Independent commission design and inclusion in Northern Ireland: Agonistic versus traditional approaches

Despite their proliferation in post-conflict societies, independent commissions represent an understudied area. Although recent studies have begun to address this gap, questions remain about best practice in commission design, particularly in terms of fostering inclusion. This paper contributes to a burgeoning literature on commissions by comparing two different approaches to commission design: agonistic and traditional. These two approaches offer competing visions for peace and inclusion in Northern Irish society. This paper compares the goals and aims and decision-making processes of two independent commissions: one (the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission) with a traditional design and one (the Commission for Flags, Identity, Culture and Tradition) adopting an agonistic design. It then shows the implications of these differences for fostering inclusion. The paper illustrates that agonistic commissions have the potential to foster deeper, more transformative inclusion, whereas traditional commissions focus more on cohesion and reinforcing existing norms.