In transitional justice (TJ) processes, denialism, revisionism, and politicization (DRP) have become more prevalent over the years, a trend exacerbated due to digital technologies, political contestation, and historical distortion. By using a comparative case study methodology, this research aims to understand the four TJ mechanisms in relation to these dynamics, analyzing reforms, public discourse, legislation, online narratives across social media, memorialization initiatives, and AI-generated outputs. Currently, there are primarily individual studies on the topic, but there is a lack of a holistic comparative trend analysis among different countries that take into account the role of new technologies. This research becomes particularly relevant as it intends to fill part of that gap by analyzing four typical case studies for clear indicators of DRP and identifying trends among them. Examining the four cases, it is evident that each respective country is in a different stage of transitional justice, subject to the background and context of each historical case: Turkey exemplifies denialism in almost all respects, while in Bosnia denialist tendencies are concentrated in the ethnically Serb region; Argentina exhibits a concerning reversal of accountability through revisionism, and in South Africa, politicization across racial lines has sparked increased tensions. The findings also demonstrate that DRP elements rarely operate independently, rather they reinforce one another, and bridge across mechanisms such that denial of truth often leads to an impossibility of reparations or non-recurrence. Overall, the report finds that TJ processes remain highly vulnerable to political instrumentalization and the increasing flow of information amidst technologization have created a venue for the spread of rhetoric which conflicts with the goal of transitional justice as a method of repair and accountability.