Latin American Amnesties in Comparative Perspective: Can the Past Be Buried?

1999 ◽  
Vol 13 ◽  
pp. 99-122 ◽  
Author(s):  
Margaret Popkin ◽  
Nehal Bhuta
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Latin American ◽  
Transitional Justice ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Authoritarian Rule ◽  
Human Rights Abuses ◽  
The Past ◽  
The Status ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
Comparative Examination

Throughout Latin America during the past 15 years, new democratic or postwar governments have faced demands for transitional justice following the end of authoritarian rule or the conclusion of internal armed conflicts.Demands for justice for serious past abuses have often been met by threats of destabilization by the perpetrators and calls for forgiving and forgetting in the name of reconciliation.Although recent developments in and interpretations of international law oblige states to punish those responsible for serious human rights violations, many transitional governments insist that reconciliation requires broad amnesty laws. This essay first reviews basic legal and conceptual issues relating to prosecution of, and grants of amnesty to, those responsible for gross human rights abuses during earlier periods. A comparative examination follows, starting with El Salvador, where the amnesty law constitutes the most comprehensive and successful action to end efforts to address past abuses. The essay then reviews the status of efforts in Argentina, Chile, Honduras, Guatemala, and South Africa, where, despite amnesty laws, civil society and courts have sought to uncover the truth about the past, hold perpetrators accountable, and obtain redress for victims.

Dealing with the Past or Moving Forward? Transitional Justice, the Bangsamoro Peace Agreement and Federalism in the Philippines

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-28
Author(s):  
Jayson S. Lamchek ◽  
George B. Radics
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Transitional Justice ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
The Philippines ◽  
Peace Agreement ◽  
Authoritarian Rule ◽  
Human Rights Abuses ◽  
The Past ◽  
Land Dispossession ◽  
The Government

Abstract In the Philippines, transitional justice is plagued by questions about whether and how to deal with the past as well as whether and what kind of justice is possible in the present. In 2014, the government ended its armed conflict with Muslim secessionists by enacting a peace deal with transitional justice provisions, but also proposed federalism as a more lasting solution to conflict. This article reads the agreement’s ‘dealing with the past’ framework as reflecting a conventional approach. It then highlights continuing Muslim experiences of land dispossession and human rights abuses. It shows how transitional justice can come with uncertainty about what it means to “move forward,” what “past” to overcome, and how the past is related to “justice.” Furthermore, it argues that as the country increasingly veers towards authoritarian rule, conventional applications of transitional justice are further impeded. It explores how federalism receives more enthusiastic support than transitional justice.

Human Rights Obligations of Armed Groups

2019 ◽  
pp. 444-462
Author(s):  
Andreas Th Müller
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Potential Application ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Armed Groups ◽  
The Past ◽  
Legal Obligations ◽  
Human Rights Treaties ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
State Actors

One of the asymmetries faced by military missions in areas of limited statehood are diverging legal obligations of state and non-state actors, in particular in relation to human rights duties. From a perspective of states bound by human rights treaties, there is a certain danger that armed groups opposing them might abuse the obligations incumbent upon state actors. Against this perception, the potential application of human rights law to armed groups is not only relevant as a tool for protecting civilians but also from a reciprocity perspective in view of the fluidity of armed conflicts and with a view to convergence of standards. The chapter assesses how international law and international legal practice in relation to armed groups have evolved over the past decade. It takes stock of recent developments and analyses the degree to which human rights obligations apply to armed groups.

The Suharto Case

2016 ◽  
Vol 44 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 214-245 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jiwon Suh
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Transitional Justice ◽  
National Commission ◽  
Public Attention ◽  
Human Rights Abuses ◽  
The Past ◽  
Study Team ◽  
Political Capabilities ◽  
The Impact

How could Suharto avoid prosecution for human rights abuses? For a preliminary answer, this paper provides an account of a specific and observable failure: The failure of the Suharto study team, a Komnas-HAM (National Commission of Human Rights) initiative to put the atrocities of the Suharto era on the human rights court track. It begins with prosecutorial approaches toward past abuses and a lack of coordination over transitional justice strategies in Indonesia as the background to Suharto’s non-prosecution. Then, it proceeds to trace the Suharto study team’s life in 2003 until its defeat. The fate of the Suharto team highlights the dilemma of timing between public attention and political capabilities in transitional justice. Five years after Suharto stepped down, legacies from the past prevented progress in the case, while the impact was far from explosive when new commissioners of the Komnas-HAM finally announced the findings of gross violations in 2012.

scholarly journals The European Court of Human Rights, Transitional Justice and Historical Abuse in Consolidated Democracies

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 675-704
Author(s):  
James Gallen
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Transitional Justice ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Authoritarian Regimes ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Authoritarian Rule ◽  
Human Rights Abuses ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Relationship

Abstract In recent years, both transitional justice and the role of the European Court of Human Rights in dealing with historical abuses have evolved. Transitional justice has begun to address widespread or systemic human rights abuses outside of the contexts of armed conflict and authoritarian regimes. In three key recent judgments, El-Masri v Macedonia, Janowiec v Russia and O’Keeffe v Ireland, the Court has clarified and expanded its approach to addressing historical human rights violations relevant to transitional justice in significant, if inconsistent, ways. To date, there is no exploration of the relationship between transitional justice, historical abuse outside the contexts of armed conflict or authoritarian rule and the European Convention of Human Rights. This article seeks to address that gap by considering the potential opportunities and obstacles for the use of the Convention to address historical abuse in consolidated democracies as a part of transitional justice.

scholarly journals The right to the truth in international law: The significance of Strasbourg's contributions

Legal Studies ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 37 (4) ◽  
pp. 739-764 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alice M. Panepinto
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
The State ◽  
Right To Know ◽  
The Past ◽  
The Status ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
The Right ◽  
Comprehensive Study

The concept of a right to the truth is increasingly utilised in different settings to empower victims and societies to find out about past abuses linked to conflict or authoritarianism. Since the last comprehensive study of this topic in 2006, there has been little attempt to draw together the advancements of fragmented practices. Recent developments in European human rights call for a fresh analysis of the right to the truth as a freestanding principle linked to, but separate from, the state duty to investigate. This paper takes stock of the more recent evolutions of the right to the truth and contributes to its independent conceptualisation. The first part investigates whether there is growing consistency between the Inter-American and European human rights systems around the contours of the right to the truth, as linked to survivors’ right to know the past and to access justice (make claims) as an individual and collective matter. The second part broadens the discussion to the status of the right to the truth under international law in light of the ECHR jurisprudence, and considers whether the available legal categories are suited to its formalisation.

The Kenya National Commission on Human Rights under the 2010 Constitutional Dispensation

2018 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 205-226
Author(s):  
Bonolo Ramadi Dinokopila ◽  
Rhoda Igweta Murangiri
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Transitional Justice ◽  
National Commission ◽  
Bill Of Rights ◽  
Institutional Perspective ◽  
Post Conflict ◽  
National Human ◽  
The Status ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights

This article examines the transformation of the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights (KNCHR) and discusses the implications of such transformation on the promotion and protection of human rights in Kenya. The article is an exposition of the powers of the Commission and their importance to the realisation of the Bill of Rights under the 2010 Kenyan Constitution. This is done from a normative and institutional perspective with particular emphasis on the extent to which the UN Principles Relating to the Status of National Institutions for the promotion and protection of human rights (the Paris Principles, 1993) have been complied with. The article highlights the role of national human rights commissions in transformative and/or transitional justice in post-conflict Kenya. It also explores the possible complementary relationship(s) between the KNCHR and other Article 59 Commissions for the better enforcement of the bill of rights.

scholarly journals Thinking Systemically About Transitional Justice, Legal Systems, and Resilience

2021 ◽  
pp. 530-550
Author(s):  
Janine Natalya Clark
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Transitional Justice ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Legal Systems ◽  
Social Environments ◽  
Human Rights Abuses ◽  
Resilience Thinking ◽  
Systemic Impact ◽  
Resilience Framework ◽  
The Impact

Transitional justice refers to the set of judicial and non-judicial processes that societies may use to deal with legacies of past human rights abuses and atrocities. While the field is rapidly expanding, to date there are almost no systematic analyses of transitional justice within a resilience framework, or vice versa. The purpose of this chapter is to address that gap and to demonstrate why resilience is highly relevant for transitional justice theory and practice. It argues that resilience thinking can enhance the impact of transitional justice on the ground, by contributing to the development of more ecological approaches to dealing with the past that locate individuals within their broader social environments. The chapter also reflects on the conceptual and empirical utility of resilience as a concept that opens up a space for analyzing the wider societal and systemic impact of legal systems more generally.

Transition, ‘Never Again’ and ‘Moving On’

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin Hearty
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Northern Ireland ◽  
Transitional Justice ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
Master Narrative ◽  
The Past ◽  
The North ◽  
Irish Republicanism ◽  
Difficult Issue ◽  
Subsequent Replacement

Viewing Irish republican policing memory primarily through a transitional justice lens, this chapter critically examines how Irish republicans, as a principal party to the conflict, approach the difficult issue of ‘dealing with the past’ as both collective victims and perpetrators of human rights violations during the conflict. It will interrogate the range of divergent views within modern Irish republicanism on issues such as victimhood, truth recovery, ‘moving on’ and ‘dealing with the past’. In particular, it looks at how the memory of human rights violations framed the wider policing debate and led to a master narrative of ‘never again’ whereby the value of ‘remembering’ past abuses lay in helping to prevent future repetition. This is placed against a more general backdrop of the stop-start ‘dealing with the past’ process in the North of Ireland that has included the establishment, operation and subsequent replacement of the Historical Enquiries Team (HET), the passage of the Civil Service (Special Advisers) Act (Northern Ireland), and proposals like the Haass/O’Sullivan document and the Stormont House Agreement.

Contemporary Research on Proportionality in Armed Conflicts: A Select Review

2012 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 391-414 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ben Clarke
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Committee ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Red Cross ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
Hebrew University ◽  
Scope Of Application ◽  
Proportionality Principle

In an attempt to impose limits on the level of acceptable incidental civilian suffering during armed conflict, international humanitarian law (IHL) articulates a proportionality formula as the test to determine whether or not an attack is lawful. Efforts to comply with that formula during the conduct of hostilities can involve a host of legal and operational challenges. These challenges have inspired a growing body of doctrinal and empirical research. A recent international conference in Jerusalem, co-sponsored by the Delegation of the International Committee of the Red Cross in Israel and the Occupied Territories and the Minerva Center for Human Rights at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, brought together human rights lawyers, military experts and scholars from a variety of disciplines to assess recent developments relating to the proportionality principle in international humanitarian law. This report examines ten conference presentations which offer important insights into: the nature, scope of application and operational requirements of the proportionality principle under IHL; the modalities of investigation and review of proportionality decisions; and the challenges involved in proportionality decision-making.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document