In recent years, Latin American countries have sought to come to terms with pnor periods of widespread human rights wiolations, relying increasingly on investigatory commissions. Investigatory efforts have been undertaken by democratically elected governments that replaced military dictatorships, by UN-sponsored commissions as part of a UN-mediated peace process, and by national human rights commissioners. This article examines truth commissions in Chile and El Salvador, an investigatory effort in Honduras, and a proposed commission m Guatemala. It compares the achievements and limitations of these commissions within the political constraints and institutional reality of each country, focusing on four major goals: the effort to create an authoritative account of the past; vindication of victims; recommendations for legislative, structural, or other changes to avoid repetition of past abuses; and establishing accountability or the identity of perpeaators.In the past 15 years a growing number of countries have tried to come to terms with periods of widespread human rights violations, during which national institutions failed to address rights abuses. Increasingly, coming to terms has involved the constitution of investigatory commissions, often known as "truth commissions." These may be ad hoc commissions appointed by the executive or by parliament, international commissions under United Nations (UN) or regional auspices, or those operating under a more permanent national structure like an ombudsman's office. Such commis-Margaret Popkin is a fellow at the Washington Office on Latin America. Naomi Roht-Arriaza is an assistant professor of law at Hastings College of Law, University of California. The authors thank Professor Patty Blum for her insightful comments on an earlier draft. Some material for this article is taken from N. Roht-Arriaza, ed., Impunity and Human Rights in Zntowtiod Luw and Practice (New York: Oxford University Press, 1995). 0 1995 American Bar Foundation. 0897-6546/95/2001-0079$01.CO 79 3. Argentina, not discussed here, also fits into this type of situation. The Argentine truth commission (the Sabato Commission) is discussed in, e.g., Hayner, 16 Hum. Rts. Q., and in International Commission of Jurists, "Human Rights in the World: Argentina, the Truth about the Disappeared," 33 Rev. Inr'l Commission of jurists 1-8 (Dec. 1984).
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.
In recent years, Latin American countries have sought to come to terms with prior periods of widespread human rights violations, relying increasingly on investigatory commissions. Investigatory efforts have been undertaken by democratically elected governments that replaced military dictatorships, by UN‐sponsored commissions as part of a UN‐mediated peace process, and by national human rights commissioners. This article examines truth commissions in Chile and El Salvador, an investigatory effort in Honduras, and a proposed commission in Guatemala. It compares the achievements and limitations of these commissions within the political constraints and institutional reality of each country, focusing on four major goals: the effort to create an authoritative account of the past; vindication of victims; recommendations for legislative, structural, or other changes to avoid repetition of past abuses; and establishing accountability or the identity of perpetrators.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.