No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Provisional justice in protracted conflicts: The place of temporality in bridging the international humanitarian law and transitional justice divide
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 19 April 2024
Abstract
2024 will mark seventy-five years since the adoption of the 1949 Geneva Conventions. Despite the drafters’ efforts to mitigate the worst horrors of armed conflict, contemporary conflicts continue to witness the death and suffering of millions. This raises fundamental concerns over the ability of international law to alleviate the harm caused to those caught up in armed conflict, to redress violations and to prevent their recurrence. In international policy, international humanitarian law (IHL) is increasingly intertwined with transitional justice and in particular its emphasis on the centrality of human rights. This article focuses on the intersection between IHL and transitional justice in protracted conflicts, interrogating their increasing overlaps, complementary intersections and even tensions. In particular, the article examines the importance of the temporal dimensions of humanity and justice in prevention of violations. In doing so, the article concentrates on the impact of time on those harmed by armed conflict and the repercussions this has on the law and justice efforts. The article argues that time can be weaponized to frustrate accountability and prevent interference with belligerents’ behaviour. Victims in war cannot wait until the end of fighting to seek the recovery of the remains of their loved ones, for those responsible to be brought to justice, and for redress of their continuing suffering. Indeed, such delays amount to violations of victims’ right to an effective remedy and fail to stop the continuation of violations or the re-victimization of civilians and their communities. The article suggests the need for “provisional justice”, whereby, in the increasing number of situations of protracted conflict, efforts to redress conflict-related violations should be, at least in part, dealt with at the time, rather than waiting until the end of hostilities, so as to mitigate harm to victims and to correct belligerents’ behaviour in order to prevent recurrence.
Keywords
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of ICRC
Footnotes
†
Our thanks to the reviewers, the editorial team and Professor Kieran McEvoy for their comments and encouragement on this article. All errors are solely attributable to the authors.
The advice, opinions and statements contained in this article are those of the author/s and do not necessarily reflect the views of the ICRC. The ICRC does not necessarily represent or endorse the accuracy or reliability of any advice, opinion, statement or other information provided in this article.
References
1 See Policinski, Ellen and Kuzmanovic, Jovana, “Protracted Conflicts: The Enduring Legacy of Endless War”, International Review of the Red Cross, Vol. 101, No. 912, 2019CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
2 The preamble of Additional Protocol II recalls the place of human rights in offering “basic protection to the human person” and emphasizes the need to ensure “better protection for the victims” of armed conflicts. Protocol Additional (II) to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of Non-International Armed Conflicts, 1125 UNTS 609, 8 June 1977 (entered into force 7 December 1978) (AP II), preambular paras 3–4.
3 UN Secretary-General, Guidance Note of the Secretary General on Transitional Justice: A Strategic Tool for People, Prevention and Peace, 11 October 2023 (Guidance Note on Transitional Justice), p. 2.
4 Fabian Salvioli, Sustainable Development Goals and Transitional Justice: Leaving No Victim Behind: Report of the Special Rapporteur on the Promotion of Truth, Justice, Reparation and Guarantees of Non-Recurrence, UN Doc. A/77/162, 14 July 2022, para. 3.
5 E. Policinski and J. Kuzmanovic, above note 1, p. 968.
6 Bell, Christine, “Transitional Justice, Interdisciplinarity and the State of the ‘Field’ or ‘Non-Field’”, International Journal of Transitional Justice, Vol. 3, No. 1, 2009, p. 25Google Scholar.
7 Salmón, Elizabeth, “Reflections on International Humanitarian Law and Transitional Justice: Lessons to Be Learnt from the Latin American Experience”, International Review of the Red Cross, Vol. 88, No. 862, 2006, p. 328CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
8 Lewis, Dustin, “The Notion of ‘Protracted Armed Conflict’ in the Rome Statute and the Termination of Armed Conflicts under International Law: An Analysis of Select Issues”, International Review of the Red Cross, Vol. 101, No. 912, 2019, p. 1113CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
9 See Guidance Note on Transitional Justice, above note 3; F. Salvioli, above note 4.
10 Hugo Grotius, The Law of War and Peace, 1625, Chap. 25.
11 The Rule of Law and Transitional Justice in Conflict and Post-Conflict Societies: Report of the Secretary General, UN Doc. S/2004/616, 2004; The Rule of Law and Transitional Justice in Conflict and Post-Conflict Societies: Report of the Secretary-General, UN Doc. S/2011/634, 2011; UN Secretary-General, Guidance Note of the Secretary General: United Nations Approach to Transitional Justice, March 2010.
12 Guidance Note on Transitional Justice, above note 3, p. 3.
13 F. Salvioli, above note 4.
14 C. Bell, above note 6, p. 22.
15 E. Salmón, above note 7, p. 328.
16 Camins, Emily L., “Needs or Rights? Exploring the Limitations of Individual Reparations for Violations of International Humanitarian Law”, International Journal of Transitional Justice, Vol. 10, No. 1, 2016CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
17 Greiff, Pablo de, “Theorizing Transitional Justice”, Nomos, Vol. 51, No. 1, 2012, p. 35Google Scholar; Jones, Briony, “The Performance and Persistence of Transitional Justice and Its Ways of Knowing Atrocity”, Cooperation and Conflict, Vol. 56, No. 2, 2021, p. 173CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed.
18 E. Salmón, above note 7, pp. 328, 352. See Articles 49, 50, 129 and 146 of Geneva Conventions I, II, III and IV respectively.
19 Brianne McGonigle Leyh, “Transitional Justice and International Criminal Justice”, in Cheryl Lawther and Luke Moffett (eds), Research Handbook on Transitional Justice, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, 2023.
20 Memorialization has been recognized as a fifth pillar of transitional justice by the UN Special Rapporteur on Transitional Justice, but it is often folded in under reparations as a measure of satisfaction. See Memorialization Processes in the Context of Serious Violations of Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law: Report of the United Nations Special Rapporteur for Truth, Justice, Reparation and Guarantees of Non-Recurrence, UN Doc. A/HRC/45/45, 9 July 2020.
21 See Priscilla Hayner, Unspeakable Truths: Confronting State Terror and Atrocity, Routledge, London, 2001.
22 See Updated Set of Principles for the Protection and Promotion of Human Rights through Action to Combat Impunity, UN Doc. E/CN.4/2005/102/Add.1, 8 February 2005; International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, 2010, Art. 24(2).
23 Protocol Additional (I) to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts, 1125 UNTS 3, 8 June 1977 (entered into force 7 December 1978) (AP I), Art. 32.
24 Yves Sandoz, Christophe Swinarski and Bruno Zimmerman (eds), Commentary on the Additional Protocols, ICRC, Geneva, 1987, para. 1198.
25 Ibid., para. 1212.
26 See Catherine Harwood, “The Contributions of International Commissions of Inquiry to Transitional Justice”, in C. Lawther and L. Moffett (eds), above note 19.
27 IACtHR, Rodríguez Vera et al. (The Disappeared from the Palace of Justice) v. Colombia, Series C, No. 287, Judgment (Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs), 14 November 2014, para. 496, citing Articles 17, 20, 120 and 130 of Geneva Conventions I, II, III and IV respectively, Article 8 of AP II, and Jean-Marie Henckaerts and Louise Doswald-Beck (eds), Customary International Humanitarian Law, Vol. 1: Rules, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2005 (ICRC Customary Law Study), Rules 112–116, available at: https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/customary-ihl/rules (all internet references were accessed in March 2024).
28 IACtHR, Santo Domingo Massacre v. Colombia, Series C, No. 259, Judgment (Preliminary Objections, Merits and Reparations), 30 November 2012, paras 220, 236; Crown Court for Northern Ireland, R v. Holden, ICOS No. 19/005923, [2022] NICC 17, 16 March 2022, para. 24.
29 Colm Campbell, “Peace and the Laws of War: The Role of International Humanitarian Law in the Post-Conflict Environment”, International Review of the Red Cross, Vol. 82, No. 839, 2000, pp. 648–649.
30 ICRC Advisory Service on International Humanitarian Law (ICRC Advisory Service), “Amnesties and International Humanitarian Law: Purpose and Scope”, International Review of the Red Cross, Vol. 101, No. 1, 2019, p. 358.
31 AP II, Art. 6(5); ICRC Advisory Service, above note 30, p. 357.
32 Laura M. Olson, “Provoking the Dragon on the Patio – Matters of Transitional Justice: Penal Repression vs Amnesties”, International Review of the Red Cross, Vol. 88, No. 862, 2006, pp. 275, 288; South Africa Constitutional Court, Azapo v. South Africa, Case No. [1996] ZACC 16, 1996.
33 John Dugard, “Is the Truth and Reconciliation Process Compatible with International Law? An Unanswered Question”, South African Journal on Human Rights, Vol. 13, 1997, pp. 258, 267; John Dugard, “Dealing with Crimes of a Past Regime: Is Amnesty Still an Option?”, Leiden Journal of International Law, Vol. 12, No. 4, 1999.
34 ICRC Advisory Service, above note 30, pp. 359–360.
35 See e.g. Special Court for Sierra Leone (SCSL), Prosecutor v. Furundžija, Decision on Challenge to Jurisdiction: Lomé Accord Amnesty, 2003; International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), Prosecutor v. Anto Furundžija, Case No. IT-95-17/1-T, Judgment (Trial Chamber), 10 December 1998.
36 Uganda Supreme Court, Uganda v. Kwoyelo, Case No. [2015] UGSC 5 (Constitutional Appeal No. 1 of 2012), 8 April 2015.
37 Ibid.
38 See Report of the Secretary General on the Rule of Law and Transitional Justice in Conflict and Post-Conflict Societies, UN Doc. S/2011/634, 12 October 2011, p. 18; IACtHR, Almonacid-Arellano et al. v. Chile, Series C, No. 154, Judgment (Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs), 26 September 2006 (IACtHR holding that amnesty is unavailable for crimes against humanity); European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), Abdülsamet Yaman v. Turkey, Case No. 32446/96, Judgment (Second Section), 2 November 2004 (ECtHR barring amnesties for crimes involving torture); IACtHR, Barrios Altos v. Peru, Series C, No. 75, Judgment (Merits), 14 March 2001 (IACtHR precluding amnesties for the crime of enforced disappearance); African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, Malawi African Association and Others v. Mauritania, Comm. Nos 54/91, 61/91, 98/93, 164/97 to 196/97 and 210/98, 11 May 2000 (holding that the amnesty law could not shield the State from its international obligations under the African Charter for Human and Peoples’ Rights); Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, Juan Gelman et al. v. Uruguay, Case No. 438-06, Report 30/07, Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.130 Doc. 22, Rev. 1, 2007, Judgment on Admissibility, 9 March 2007 (blanket amnesty law incompatible with State’s duty to investigate non-derogable human rights violations). The Special Court for Sierra Leone rejected the broad amnesty of the country's peace agreement: see Peace Agreement between the Government of Sierra Leone and the Revolutionary United Front of Sierra Leone, UN Doc. S/1999/777, 7 July 1999. SCSL, The Prosecutor v. Morris Kallon and Brima Buzzy Kamara, Case Nos SCSL-2004-15AR72(E), SCSL-2004-16-AR72(E), Decision on Challenge to Jurisdiction: Lomé Accord Amnesty (Appeals Chamber), 13 March 2004; Simon M. Meisenberg, “Legalities of Amnesties in International Humanitarian Law: The Lomé Amnesty Decision of the Special Court for Sierra Leone”, International Review of the Red Cross, Vol. 86, No. 856, 2004; Carsten Stahn, “United Nations Peace-Building, Amnesties and Alternative Forms of Justice: A Change in Practice?”, International Review of the Red Cross, Vo. 84, No. 845, 2002, pp. 198–201.
39 IACtHR, The Massacres of El Mozote and Nearby Places v. El Salvador, Series C, No. 252, Judgment (Merits, Reparations and Costs), 25 October 2012, para. 286.
40 ECtHR, Marguš v. Croatia, Case No. 4455/10, Judgment (Grand Chamber), 27 May 2014, para. 139.
41 See Kieran McEvoy and Louise Mallinder, “Amnesties in Transition: Punishment, Restoration, and the Governance of Mercy”, Journal of Law and Society, Vol. 39, No. 3, 2012.
42 Louise Mallinder, “The End of Amnesty or Regional Overreach? Interpreting the Erosion of South America's Amnesty Laws”, International and Comparative Law Quarterly, Vol. 65, No. 3, 2016, pp. 655–656.
43 See Alonso Gurmendi, “At Long Last, Brazil's Amnesty Law Is Declared Anti-Conventional”, Opinio Juris, 16 August 2019, available at: https://opiniojuris.org/2019/08/16/at-long-last-brazils-amnesty-law-is-declared-anti-conventional/.
44 Louise Mallinder, Amnesty, Human Rights and Political Transitions: Bridging the Peace and Justice Divide, Hart, Oxford, 2008, pp. 279–280.
45 See Louise Mallinder, “Amnesties and Transitional Justice”, in C. Lawther and L. Moffett (eds), above note 19.
46 Maria Camila Correa Florez, Andrés Felipe Martin Parada and Juan Francisco Soto Hoyos, “Punishment and Pardon: The Use of International Humanitarian Law by the Special Jurisdiction for Peace in Colombia”, International Review of the Red Cross, Vol. 104, No. 919, 2022, p. 1212–1213. See Colombia's Law No. 1820 of 2016, Articles 8 and 23, invoking IHL as the legal basis for determining grant of amnesties, as well as those crimes, including war crimes, that are not eligible for amnesty; and see C. Campbell, above note 29.
47 Renée Jeffery, “Amnesty and Accountability: The Price of Peace in Aceh, Indonesia”, International Journal of Transitional Justice, Vol. 6, No. 1, 2012.
48 See e.g., Côte d'Ivoire, Act No. 2003-309, 8 August 2003; Central African Republic, Act No. 08-020, 13 October 2008; Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Act No. 014/006, 11 February 2014; and Colombia, Law No. 1820, 30 December 2016, which establishes the JEP and bars amnesties for crimes against humanity, genocide, war crimes, torture and other gross human rights violations.
49 L. Mallinder, above note 45, p. 276.
50 M. C. Correa Flórez, A. F. Martin Parada and J. F. Soto Hoyos, above note 46; Louise Mallinder, “Can Amnesties and International Justice Be Reconciled?”, International Journal of Transitional Justice, Vol. 1, No. 2, 2007, p. 218.
51 ICRC Customary Law Study, above note 27, Rule 159.
52 Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act, 2023.
53 See Daniel Holder and Andrew Forde, “Avoiding the Legacy of Impunity”, Verfassungsblog, 21 December 2023, available at: https://verfassungsblog.de/avoiding-the-legacy-of-impunity/.
54 M. C. Correa Flórez, A. F. Martin Parada and J. F. Soto Hoyos, above note 46, pp. 1206–1207.
55 C. Campbell, above note 29, p. 651; Vasuki Nesiah, “Overcoming Tensions between Family and Judicial Procedures”, International Review of the Red Cross, Vol. 84, No. 848, 2002.
56 Luke Moffett, Reparations and War, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2023, pp. 103–123.
57 UN Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Gross Violations of International Human Rights Law and Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law, UN Doc. A/RES/60/147, 2005 (UN Basic Principles).
58 Sri Lanka Office for Reparations Act, 2018, Sec. 27(a); Colombian Victims Law, 2011, Art. 3.
59 Zimbabwe War Victims Compensation Act, 1980, Sec. 4.
60 Northern Ireland Victims’ Payment Regulations, 2020, Reg. 5.
61 Serbian Law on Civilian Invalids of War, 1996.
62 Or a collective right: see Friedrich Rosenfeld, “Collective Reparation for Victims of Armed Conflict”, International Review of the Red Cross, Vol. 92, No. 879, 2010, p. 738.
63 Fixant les Regles Generales Relatives a la Reparation des Prejudices Causes par les Violations Graves des Droits de l'Homme, Law No. 2022-041, 15 November 2022, Art. 8. The law lays down a range of serious human rights violations which include those that would fall under grave breaches.
64 L. Moffett, above note 56, p. 302.
65 Report of the Special Rapporteur for the Promotion of Justice, Truth, Reparation and Guarantees of Non-Recurrence, UN Doc. A/HRC/30/42, 7 September 2015, paras 34–35.
66 UN Basic Principles, above note 57, Principle 23(a), (f), (g).
67 Ibid., Principle 23(e).
68 See e.g. Report of the Secretary General on the Rule of Law and Transitional Justice in Conflict and Post-Conflict Societies, UN Doc. S/2004/616, 2004.
69 Ruti Teitel, “Transitional Justice Genealogy”, Harvard Human Rights Journal, Vol. 16, 2003, p. 91.
70 Ibid., p. 71.
71 Christine Bell, Colm Campbell and Fionnuala Ní Aoláin, “The Battle for Transitional Justice: Hegemony, Iraq and International Law”, in John Morison, Kieran McEvoy and Gordon Anthony (eds), Judges, Transition, and Human Rights, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2007, pp. 147-165, 162.
72 Convention (IV) respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land and its Annex: Regulations concerning the Laws and Customs of War on Land, The Hague, 18 October 1907 (Hague Regulations), Art. 43.
73 Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Report on the Human Rights Situation in Ukraine, 4 October 2023, p. 22. This violates Article 45 of the Hague Regulations.
74 See Gabriela Echeverria, “The UN Principles and Guidelines on Reparation: Is There an Enforceable Right to Reparation for Victims of Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law Violations?”, PhD thesis, University of Essex, 2017, p. 243.
75 Kirsten J. Fisher, “Defining a Relationship between Transitional Justice and Jus post Bellum: A Call and an Opportunity for Post-Conflict Justice”, Journal of International Political Theory, Vol. 16, No. 3, 2020, pp. 295–297.
76 See International Court of Justice (ICJ), Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Advisory Opinion, 9 July 2004, para. 106; Katharine Fortin, “The Procedural Right to a Remedy when the State Has Left the Building? A Reflection on Armed Groups, Courts and Domestic Law”, Journal of Human Rights Practice, Vol. 14, No. 2, 2022.
77 Kieran McEvoy, “Letting Go of Legalism: Developing a ‘Thicker’ Version of Transitional Justice”, in Kieran McEvoy and Lorna McGregor (eds), Transitional Justice from Below: Grassroots Activism and the Struggle for Change, Hart, Oxford, 2008, p. 16.
78 Kieran McEvoy and Lorna McGregor, “Transitional Justice From Below: An Agenda for Research, Policy and Praxis”, in K. McEvoy and L. McGregor (eds), above note 77, pp. 3–4.
79 See Camilo Tamayo Gomez, “Recognition as Transitional Justice ‘From Below’: Analysing Victims’ Grassroots Activism in Postconflict Colombia”, International Journal of Transitional Justice, Vol. 16, No. 3, 2022, pp. 314–330.
80 L. Moffett, above note 56, p. 78.
81 Carol Greenhouse, “Just in Time: Temporality and the Cultural Legitimation of Law”, Yale Law Journal, Vol. 98, No. 8, 1989, p. 1633.
82 Natascha Mueller-Hirth and Sandra Rios Oyola, “Temporal Perspectives on Transitional and Post-Conflict Societies”, in Natascha Mueller-Hirth and Sandra Rios Oyola (eds), Time and Temporality in Transitional and Post-Conflict Societies, Routledge, London, 2018.
83 Mary Dudziak, War Time: An Idea, Its History, Its Consequences, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2012, p. 4.
84 Jann K. Kleffner, “The Legal Fog of an Illusion: Three Reflections on ‘Organization’ and ‘Intensity’ as Criteria for the Temporal Scope of the Law of Non-International Armed Conflict”, International Law Studies, Vol. 95, 2019, p. 162.
85 E. Salmón, above note 7, p. 328.
86 Jean-Marie Henckaerts, “Concurrent Application of International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights Law: A Victim Perspective”, in Roberta Arnold and Noëlle Quénivet (eds), International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights Law: Towards a New Merger in International Law, Martinus Nijhoff, Leiden, 2008, p. 252.
87 Pádraig McAuliffe, “Transitional Justice, Institutions and Temporality: Towards a Dynamic Understanding”, International Criminal Law Review, Vol. 21, No. 5, 2021, p. 833.
88 Geneva Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War of 12 August 1949, 75 UNTS 287 (entered into force 21 October 1950) (GC IV).
89 Jean Pictet (ed), Commentary on the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, Vol. 4: Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, ICRC, Geneva, 1958, p. 10.
90 See Boyd van Dijk, “What Is IHL History Now?”, International Review of the Red Cross, Vol. 104, No. 920–921, 2022.
91 Naz Modirzadeh, “Cut These Words: Passion and International Law of War Scholarship”, Harvard International Law Journal, Vol. 61, No. 1, 2020.
92 Antoon de Baets, “The View of the Past in International Humanitarian Law (1860–2020)”, International Review of the Red Cross, Vol. 104, No. 920–921, 2022, p. 1593.
93 Cordula Droege and Eirini Giorgou, “How International Humanitarian Law Develops”, International Review of the Red Cross, Vol. 104, No. 920–921, 2022, p. 1832.
94 Ibid., pp. 1809–1810.
95 Matthew Waxman, “Temporality and Terrorism in International Humanitarian Law”, Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law, Vol. 14, 2011, p. 414.
96 J. K. Kleffner, above note 84, p. 177.
97 See Stephanie Savell, How Death Outlives War: The Reverberating Impact of the Post-9/11 Wars on Human Health, Costs of War Project, May 2023.
98 M. Dudziak, above note 83, pp. 7–8.
99 Alejandro Castillejo-Cuéllar, “Historical Injuries, Temporality and the Law: Articulations of a Violent Past in Two Transitional Scenarios”, Law Critique, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2014.
100 Vasuki Nesiah, “The Trials of History: Losing Justice in the Monstrous and the Banal”, in Ruth Buchanan and Peer Zumbansen (eds), Law in Transition: Human Rights, Development and Transitional Justice, Hart, Oxford, 2014.
101 Mary Hansel, “From Crisis to Quotidian: Countering the Temporal Myopia of Jus Cogens”, in Kathryn McNeilly and Ben Warwick (eds), The Times and Temporalities of International Human Rights Law, Hart, Oxford, 2022.
102 Ibid., p. 210.
103 Yuval Abraham, “‘A Mass Assassination Factory’: Inside Israel's Calculated Bombing of Gaza”, +972 Magazine, 30 November 2023.
104 B. Jones, above note 17, p. 174.
105 A. Castillejo-Cuéllar, above note 99.
106 Ron Dudai and Hillel Cohen, “Dealing with the Past when the Conflict Is Still Present: Civil Society Truth-Seeking Initiatives in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict”, in Robert Shaw and Lars Waldorf (eds), Localizing Transitional Justice, Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA, 2010
107 Ibid.
108 Hugo Slim, “Sharing a Universal Ethic: The Principle of Humanity in War”, International Journal of Human Rights, Vol. 2, No. 4, 1998.
109 Ryan J. Vogel, “Drone Warfare and the Law of Armed Conflict”, Denver Journal of International Law and Policy, Vol. 39, No. 1, 2010, pp. 101, 127–128.
110 Jean Pictet, The Principles of International Humanitarian Law, ICRC, Geneva, 1966, p. 460.
111 Frédéric Mégret, “Theorizing the Laws of War”, in Anne Orford and Florian Hoffmann (eds), The Oxford Handbook of the Theory of International Law, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2016, p. 770.
112 Convention (II) with Respect to the Laws of War on Land, 29 July 1899 (Hague Convention II), Preamble; AP I, Art. 1(2); AP II, Preamble.
113 This is the common ground between human rights and IHL on the concern for “respect for human values and the dignity of the human person”. Ruti Teitel, Humanity's Law, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2011, p. 47.
114 IACtHR, Almonacid-Arellano et al. v. Chile, Series C, No. 154, Judgment, 26 September 2006, para. 152.
115 Sandra Milena Rios Oyola, “Uses of the Concept of Human Dignity and the Dignification of Victims in Transitional Justice in Colombia”, European Review of International Studies, Vol. 9, No. 1, 2022.
116 See e.g. Gambia Truth, Reconciliation and Reparations Commission Act, 2017, Sec. 13(a)(i).
117 Stephen Winter, “Theorising Transitional Justice in Ongoing Conflict”, in Tine Destrooper, Line Egbo Gissel and Kerstin Bree Carlson (eds), Transitional Justice in Aparadigmatic Contexts, Routledge, London, 2023.
118 Shana Tabak, “False Dichotomies of Transitional Justice: Gender, Conflict and Combatants in Colombia”, New York University Journal of International Law and Politics, Vol. 44, 2011, p. 113–118.
119 Thomas Unger and Marieke Wierda, “Pursuing Justice in Ongoing Conflict: A Discussion of Current Practice”, in Kai Ambos, Judith Large and Marieke Wierda (eds), Building a Future on Peace and Justice, Springer, Berlin, 2009.
120 Jeremy Sarkin, “Refocusing Transitional Justice to Focus Not Only on the Past, but also to Concentrate on Ongoing Conflicts and Enduring Human Rights Crises”, Journal of International Humanitarian Legal Studies, Vol. 7, No. 2, 2016, p. 314.
121 See Par Engstrom, “Transitional Justice and Ongoing Conflicts”, in Chandra Lekha Sriram, Jemima Garcia-Godos, Johanna Herman and Olga Martin-Ortega (eds), Transitional Justice and Peacebuilding on the Ground: Victims and Ex-Combatants, Routledge, London, 2013.
122 This number stood at 9.593 million victims registered in 31 October 2023. See the Unity for Victims website, available at: www.unidadvictimas.gov.co/es/.
123 See Rosario Figari Layus and Juliette Vargas Trujillo, “The ‘Domino Effect’ of Ongoing Violence on Transitional Justice: The Case of Colombia's Special Jurisdiction for Peace”, International Journal of Transitional Justice, forthcoming.
124 S. Tabak, above note 118, p. 105.
125 See Daniela Suarez Vargas, “The Subversive Victim: Victimhood and Sexual and Gender-Based Violence Inside Non-State Armed Groups in Colombia”, PhD thesis, Queen's University Belfast, 2024.
126 See Luke Moffett and Kevin Hearty, More than a Number: Reparations for those Bereaved during the Troubles, Reparations, Responsibility and Victimhood in Transitional Societies, 2023, available at: https://reparations.qub.ac.uk/new-report-reparations-for-those-bereaved-during-the-troubles/.
127 K. J. Fisher, above note 75, p. 289.
128 Jens Iverson, “Transitional Justice, Jus Post Bellum, and International Criminal Law”, International Journal of Transitional Justice, Vol. 7, No. 3, 2013, p. 414.
129 Mark Freeman and Drazan Djukic, “Jus Post Bellum and Transitional Justice”, in Carsten Stahn and Jann K. Kleffner (eds), Jus Post Bellum: Towards a Law of Transition from Conflict to Peace, T. M. C. Asser Press, The Hague, 2008, p. 213.
130 Jann K. Kleffner, “Introduction: From Here to There… and the Law in the Middle”, in C. Stahn and J. K. Kleffner (eds), above note 129, p. 2.
131 Carsten Stahn, “‘Jus ad Bellum’, ‘Jus in Bello’… ‘Jus post Bellum’? – Rethinking the Conception of the Law of Armed Force”, European Journal of International Law, Vol. 17, No. 5, 2006, p. 921.
132 K. J. Fisher, above note 75, pp. 291–292.
133 Ibid.
134 J. Iverson, above note 128, p. 422.
135 K. J. Fisher, above note 75, p. 299.
136 M. Freeman and D. Djukic, above note 129, p. 226.
137 Theodor Meron, The Humanization of International Law, Martinus Nijhoff, Leiden, 2006, p. 2.
138 See Antônio Augusto Cançado Trindade, The Access of Individuals to International Justice, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2012.
139 Piki Ish-Shalom, Concepts at Work: On the Linguistic Infrastructure of World Politics, Michigan University Press, Ann Arbor, MI, 2021, p. 1.
140 Role and Responsibilities of Non-State Actors in Transitional Justice Processes, UN Doc. A/HRC/51/34, July 2022; Implementing the Third Pillar: Lessons from Transitional Justice, UN Doc. A/HRC/50/40/Add.4, July 2022.
141 Valerie Arnould, “Transitional Justice in Peacebuilding: Dynamics of Contestation in the DRC”, Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding, Vol. 10, No. 3, 2016. A number of other perpetrators have been prosecuted through the domestic military courts, but this remains only a fraction of those responsible.
142 Juan Mendez, “Victims as Protagonists in Transitional Justice”, International Journal of Transitional Justice, Vol. 10, No. 1, 2016, p. 1.
143 Trudy Govier, Victims and Victimhood, Broadview Press, Peterborough, 2015, p. 27.
144 Conall Mallory, Human Rights Imperialists, Hart, Oxford, 2020, p. 182.
145 Rosemary Nagy, “Transitional Justice as Global Project: Critical Reflections”, Third World Quarterly, Vol. 29, No. 2, 2008, p. 276.
146 See E. L. Camins, above note 16.
147 AP I, Art. 81(1).
148 See Ezequiel Heffes, “Responsible Rebels: Exploring Correlations between Compliance and Reparations in Non-International Armed Conflicts”, Journal of Human Rights Practice, Vol. 14. No. 2, 2022.
149 See C. Harwood, above note 26.
150 Hilde Roskam, “Crime-Based Targeted Sanctions: Promoting Respect for International Humanitarian Law by the Security Council”, Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law, Vol. 19, 2016.
151 Luke Moffett, “Violence and Repair: The Practice and Challenges of Non-State Armed Groups Engaging in Reparations”, International Review of the Red Cross, Vol. 102, No. 915, 2020.
152 Brianne McGonigle Leyh, “The Role of Universities and Law Schools in Documenting Serious International Crimes and Advancing the Rule of Law”, Utrecht Law Review, Vol. 17, No. 2, 2021.
153 See Human Rights Watch, “Gaza: Findings on October 17 Al-Ahli Hospital Explosion”, 26 November 2023, available at: www.hrw.org/news/2023/11/26/gaza-findings-october-17-al-ahli-hospital-explosion.
154 Holewinski, Sarah, “Do Less Harm: Protecting and Compensating Civilians in War”, Foreign Affairs, Vol. 92, No. 1, 2013Google Scholar.
155 See van de Put, Steven, “Ex Gratia Payments and Reparations: A Missed Opportunity?”, Journal of International Humanitarian Legal Studies, Vol. 14, No. 1, 2023CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
156 Muhammedally, Sahr, “Minimizing Civilian Harm in Populated Areas: Lessons from Examining ISAF and AMISOM Policies”, International Review of the Red Cross, Vol. 98, No. 901, 2016, p. 231CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
157 See UN Doc. A/HRC/51/34, above note 140; L. Moffett, above note 151.
158 L. Moffett, above note 56, p. 184.
159 See Luke Moffett et al., Belfast Guidelines on Reparations in Post-Conflict Societies, Queen's University Belfast, 2023, Principle 8.
160 Leyh, Brianne McGonigle, “Using Strategic Litigation and Universal Jurisdiction to Advance Accountability for Serious International Crimes”, International Journal of Transitional Justice, Vol. 16, No. 3, 2022, p. 367Google Scholar.
161 Branch, Adam, “Uganda's Civil War and the Politics of ICC Intervention”, Ethics and International Affairs, Vol. 21, No. 2, 2007, p. 186CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
162 McKittrick, David, Kelters, Seamus, Feeney, Brian, Thornton, Chris and McVea, David, Lost Lives: The Stories of the Men, Women and Children Who Died as a Result of the Northern Ireland Troubles, Mainstream Publishing, Edinburgh, 2004, p. 1265Google Scholar.
163 See Samuel Moyn, Humane: How the United States Abandoned Peace and Reinvented War, Verso, La Vergne, 2022.