Advertisement

International Law and Transitional Justice: The Difficulties of Abiding by the Obligations to Investigate and Prosecute in Countries Facing a Transition

  • Jacopo Roberti di SarsinaEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter broadly examines the relationship between international law and transitions, and specifically adds to the debate on whether countries emerging from periods of conflict or systematic repression enjoy some margin of discretion in designing transitional justice mechanisms in which criminal prosecution is only one of the tools utilized as part of a holistic approach to peace. The chapter commences by defining transition and transitional justice. It then goes on to examine the dilemmas and challenges faced by successor governments, and societies, in abiding by the obligations imposed upon states to investigate and prosecute mass atrocities. Going largely by the experience of South America and Africa, the chapter shows how the balance of power at the time of transition affects the manner in which successor governments decide to deal with their past. It then examines the contentious issue of amnesty and pardon, which are traditionally included in peace agreements with a view to ending conflict and facilitating transition. Placing these domestic criminal policy instruments in the context of the global fight against impunity, the chapter analyzes the latest jurisprudence of human rights treaty bodies to assess whether genuine national reconciliation programs encompassing amnesties also for international crimes may be warranted, together with limited criminal sanctions. It then examines whether an outright prohibition of amnesty may be read into customary law. Lastly, focusing on the case of Uganda and the 2016 Colombian peace agreement, the chapter addresses the role of the ICC, and how it may impact on conflict management efforts.

Keywords

Military junta Dictatorship Conflict Systematic human rights violations Transition Democracy Rule of law Successor government Accountability Obligations to investigate and prosecute The Military Coup Transitional justice Balance of power Realpolitik Peace agreement National reconciliation program Sierra Leone Amnesty Pardon Statute of limitations Impunity Treaty bodies Latin America ICC International crimes Positive complementarity Uganda Colombia Colombian Final Peace Agreement Special Jurisdiction for Peace Alternative sanctions Principle of continuity Principle of effectiveness 

References

  1. Alvarez J E (2009) Alternatives to international criminal justice. In: Cassese A (ed) The Oxford Companion to International Criminal Justice. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 25–38Google Scholar
  2. Ambos K (2009) The legal framework of transitional justice. In: Ambos K, Large J, Wierda M (eds) Building a future on peace and justice: Studies on transitional justice, peace and development. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, pp 19–103Google Scholar
  3. Andrieu K (2016) Confronting the dictatorial past in Tunisia: Human rights and the politics of victimhood in transitional justice discourses since 2011. Human Rights Quarterly 38:261–293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Aponte A (2009) Colombia: Un caso sui generis de la justicia de transiciòn. In: Almqvist J, Espòsito C (eds) Justicia transicional en Iberoamérica. Centro de Estudios Polìticos y Constitucionales, Madrid, pp 87–114Google Scholar
  5. Apuuli P K (2005) Amnesty and international law: The case of the Lord’s Resistance Army insurgents in Northern Uganda. African Journal of Conflict Resolution 5:33–61Google Scholar
  6. Aukerman M J (2002) Extraordinary evil, ordinary crime: A framework for understanding transitional justice. Harvard Human Rights Journal 15:39–98Google Scholar
  7. Bassiouni C M (1996) Searching for peace and achieving justice: The need for accountability. Law and Contemporary Problems 59:9–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bassiouni C M (ed) (2002a) Post-conflict justice. Transnational Publishers, ArdsleyGoogle Scholar
  9. Bassiouni C M (2002b) Accountability for violations of international humanitarian law and other serious violations of human rights. In: Bassiouni C M (ed) Post-conflict justice. Transnational Publishers, Ardsley, pp 3–54Google Scholar
  10. Bell C (2008) On the law of peace: Peace agreements and the lex pacificatoria. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  11. Bell C (2009) The “new law” of transitional justice. In: Building a future on peace and justice: Studies on transitional justice, peace and development. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, pp 105–126Google Scholar
  12. Bell C (2016) Lex Pacificatoria Colombiana: Colombia’s peace accord in comparative perspective. American Journal of International Law 110:165–171. https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/14D6D1986F104F243B1FFFE1AE92A5CA/S2398772300003019a.pdf/lex_pacificatoria_colombiana_colombias_peace_accord_in_comparative_perspective.pdf. Accessed 11 September 2018CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Boraine A (2000) A country unmasked: Inside South Africa´s Truth and Reconciliation Commission. Oxford University Press, Cape Town/New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. Brehm H N, Uggen C, Gasanabo J-D (2014) Genocide, justice, and Rwanda’s gacaca courts. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice 30:333–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Burke-White W W (2001) Reframing impunity: Applying liberal international law theory to an analysis of amnesty legislation. Harvard International Law Journal 42:467–534Google Scholar
  16. Burke-White W W (2006) Double edged tribunals: The political effects of international criminal tribunals. International Criminal Court, Guest Lecture Series of the Office of the Prosecutor. https://www.icc-cpi.int/NR/rdonlyres/E6DA72F5-606E-41F0-A563-5B8456E4AE35/0/ICCOTP20060728BurkeWhite_en.pdf. Accessed 11 September 2018
  17. Burke-White W W (2008) Proactive complementarity: The International Criminal Court and national courts in the Rome system of international justice. Harvard International Law Journal 49:53–108Google Scholar
  18. Cassese A (2007–2008) Clemency versus retribution in post-conflict situations. Columbia Journal of Transnational Law 46:1–13Google Scholar
  19. Cassese A, Gaeta P (2013) Cassese’s International Criminal Law, 3rd edn. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  20. Chinchón Álvarez J (2007) Derecho Internacional y transiciones a la democracia y la paz: Hacia un modelo para el castigo del los crímenes pasados a través de la experiencia iberoamericana. Ediciones Parthenon, MadridGoogle Scholar
  21. Chinchón Álvarez J (2009) Formulando las preguntas correctas sobre los problemas de cumplimiento de las obligaciones de investigar, juzgar, sancionar y reparar los crìmenes pasados. In: Almqvist J, Espòsito C (eds) Justicia transicional en Iberoamérica. Centro de Estudios Polìticos y Constitucionales, Madrid, pp 343–367Google Scholar
  22. Delgado M (2015) Embracing concurrent realities: Revisiting the relationship between human rights and conflict resolution. PhD Thesis, University of AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  23. Della Morte G (2011) Le amnistie nel diritto internazionale. CEDAM, PadovaGoogle Scholar
  24. Dugard J (1999) Dealing with crimes of a past regime. Is amnesty still an option? Leiden Journal of International Law 12:1001–1016CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Elias J S (2008) Constitutional changes, transitional justice, and legitimacy: The life and death of Argentina’s amnesty laws. Hastings International and Comparative Law Review 31:587–646Google Scholar
  26. Forcada Barona I (2011) Derecho internacional y justicia transicional: Cuando el derecho se convierte en religiòn. Editorial Civitas, MadridGoogle Scholar
  27. Fornasari G (2013) Giustizia di transizione e diritto penale. Giappichelli, TurinGoogle Scholar
  28. Freeman M (2009) Necessary evils: Amnesties and the search for justice. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  29. Freeman M, Pensky M (2012) The amnesty controversy in international law. In: Lessa F, Payne L A (eds) Amnesty in the age of human rights accountability: Comparative and international perspectives Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 42–68Google Scholar
  30. Frulli M (2009) Amnesty. In: Cassese A (ed) The Oxford Companion to International Criminal Justice. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 243–244Google Scholar
  31. Gaeta P (1999) The defence of superior orders: The Statute of the International Criminal Court versus customary international law. European Journal of International Law 10:172–191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Galleguillos N, Nef J (1990) Introduction: The uneasy road to democracy. Canadian Journal of Latin American and Caribbean Studies 15:7–25Google Scholar
  33. Gans-Morse J (2004) Searching for transitologists: Contemporary theories of post-communist transitions and the myth of a dominant paradigm. Post-Soviet Affairs 20:320–349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Garretòn M A (1987) Reconstruir la politìca: Transiciòn y consolidaciòn democràtica en Chile. Editorial Andante, SantiagoGoogle Scholar
  35. Hansen T O (2012) Establishing a normative framework for evaluating diverse cases of transitional justice. International Studies Journal 9:171–222Google Scholar
  36. Hayner P B (2001) Unspeakable truths: Transitional justice and the challenge of truth commissions. Routledge, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Hazan P (2006) Measuring the impact of punishment and forgiveness: A Framework for evaluating transitional justice. International Review of the Red Cross 88:19–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Henckaerts J-M, Doswald-Beck L (2009) Customary International Humanitarian Law. International Committee of the Red Cross/Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  39. Herdegen M (2013) Interpretation in international law. In: Wolfrum R (ed) Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law. Oxford University Press (Online)Google Scholar
  40. Huntington S P (1991) The third wave: Democratization in the late twentieth century. University of Oklahoma Press, NormanGoogle Scholar
  41. International Council on Human Rights Policy (2006) Negotiating justice? Human rights and peace agreements. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1551237. Accessed 11 September 2018
  42. Jalloh C C (2011) Special Court for Sierra Leone: Achieving justice? Michigan Journal of International Law 32:395–460Google Scholar
  43. Kellogg Institute for International Studies, Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies, University of Notre Dame (2012) The Tipping Point: Transitions to Democracy in Latin America and the Middle East. http://www.bahaistudies.net/asma/the_tipping_point.pdf. Accessed 10 September 2018
  44. Kersten M (2016) Justice in conflict: The effects of the International Criminal Court’s interventions on ending wars and building peace. Oxford University Press, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Khachaturian R (2015) Uncertain knowledge and democratic transitions: Revisiting O’Donnell and Schmitter’s Tentative Conclusions about Uncertain Democracies. Polity 47:114–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Kokott J (1993) No impunity for human rights violations in the Americas. Human Rights Law Journal 14:153–159Google Scholar
  47. Korhonen O (2003) “Post” as justification: International law and democracy-building after Iraq. German Law Journal 4:709–723CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Kritz N J (ed) (1995) Transitional justice: How emerging democracies reckon with former regimes. Volumes I-III. United States Institute for Peace Press, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  49. Kritz N J (1996) Coming to terms with atrocities: A review of accountability mechanisms for mass violations of human rights. Law and Contemporary Problems 59:127–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Krygier M (2001) Transitional question about the rule of law: Why, what, and how? East Central Europe 28:1–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Lafontaine F (2005) No amnesty or statute of limitation for enforced disappearances: The Sandoval Case before the Supreme Court of Chile. Journal of International Criminal Justice 3:469–484CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Lamont C K, Boujneh H (2012) Transitional justice in Tunisia: Negotiating justice during transition. Politička Misao 49:32–49Google Scholar
  53. Laplante L J, Theidon K (2006) Transitional justice in times of conflict: Colombia’s Ley de Justicia y Paz. Michigan Journal of International Law 28:49–108Google Scholar
  54. Lauterpacht H (1949) Restrictive interpretation and the principle of effectiveness in the interpretation of treaties. British Yearbook of International Law 26:48–85Google Scholar
  55. Macaluso D J (2001) Absolute and free pardon: The effect of the amnesty provision in the Lome Peace Agreement on the jurisdiction of the Special Court for Sierra Leone. Brooklyn Journal of International Law 27:347–380Google Scholar
  56. Maculan E (2017a) About the implementation of the Colombian Peace Agreement: The Commission for the Elucidation of Truth. International Law Blog. https://aninternationallawblog.wordpress.com/2017/05/29/about-the-implementation-of-the-colombian-peace-agreement-the-commission-for-the-elucidation-of-truth/. Accessed 11 September 2018
  57. Maculan E (2017b) Finally, the Final Agreement. A comparative perspective on the Colombian Peace Agreement. International Law Blog. https://aninternationallawblog.wordpress.com/2017/01/09/finally-the-final-agreement-a-comparative-perspective-on-the-colombian-peace-agreement/. Accessed 11 September 2018
  58. Malamud-Goti J (1990) Transitional governments in the breach: Why punish state criminals? Human Rights Quarterly 12:1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Malamud-Goti J (2005) Dignidad, venganza y fomento de la democracia. Universidad del Rosario (Colombia), Revista de Estudios Socio-Jurìdicos 7:113–152Google Scholar
  60. Mallinder L (2008) Amnesty, human rights and political transitions: Bridging the peace and justice divide. Hart Publishing, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  61. Mallinder L (2009) Fighting impunity and promoting international justice: Global comparison of amnesty laws. European Initiative for Democracy and Human Rights. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Louise_Mallinder/publication/228214698_Global_Comparison_of_Amnesty_Laws/links/0046352b0ada071e70000000/Global-Comparison-of-Amnesty-Laws.pdf?origin=publication_detail. Accessed 12 September 2018
  62. Mallinder L (2010) Amnesties. In: Bassiouni C M (ed) The pursuit of international criminal justice: A World study on conflicts, victimization, and post-conflict justice. Intersentia, Antwerp, pp 793 et seq.Google Scholar
  63. Mallinder L (2014) Amnesties in the pursuit of reconciliation, peacebuilding, and restorative justice. In: Llewellyn J J, Philpott D (eds) Restorative justice, reconciliation, and peacebuilding. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 138–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Mallinder L (2015) Investigations, prosecutions and amnesties under Articles 2 & 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Transitional Justice Institute, Research Paper No. 15-05. https://ssrn.com/abstract=2668106 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2668106. Accessed 11 September 2018
  65. Mallinder L (2016) Combatiendo la impunidad: La erosiòn gradual de la Ley de Caducidad Uruguaya. In: Galain Palermo P (ed) ¿Justicia de transiciòn? Tirant lo Blanch, Valencia, pp 1–21Google Scholar
  66. Mallinder L, McEvoy K (2011) Rethinking amnesties: Atrocity, accountability and impunity in post-conflict societies. Contemporary Social Science 6:107–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Marchuk I (2016) Ukraine and the International Criminal Court: Implications of the ad hoc jurisdiction acceptance and beyond. Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law 49:323–370Google Scholar
  68. McEvoy K, Mallinder L (2012) Amnesties in transition: Punishment, restoration and the governance of mercy. Journal Law and Society 39:410–440CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Méndez J E (1997) Accountability for past abuses. Human Rights Quarterly 19:255–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Minow M (1998) Between vengeance and forgiveness: Facing history after genocide and mass violence. Beacon Press, BostonGoogle Scholar
  71. Naqvi Y (2003) Amnesty for War Crimes: Defining the limits of international recognition. International Review of the Red Cross 85:583–626CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Ní Aoláin F (2014) European Court of Human Rights rules on amnesty and double jeopardy. Just Security Online Forum. https://www.justsecurity.org/11112/ecthr-double-jeopardy/. Accessed 11 September 2018
  73. Ní Aoláin F, Campbell C (2005) The paradox of transition in conflicted democracies. Human Rights Quarterly 27:172–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Nino C S (1991) The duty to punish past abuses of human rights put into context: The case of Argentina. Yale Law Journal 100:2619–2640CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. O’Donnell G (2002) In partial defense of an evanescent “paradigm”. Journal of Democracy 13:6–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. O’Donnell G (2007) The perpetual crises of democracy. Journal of Democracy 18:5–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. O’Donnell G, Schmitter P C (eds) (1986) Transitions from authoritarian rule: Tentative conclusions about uncertain democracies. Johns Hopkins University Press, BaltimoreGoogle Scholar
  78. O’Donnell G, Schmitter P C (eds) (2013) Transitions from authoritarian rule: Tentative conclusions about uncertain democracies, 2nd edn. Johns Hopkins University Press, BaltimoreGoogle Scholar
  79. O’Donnell G, Schmitter P C, Whitehead L (eds) (1986a) Transitions from authoritarian rule: Southern Europe. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore Google Scholar
  80. O’Donnell G, Schmitter P C, Whitehead L (eds) (1986b) Transitions from authoritarian rule: Latin America. Johns Hopkins University Press, BaltimoreGoogle Scholar
  81. O’Donnell G, Schmitter P C, Whitehead L (eds) (1986c) Transitions from authoritarian rule: Comparative perspectives. Johns Hopkins University Press, BaltimoreGoogle Scholar
  82. Olasolo H (2017) Reflections on the need for some degree of harmonization between the international normative framework of ius cogens crimes and transitional justice special attention to criminal proceedings and truth commissions. In: Slye R (ed) The Nuremberg principles in non-western societies: A reflection on their universality, legitimacy and application. International Nuremberg Principles Academy, Nuremberg, pp 115–143Google Scholar
  83. Olasolo H, Ramirez J, Varón A (2017) Have the Colombian Government and the FARC learnt the lessons of the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission as to the need to clearly define and prioritize the main goals of a truth commission? Harvard Human Rights Journal (Forthcoming). http://harvardhrj.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Olasolo.pdf. Accessed 11 September 2018
  84. Orentlicher D F (1991) Settling accounts: The duty to prosecute human rights violations of a prior regime. Yale Law Journal 100:2537–2618CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Paige A (2009) How “transitions” reshaped human rights: A conceptual history of transitional justice. Human Rights Quarterly 31:321–367CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Parker K, Neylon L B (1989) Jus cogens: Compelling the law of human rights. Hastings International and Comparative Law Review 12:411–464Google Scholar
  87. Pensky M (2008) Amnesty on trial: Impunity, accountability, and the norms of international law. Ethics & Global Politics 1:1–40Google Scholar
  88. Posner E A, Vermeule A (2004) Transitional justice as ordinary justice. Harvard Law Review 117:762–825CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Przeworski A (1986) Some problems in the study of the transition to democracy. In: O’Donnell G, Schmitter P C, Whitehead L (eds) Transitions from authoritarian rule: Comparative perspectives. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, pp 47–63Google Scholar
  90. Ricoeur P (2004) Memory, history, forgetting. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  91. Roberti di Sarsina J (2017) Reassessing vetting and the judiciary – Some reflections in the light of the Ukrainian model. Paper presented at the Post-Conflict Justice in Ukraine Conference, 25–27 May 2017 (unpublished)Google Scholar
  92. Robinson D (2003) Serving the interests of justice: Amnesties, truth commission and the International Criminal Court. European Journal of International Law 14:481–506CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Rocci L (1998) Vocabolario greco-italiano, 39th edn. Società Editrice Dante Alighieri, RomeGoogle Scholar
  94. Roht-Arriaza N (1995) Special problems of a duty to prosecute: Derogation, amnesties, statutes of limitation, and superior orders. In: Roht-Arriaza N (ed) Impunity and human rights in international law and practice. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 57–70Google Scholar
  95. Roht-Arriaza N, Gibson L (1998) The developing jurisprudence on amnesty. Human Rights Quarterly 20:843–885CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Rouquié A (1986) Demilitarization and the institutionalization of military-dominated polities in Latin America. In: O’Donnell G, Schmitter P C, Whitehead L (eds) Transitions from authoritarian rule: Comparative perspectives. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, pp 108–136Google Scholar
  97. Rustow D A (1970) Transitions to democracy: Toward a Dynamic Model. Comparative Politics 2:337–363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Santamarìa J (1982) Transición controlada y dificultad de consolidación: El ejemplo español. In: Santamarìa J (ed) Transiciòn a la democracia en el sur de Europa y América Latina. Centro de Investigaciones Sociológicas, Madrid, pp 371–417Google Scholar
  99. Schabas W A (1996) Justice, democracy, and impunity in post-genocide Rwanda: Searching for solutions to impossible problems. Criminal Law Forum 7:523–560CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Schabas W A (2003) The relationship between truth commissions and International Courts: The case of Sierra Leone. Human Rights Quarterly 25:1035–1066CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Schabas W A (2004) Amnesty, the Sierra Leone Truth and Reconciliation Commission and the Special Court for Sierra Leone. UC Davis Journal of International Law and Policy 11:145–170Google Scholar
  102. Scharf M P (1996) The letter of the law: The scope of the international legal obligation to prosecute human rights crimes. Law and Contemporary Problems 59:41–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Scharf M P (2006) From the eXile files: An essay on trading justice for peace. Washington and Lee Law Review 63:339–378Google Scholar
  104. Schmitter P C, Karl T L (1994) The conceptual travels of transitologists and consolidologists: How far to the east should they attempt to go? Slavic Review 53:173–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Seibert-Fohr A (2009) Prosecuting serious human rights violations. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  106. Sikkink K, Walling C B (2007) The impact of human rights trials in Latin America. Journal of Peace Research 44:427–445CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Slye R C (2002) The legitimacy of amnesties under international law and general principles of Anglo-American law: Is a legitimate amnesty possible? Virginia Journal of International Law 43:173–248Google Scholar
  108. Stahn C (2005) Complementarity, amnesties and alternative forms of justice: Some interpretative guidelines for the International Criminal Court. Journal of International Criminal Justice 3:695–720CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Stotzky I P (1995) Haiti: Searching for alternatives. In: Roht-Arriaza N (ed) Impunity and human rights in international law and practice. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 185–197Google Scholar
  110. Teitel R (1997) Transitional jurisprudence: The role of law in political transformation. Yale Law Journal 106:2009–2080CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. Teitel R (2000) Transitional justice. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  112. Teitel R (2002) Humanity’s law: Rule of law for the new global politics. Cornell International Law Journal 35:355–388Google Scholar
  113. Teitel R (2003) Transitional justice genealogy. Harvard Human Rights Journal 16:69–94Google Scholar
  114. Teitel R (2014) Globalizing transitional justice: Contemporary essays. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  115. Vacas Fernàndez F (2015) El derecho international ante el conflicto de Colombia. Tirant Lo Blanch, ValenciaGoogle Scholar
  116. van der Wilt H G (2011) Universal jurisdiction under attack: An assessment of African misgivings towards international criminal justice as administered by Western states. Journal of International Criminal Justice 9:1043–1066CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. van Zyl P (1999) Dilemmas of transitional justice: The case of South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission. Journal of International Affairs 52:647–667Google Scholar
  118. van Zyl P (2000) Justice without punishment: Guaranteeing human rights in transitional societies. In: Villa-Vicencio C, Verwoerd W (eds) Looking back, reaching forward: Reflections on the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of South Africa. Zed Books, London, pp 42–57Google Scholar
  119. Vera Lugo J P (2015) Memorias emergentes: Las consecuencias inesperadas de la Ley de Justicia y Paz en Colombia (2005–2011). Universidad del Rosario (Colombia), Revista Estudios Socio-Jurídicos 17:13–44Google Scholar
  120. Vickery M, Roht-Arriaza N (1995) Human rights in Cambodia. In: Roht-Arriaza N (ed) Impunity and human rights in international law and practice. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 243–251Google Scholar
  121. Villa-Vicencio C (2000) Why perpetrators should not always be prosecuted: Where the International Criminal Court and truth commissions meet. Emory Law Journal 49:205–222Google Scholar
  122. Wiarda H J (2001) Southern Europe, Eastern Europe, and comparative politics: “Transitology” and the need for new theory. East European Politics and Societies 15:485–501Google Scholar
  123. Zalaquett J (1990) Confronting human rights violations committed by former governments: Applicable principles and political constraints. Hamline Law Review 13:623–660Google Scholar
  124. Zalaquett J (1992) Balancing ethical imperatives and political constraints: The dilemma of new democracies confronting past human rights violations. Hastings Law Journal 43:1425–1438Google Scholar
  125. Zimmerman A (2006) Continuity of states. In: Wolfrum R (ed) Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law. Oxford University Press (Online)Google Scholar

UN Documents

  1. Committee Against Torture Google Scholar
  2. – (1993) Concluding Observations on Argentina, paras 88–115, UN Doc. A/48/44Google Scholar
  3. – (2006) Consideration of Reports Submitted by States Parties under Article 19 of the Convention, Conclusions and Recommendations of the Committee against Torture on Guatemala, U.N. Doc. CAT/C/GTM/CO/4Google Scholar
  4. – (2008) General Comment No. 2, Implementation of Article 2 by States Parties, U.N. Doc. CAT/C/GC/2Google Scholar
  5. – (2011) Concluding Observations on Madagascar, U.N. Doc. CAT/C/MDG/CO/1Google Scholar
  6. – (2012) General Comment No. 3, Implementation of Article 14 by States Parties, U.N. Doc. CAT/C/GC/3Google Scholar
  7. – (2014) Concluding Observations on Sierra Leone, para 68, U.N. Doc. A/69/44Google Scholar
  8. – (2014) Concluding Observations on Uruguay, para 70, U.N. Doc. A/69/44Google Scholar
  9. – (2004) Civil and Political Rights, Including the Question of Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances. Report of the Intersessional Open-ended Working Group to Elaborate a Draft Legally Binding Normative Instrument for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/2004/59Google Scholar
  10. – (2005) Promotion and Protection of Human Rights. Impunity: Report of the Independent Expert to Update the Set of principles to Combat Impunity, Diane Orentlicher. Addendum: Updated Set of Principles for the Protection and Promotion of Human Rights through Action to Combat Impunity, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/2005/102/Add.1Google Scholar
  11. General Assembly Google Scholar
  12. – (2012) Resolution 67/1, Declaration of the High-level Meeting of the General Assembly on the Rule of Law at the National and International Levels, U.N. Doc. A/RES/67/1Google Scholar
  13. – (2016) Strengthening and Coordinating United Nations Rule of Law Activities: Report of the Secretary-General, U.N. Doc. A/71/169Google Scholar
  14. Human Rights Committee Google Scholar
  15. – (1992) General Comment No. 20: Replaces General Comment 7 concerning Prohibition of Torture and Cruel Treatment or Punishment (Art. 7), U.N. Doc. HRI/ GEN/1/Rev.1 at 30Google Scholar
  16. – (2004) General Comment No. 31: The Nature of the General Legal Obligation Imposed on States Parties to the Covenant (Art. 2), U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add.13 U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add.13Google Scholar
  17. – (1994) Concluding Observations of the Human Rights Committee: El Salvador, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/79/Add.34Google Scholar
  18. – (1995) Concluding Observations of the Human Rights Committee: Argentina, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/79/Add.46Google Scholar
  19. – (1995) Concluding Observations of the Human Rights Committee: Paraguay, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/79/Add.48Google Scholar
  20. – (1995) Concluding Observations of the Human Rights Committee: Yemen, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/79/Add.51Google Scholar
  21. – (1996) Concluding Observations of the Human Rights Committee: Guatemala, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/79/Add.63Google Scholar
  22. – (1996) Concluding Observations of the Human Rights Committee: Peru, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/79/Add.67Google Scholar
  23. – (1999) Concluding Observations on the Human Rights Committee: Chile, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/79/Add.104Google Scholar
  24. – (2000) Concluding Observations of the Human Rights Committee: Argentina, U.N. Doc. CCPR/CO/70/ARGGoogle Scholar
  25. – (2004) Concluding Observations of the Human Rights Committee: Colombia, U.N. Doc. CCPR/CO/80/COLGoogle Scholar
  26. – (2015) Concluding Observations of the Human Rights Committee: Great Britain and Northern Ireland, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/GBR/CO/7Google Scholar
  27. – (2015) Concluding Observations of the Human Rights Committee: Spain, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/ESP/CO/6Google Scholar
  28. – (2016) Concluding Observations of the Human Rights Committee: South Africa, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/ZAF/CO/1Google Scholar
  29. International Law Commission Google Scholar
  30. – (2017) Third Report on Crimes Against Humanity By Sean D. Murphy, Special Rapporteur, U.N. Doc. A/CN.4/704Google Scholar
  31. Security Council Google Scholar
  32. – (1999) Resolution 1260, U.N. Doc. S/RES/1260Google Scholar
  33. – (2000) Report of the Secretary-General on the Establishment of a Special Court for Sierra Leone, U.N. Doc. S/2000/915Google Scholar
  34. – (2004) The Rule of Law and Transitional Justice in Conflict and Post-conflict Societies: Report of the Secretary-General, U.N. Doc. S/2004/616Google Scholar
  35. – (2011) The Rule of Law and Transitional Justice in Conflict and Post-conflict Societies: Report of the Secretary-General, U.N. Doc. S/2011/634Google Scholar
  36. – (2013) Measuring the Effectiveness of the Support Provided by the United Nations System for the Promotion of the Rule of Law in Conflict and Post-conflict Situations: Report of the Secretary General to the Security Council, U.N. Doc. S/2013/341Google Scholar

Council of Europe

  1. – (2011) Committee of Ministers, Eradicating Impunity for Serious Human Rights Violations: Guidelines and reference texts. https://rm.coe.int/1680695d6e. Accessed 13 September 2018
  2. – (2016) Research Report: References to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and Inter-American Instruments in the Case-law of the European Court of Human Rights. http://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Research_report_inter_american_court_ENG.pdf. Accessed 10 September 2018

Inter-American Commission of Human Rights

  1. – (2005) Press Release, No. 26/05. http://www.cidh.org/Comunicados/Spanish/2005/26.05.htm. Accessed 10 September 2018
  2. – (2016) Press Release, No. 178/16. http://www.oas.org/en/iachr/media_center/PReleases/2016/178.asp. Accessed 10 September 2018

International Criminal Court

  1. – (2004) Office of the Prosecutor, Statement of the Prosecutor Luis Moreno Ocampo to Diplomatic Corps. https://www.icc-cpi.int/NR/rdonlyres/0F999F00-A609-4516-A91A-80467BC432D3/143670/LOM_20040212_En.pdf. Accessed 11 September 2018
  2. – (2007) Office of the Prosecutor, Policy Paper on the Interests of Justice, ICC-OTP-2007. https://www.icc-cpi.int/NR/rdonlyres/772C95C9-F54D-4321-BF09-73422BB23528/143640/ICCOTPInterestsOfJustice.pdf. Accessed 11 September 2018
  3. – (2017a) Office of the Prosecutor, Statement of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, Fatou Bensouda, on the Conclusion of her Visit to Colombia (10–13 September 2017). https://www.icc-cpi.int/Pages/item.aspx?name=170913-otp-stat-colombia. Accessed 11 September 2018
  4. – (2017b) Office of the Prosecutor, Report on Preliminary Examination Activities 2017. https://www.icc-cpi.int/itemsDocuments/2017-PE-rep/2017-otp-rep-PE_ENG.pdf. Accessed 11 September 2018
  5. – (2018) Office of the Prosecutor, “The Role of the ICC in the Transitional Justice Process in Colombia.” https://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/otp/201805SpeechDP.pdf. Accessed 11 September 2018

Other Material

  1. – (2013) Transitional Justice Institute, University of Ulster, The Belfast Guidelines on Amnesty and Accountability. https://peacemaker.un.org/sites/peacemaker.un.org/files/BelfastGuidelines_TJI2014.pdf.pdf. Accessed 13 September 2018

Copyright information

© T.M.C. Asser Press and the author 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of LawAlma Mater Studiorum - University of BolognaBolognaItaly

Personalised recommendations