Not much research has been conducted on victims'' views and expectations vis-à-vis implemenations of transitional justice official mechanisms as restribution or reparation procedures, or about effects on victims of the ways in which ‘victimhood’ is framed in a legal vocabulary. This article discusses an unintended consequence of these legal definitions within the context of the aftermath of the conflict between government and insurgent forces in Peru during the period 1980-2000. Many Peruvian victim-survivors have viewed the legal proceedings and their outcomes as a basis for official recognition of their suffering during that time—an official recognition that might in turn serve as the basis for reparations claims. However, such expectations have thus far been frustrated. As a result, those seeking redress have instead experienced a second kind of victimization. By concentrating on this “re-victimization,” this article will help to broaden the micro level perspective on societies and individuals in postconflict situations. The findings presented here are based on 61 interviews with people belonging to a number of different, legally defined victim categories in Peru.
