic justice is not merely reformist, but foundational to a new social contract. Corruption, he notes, does not only steal money – it destroys trust, blocks equal opportunity, and extinguishes hope for economic recovery.
Is economic transitional justice essential for social stability?
Dr Maha Al-Khouli, a researcher in political economy, argues that corruption creates class-based injustice that can be as damaging as human rights violations. By granting monopolies to a small elite, it closes economic pathways for thousands of young people. She warns against politicising the process, noting that turning anti-corruption efforts into political revenge undermines justice before it begins.
Al-Khouli stresses that serious investors avoid markets dominated by bribery and patronage, and that the success of economic justice should be measured by its ability to attract clean, sustainable investment. In her view, dismantling corruption networks can revive production, stabilise currency value, and improve purchasing power – making economic justice a prerequisite for growth rather than an optional reform.
Economic justice as a human necessity
Dr Siham Al-Aboud, a specialist in social economics, draws a direct link between corruption and poverty, describing corruption as a crime against the poor. Stolen public funds, she explains, translate into under-equipped schools, shortages of medicine in hospitals, and neglected infrastructure. She argues that recovered assets must be channelled into public services and support for small and medium-sized enterprises.
Speaking to +963, Al-Aboud says economic justice is essential for rebuilding post-crisis states and depends not only on laws, but on political will, public support, independent institutions, and free media. If transitional justice helped heal the wounds of war, she says, economic justice is needed to heal the wounds of corruption and poverty.
She outlines practical tools for economic transitional justice, including an independent body to investigate suspicious wealth, mandatory and public asset declarations, specialised financial courts, and the creation of a sovereign compensation fund financed through recovered assets, corruption fines, and international support. Such a fund, she argues, should be directed towards job creation, public services, and economic recovery.
Al-Aboud concludes that states willing to open the books, dismantle monopolies, and recover stolen wealth are effectively rewriting their own history. Those that postpone justice, she warns, face repeated collapse. Unpunished corruption multiplies, and untreated economic injustice eventually consumes everything. Economic transitional justice, she concludes, is not merely a reform choice, but an existential one – either states are built on justice, or they remain suspended without a future.
