Too much of a good thing: When transitional justice prescriptions may not work

2020 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 526-542
Author(s):  
VO Ojo ◽  
N Filbert
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Transitional Justice ◽  
Authoritarian Regimes ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Good Thing ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Success Stories ◽  
Relative Success ◽  
Recent Tendency ◽  
Global Project

Transitional justice developed as a pragmatic concept prescribing a set of mechanisms to be used by societies or countries experiencing systematic periods of armed conflicts or emerging from authoritarian regimes characterised by egregious violations of human rights or humanitarian law. While relative success stories of its utilisation have been recorded, questions have been raised regarding the recent tendency to prescribe transitional justice for societies which have not or are yet to undergo any transition. Through its lack of success in Nigeria and debatable effectiveness in Uganda, the article shows that transitional justice mechanisms are not a cure-all. While it does not contend that there is a perfect notion of transitional justice, the article proposes that transitional justice mechanisms must be designed from the ground up, with the victims at the centre of the process. While transitional justice is a global project, this article argues that its success can be achieved when its applicability and administration take into account the contextual and indigenous focus with a move towards localising its mechanisms.

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.

Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manfred Nowak
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Relevant Literature ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Personal Dignity ◽  
Convention Against Torture ◽  
Degrading Treatment ◽  
Domestic Affairs

International humanitarian law (IHL) was developed to ensure respect for the dignity and integrity of the human being. It aims to reduce human suffering in times of armed conflict by requiring combatants to act in a humane manner and to avoid cruelty. In relation to non-international armed conflicts, both IHL and international human rights law (IHRL) have been challenged with arguments of state sovereignty and a supposed prohibition on interference with domestic affairs. This chapter examines the three types of ill-treatment under both IHRL and IHL in light of relevant literature and jurisprudence: torture, cruel and inhuman treatment or punishment, and degrading treatment or punishment. It discusses the United Nations Convention against Torture and the Geneva Conventions of 1949, the obligations of states under human rights law, and outrages upon personal dignity.

The Interplay between International Humanitarian Law and International Human Rights Law in Situations of Armed Conflict

2007 ◽  
Vol 40 (2) ◽  
pp. 310-355 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cordula Droege
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
International Human ◽  
Historical Developments

International human rights law and international humanitarian law are traditionally two distinct branches of law, one dealing with the protection of persons from abusive power, the other with the conduct of parties to an armed conflict. Yet, developments in international and national jurisprudence and practice have led to the recognition that these two bodies of law not only share a common humanist ideal of dignity and integrity but overlap substantially in practice. The most frequent examples are situations of occupation or non-international armed conflicts where human rights law complements the protection provided by humanitarian law.This article provides an overview of the historical developments that led to the increasing overlap between human rights law and humanitarian law. It then seeks to analyse the ways in which the interplay between human rights law and humanitarian law can work in practice. It argues that two main concepts inform their interaction: The first is complementarity between their norms in the sense that in most cases, especially for the protection of persons in the power of a party to the conflict, they mutually reinforce each other. The second is the principle of lex specialis in the cases of conflict between the norms.

scholarly journals HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS PERPETRATED BY STATE AGENTS IN MILITARY OCCUPATIONS: ANALYSIS OF THE INCURSION OF INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS LAW TO THE NORMATIVE TERRITORY OF THE ARMED CONFLICTS

2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (32) ◽  
pp. 32
Author(s):  
Sidney Cesar Silva Guerra ◽  
Luz E. Nagle ◽  
Ádria Saviano Fabricio da Silva
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
International Human ◽  
Military Occupations

This article aims to revisit the interrelationship between International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and International Human Rights Law (IHRL), in honour of their respective normative scopes and in order to carry out an analysis of their complementary or supplementary application, towards the construction of a more appropriate tool for the protection of human beings in extreme situations, as it occurs during armed conflicts. This is because, amid the multifaceted vulnerabilities that accumulate in today's conflicts, it is essential to provide the most effective source of protection - proportional to the demands for protection that are manifested today, particularly in military occupations around the world, whose occurrence will be the focus of this research. As for the method of approach concerning the logical basis of the investigation, the hypothetical-deductive method was selected, insofar as the corroboration or falsification of the main hypothesis about the effective complementary and harmonious application of IHRL will be tested to cases of human rights violations in International Armed Conflicts in the military occupation modality. Given this framework, the core of this work lies in the understanding of the praxis for the complementary application of both aspects in armed conflicts, considering not only International Human Rights Law as lex generalis, but their effective overlap to the detriment of International Humanitarian Law, when it is most beneficial to human protection in the cases of Military Occupations.

Victims of Environmental Harm During Conflict

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Merryl Lawry-White
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Transitional Justice ◽  
Environmental Harm ◽  
Environmental Damage ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Conflict Setting ◽  
Post Conflict

This chapter considers the interaction of some of the applicable norms related to liability and reparation for environmental damage in a post-conflict setting, including human rights and humanitarian law norms (including precedents) and their interaction with each other, with a focus on the potential consequences for victims. Using displacement as a specific case study, the discussion regarding potential consequences is supported by the learning that may be drawn from precedent reparations schemes, including those implemented in a ‘transitional justice’ framework as part of an attempt to afford ‘justice’ for breaches of human rights and humanitarian law (whether related to the environment or otherwise). The chapter considers some of the potential challenges of this interaction, particularly for justice initiatives, and particularly reparations schemes, experienced in the aftermath of conflict, such as constructing a coherent post-conflict narrative, restitution (or ‘truth’), awarding reparation (including ‘restitution’), and reconciliation as part of ‘peacebuilding’.

Introductory Remarks by Saira Mohamed

2019 ◽  
Vol 113 ◽  
pp. 365-366
Author(s):  
Saira Mohamed
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Transitional Justice ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Criminal Courts ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
International Human

Welcome to this discussion on “Emerging Accountability Mechanisms: Innovative or Ineffective?” During this session, four expert panelists will examine the evolution and future of so-called “alternative” or “non-traditional” mechanisms that aim to secure accountability for serious violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law. This category comprises mechanisms with a range of goals and forms, from investigative institutions that prepare evidence to be handed off to criminal courts, to transitional justice mechanisms that seek through non-criminal means to redress violations, prevent a relapse into violence, and facilitate reconciliation.

Under the Gun: Moving Children for War

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacqueline Bhabha
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Child Labor ◽  
Transitional Justice ◽  
Child Soldiers ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Economic Rights ◽  
War Criminals ◽  
Former Child Soldiers

This chapter examines the transport and exploitation of child labor in situations of armed conflict. It first considers some of the main reasons why children are recruited and used in armed conflicts before discussing the process of bringing children within the scope of international criminal law as part of efforts to prosecute political leaders and senior military figures responsible for war crimes. In particular, it looks at the Special Court for Sierra Leone and describes its conviction of war criminals for the recruitment of child soldiers as an important human rights milestone. It then explores the human rights entitlements of former child soldiers and how transitional justice is implemented through the DDR (disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration) process, along with its shortcomings. The chapter concludes with an overview of enforcement of long-term social and economic rights of former child soldiers after the conflict.

14 Human Rights in Armed Conflict

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kleffner Jann K
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
The State ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Legal Relationship ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Individual

This chapter explains the application of human rights in armed conflicts. International humanitarian law has much in common with the law of human rights, since both bodies of rules are concerned with the protection of the individual. Nevertheless, there are important differences between them. Human rights law is designed to operate primarily in normal peacetime conditions, and governs the vertical legal relationship between a state and its citizens and other persons subject to its jurisdiction. Human rights law applies primarily within the territory of the state that is subject to the human rights obligation in question. International humanitarian law, by contrast, is specifically designed to regulate situations of armed conflict. These differences between human rights law and international humanitarian law have led some to argue that human rights law is only intended to be applicable in time of peace. However, it is now generally accepted that human rights continue to apply during armed conflict. Hence, international humanitarian law and human rights law can apply simultaneously in situations of armed conflict.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document