Specific Reparation for Specific Victimization: A Case for Suitable Reparation Strategies for War Crimes Victims in the DRC

Manirabona, Amissi Melchiade; Wemmers, Jo-Anne

doi:10.1163/15718123-01305002

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although international law and transitional justice scholars have argued that reparation is necessary for a long‐term transitional justice strategy (Begicevic, 2016, 2021; Fletcher & Weinstein, 2002; Stover, 2016), they warned that without victims' independent access to judicial institutions, international law would continue to face challenges in reaching its full potential (Menno, 2007; Nowak, 2007). What international law can do to restore victims' rights is limited as this largely depends on the political will of the states (Manirabona & Wemmers, 2013; Evans, 2012; Gaja, 2010; Malamud‐Goti & Grosman, 2006).…”

Section: Framework and Description Of Relative Theory And Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Law, political economy and war reparation: The case of Bosnia and Herzegovina

Begicevic

2024

Law & Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

What are the after‐effects of the Bosnia and Herzegovinian (BH) transition from a post‐socialist, post‐genocide, and post‐ethno‐nationalist state into a European liberal democracy? This article makes a case for war reparation and argues that while poverty reduction has not been among the stated aims of transitional justice mechanisms, it is of critical importance to study war victims' deprivation in the context of historical patterns of structural injustice and examine liberal reconstruction policies that failed to provide compensation and legal redress for gross violations of human rights and serious violations of humanitarian law. The article uses the historical sociology approach as a method of analysis to investigate how moving away from a socialist to a capitalist economic model, from war to peace, and from one party political system to liberal democracy has resulted in structural injustice and growing levels of poverty that adversely impact most vulnerable Bosnians. The article presents an argument that the lack of post‐war reparation programs, coupled with an inadequate emphasis on political regime change, poverty reduction programs and social and economic rights such as access to welfare, cash assistance, food, transportation, education, pension, and disability benefits to ensure the quality of living is detrimental to everyday lives of war victims and people who live at the bottom of the society.

show abstract

Section: Framework and Description Of Relative Theory And Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Law, political economy and war reparation: The case of Bosnia and Herzegovina

Begicevic

2024

Law & Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Misrepresentation of relevant facts in the application does not affect consistency. Although some scholars believe that many victims are in relatively underprivileged areas and do not have access to educational opportunities (Manirabona and Wemmers 2013), many victims struggle to fully articulate their needs and the degree of damage when filing claims, which affects the ability of victims to obtain compensation. However, due to the assistance of the Victims Participation and Reparations Section (VPRS), OPCV, and other organizations, most victims can fully articulate the details of their injuries via relevant organizations of the court, and therefore, low education is not a large influencing factor.…”

Section: Participating In Trial For Compensationmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Gap between the International Criminal Court and Victims: Criminal Trial Reparations as a Case Study

Yang

2023

Laws

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although victims have the right to limited participation in trials and to seek reparations after sentencing, the legal structure of the International Criminal Court (ICC) prioritizes retributive justice over restorative justice and punishment over reparations. Thus, currently, although the perpetrators can be tried through the ICC, it is still difficult to obtain reasonable compensation for the damages suffered by the victims. On the one hand, the ICC’s reparation system may be restricted by the identity of the victim, ICC internal factors, and so on. The current structure of the ICC compensation system allows for hierarchical relationships between victims, while at the same time, there is tension between individual and collective types of compensation. These factors have led to a disconnect and gap between the protection of rights at the theoretical level and actual reparation. This dichotomy between the theoretical protection of the rights of victims and the real protection of victims in practice exists in the ICC. Victims are isolated from the field of vision due to potential repercussions. The idealistic illusion of justice is completed when the ICC stands on the stage and accepts the audience’s praise. However, for compensation in criminal courts, people are paying increasing attention to the legal process and content. In practice, the proportion of victims of international crimes is not low, and in some cases, victims are widespread. It can be seen that criminal compensation for victims is an issue that spans a vast range of people and regions. Nonetheless, there are still research gaps regarding reparation and other ideas of justice according to the ICC, how the ICC provides multifaceted safeguards for victims, and the limitations and influence of the mechanism of the ICC on the compensation of victims. Considering the above problems, this paper aims to analyze the International Criminal Court indemnity cases. This paper wishes to analyze reparations and other ideas of justice under the ICC, examining the approach of the ICC toward compensation for victims, where the ICC is heading regarding reparations for victims, how the reparations system works, and the advantages and disadvantages of the reparations system, as well as what are the potential problems of ICC related to reparations. What guarantees do the ICC’s mechanisms provide for victims to be able to receive reparations? How does the structure of the ICC reparations system conflict with victims’ reparations in practical terms? What are the potential obstacles and gaps between criminal trial reparations and victims? The first chapter wants to analyze the early Nuremberg tribunal, Tokyo tribunal, ICTY, and the ICTR by analyzing whether international criminal justice under these military tribunals was restorative justice or reparation justice and interspersed with analyses of reparation to victims under these tribunals. Then, it analyses it further about justice and reparation of the ICC, and it talks about the compensation for the victim and how the idea of compensation under the ICC has evolved. Using these arguments to analyze reparation and other different ideas of justice under the paly of ICC. The second chapter of the article analyzes the “participatate in trial for compensation”, “The limits of participating in trial”, “Safety protection for victims” to demonstrate the current protection and progress of the ICC system on the issue of victims’ compensation, this is because victims’ participation in the trial will bring a lot of help to the issue of compensation. The article analyses the significance and shortcomings of participation in a trial for compensation, which is necessary and meaningful to the issue of compensation because “participation in trial” and compensation are related and complementary to each other, as participation of the victims will bring a lot of help to the issue of compensation. The article analyses the section “Protection of the financial situation of victims: A possible alternative methods of reparation” because, to some extent, it can be seen as an alternative method of ICC compensation. The third chapter of the article hopes that by analyzing “Little compensation”, “The silence court put on victims’ rights of compensation”, “The ICC’s model of judicial administration remains optional” to argue and analyze how the structure of the ICC reparations system conflict with victim reparations in practical terms. Because the silence the court put on victims’ rights of compensation and the ICC’s model of judicial administration remains optional, both directly impact the issue of compensation. Chapter IV mainly aims to analyze some of the potential negative impacts of the ICC on victim reparations, specifically “The victim’s social death”, “Restrictions on “expression” between the victim and the court”, “Does the ICC hope to improve its attitude to victims?” to specifically analyze and argue these aspects of its potential negative impact on victim reparations. On this basis, this paper analyzes the gap between criminal trial reparations and victims to identify what negatives exist between the two.

show abstract

New publications in humanitarian action and the law

2014

Int. rev. Red Cross

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Specific Reparation for Specific Victimization: A Case for Suitable Reparation Strategies for War Crimes Victims in the DRC

Cited by 4 publications

References 2 publications

Law, political economy and war reparation: The case of Bosnia and Herzegovina

Law, political economy and war reparation: The case of Bosnia and Herzegovina

The Gap between the International Criminal Court and Victims: Criminal Trial Reparations as a Case Study

New publications in humanitarian action and the law

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About