(2) Amnesties and National Prosecutions Flashcards
When were amnesties enacted in SA?
during dictatorial rule and political transitions from dictatorship in SA during 80s
What was the outcome of the challenging by victims and civil society groups to use of amnesties on basis of international human rights law before the Inter-American Court of HR
limited the scope of amnesty laws by domestic courts to excl certain crimes etc, cases then reopened
3 phases of the use of amnesties in SA
1) 70s: amnesties granted to political prisoners imprisoned by dictatorial regime and those in exile (demanded by HR activists)
2) other side of coin: amnesties granted to those for grave HR violations (self-granted to avoid imprisonment)
3) survivors then challenged amnesty laws granted for grave violations of HR
What was held by the IACHR re compatability of amnesties with American Convention on HR in Barrios Altos v Peru (2001)?
held certain inadmissible bc they violated certain HRs –> amnesties intended to prevent investigation and punishment of perpetrators of serious HR violations
What was held by the IACHR re compatability of amnesties with American Convention on HR in Velasquez-Rodriguez v Honduras (1988)?
held amnesties weren’t compatible with HR
State has a legal duty to take reasonable steps to prevent HR violations and use means necessary to investigate HR violations committed within its jurisdiction
There is a regional trend in SA to:
narrow/annul or completely reject amnesty for international crimes and gross HR violations
The Inter-American Court of HR has rejected what type of amnesties:
unconditional amnesties!
- held that parties to the American Convention on HR prohibited to enact broad/unconditional amnesties for intl crimes and gross HR violations
- permits limited amnesties w a narrow scope
- willingness to distinguish btw amnestis enacted during/after dictatorships and those adopted in transitions from armed conflicts
What does Miller say about the trend in SA to reject broad amnesties?
this wasn’t a global trend
- arguably there’s been regional overreach by international institutions in their pursuit of accountability
- nevertheless reversing amnesty laws facilitates national healing and reconciliation
amnesties initially implemented to
to foster reconciliation and avoid retribution
are amnesty laws national or international laws?
national laws
What are some different forms of amnesties?
broad, narrow, conditional unconditional etc
What are the 5 principles of prescriptive jurisdiction?
1) territoriality principle (jurisdiction based on where act committed)
2) active personality principle (natoinality of perpetrator dtermines jurisdiction as can have jurisdiction over own nationals)
3) passive personality principle (exercise of jurisdiction if someone commits crime against victim with the nationality of the state)
4) protective principle (state can exercise J if poses threat to vital state interest ie, falsification of passports currency)
5) universal jurisdiction - due to nature of crime, such a gross violation that they can prosecute regardless of where committed/nationalities)
What crimes does the universal jurisdiction principle apply to?
o Piracy, a crime outside the jurisdiction of any State
o Genocide
o Crimes against Humanity
o Torture
o Grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of 1949
Amnesties represent what
form of political compromise to bring about peace and stability, while international justice seeks to hold individuals accountable for serious international crimes.
what is strategic litigation
using legal action to achieve a specific strategic goal, such as securing accountability for perpetrators of international crimes.