The Right to Reparation in International Law for Victims of Armed Conflict

298 Pages·2012·1.4 MB·English

by  Dr Christine Evans

The Right toReparation in International Law forVictims
of Armed Conflict
Inthisevaluationoftheinternationallegalstandingoftheright
to reparation and itspractical implementation at the national
level, Christine Evansoutlinesstate responsibility and examines
the jurisprudence of the International Court ofJustice,the
Articles on State Responsibility of the International Law
Commissionandtheconvergenceofnormsindifferentbranches
of international law, notably human rights law, humanitarian
law andinternationalcriminal law. Case studiesof countriesin
which the United Nations hasplayeda significant role in peace
negotiations and post-conflict processes allow her to analyse to
what extent transitional justice measureshave promoted state
responsibilityfor reparations,interacted with human rights
mechanisms and prompted subsequent elaborationof domestic
legislationandreparationspolicies.Inconclusion,shearguesfor
an emergingcustomary right for individuals to receive
reparations for serious violations of human rights and a
corresponding responsibility ofstates.
Christine Evans is astaffmemberof the Office ofthe United
NationsHighCommissionerforHumanRights. SheholdsaPh.D.
in internationallaw from the LSE andan LLM from the Raoul
Wallenberg Institute of Human Rights andHumanitarian Law.

The Right to Reparation in International
Law for Victims of Armed Conflict
Christine Evans
CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS
Cambridge,NewYork,Melbourne,Madrid,CapeTown,
Singapore,Sa˜oPaulo,Delhi,MexicoCity
CambridgeUniversityPress
TheEdinburghBuilding,CambridgeCB28RU,UK
PublishedintheUnitedStatesofAmericabyCambridgeUniversityPress,NewYork
www.cambridge.org
Informationonthistitle:www.cambridge.org/9781107019973
#ChristineEvans2012
Thispublicationisincopyright.Subjecttostatutoryexception
andtotheprovisionsofrelevantcollectivelicensingagreements,
noreproductionofanypartmaytakeplacewithoutthewritten
permissionofCambridgeUniversityPress.
Firstpublished2012
PrintedintheUnitedKingdomattheUniversityPress,Cambridge
AcataloguerecordforthispublicationisavailablefromtheBritishLibrary
LibraryofCongressCataloging-in-PublicationData
Evans,Christine(E.Christine)
Therighttoreparationininternationallawforvictimsofarmedconflict/
ChristineEvans.
p. cm.– (Cambridgestudiesininternationalandcomparativelaw;91)
Includesbibliographicalreferencesandindex.
ISBN978-1-107-01997-3
1. Warreparations. 2. Restorativejustice. 3. Reparationsfor
historicalinjustices 4. Reparation(Criminaljustice) I. Title.
KZ6785.E932012
340.9–dc23
2011048386
ISBN978-1-107-01997-3Hardback
CambridgeUniversityPresshasnoresponsibilityforthepersistenceor
accuracyofURLsforexternalorthird-partyInternetwebsitesreferredto
inthispublication,anddoesnotguaranteethatanycontentonsuch
websitesis,orwillremain,accurateorappropriate.
Theviewsexpressedhereinarethoseoftheauthorand
donotnecessarilyreflecttheviewsoftheUnitedNations.
Contents
Acknowledgements page ix
Table of cases xi
Table of treaties xvii
List of abbreviations xix
1 Introduction 1
1.1 Introduction and context 1
1.2 Aim and objectivesof the study 7
1.3 Structure andoutline 10
1.4 Definition of key concepts 13
Part I Responsibilityand legal standards 15
2 State responsibility,the legal order and the
development of legal normsfor victims 17
2.1 Introduction 17
2.2 Recognition ofhumanrightsin customarylaw 18
2.3 Recognition in general international law
of individualsas beneficiaries of reparations 28
2.4 Reparation in international humanitarianlaw 31
2.5 Reparation in international human rights law 33
2.6 Reparation provisionsin regional human rights
instruments 35
2.7 Basic principleson the right to reparation for
victims 36
2.8 A customaryright to reparation? 39
2.9 Conclusions 42
v
vi contents
3 Human rightsjurisprudenceon reparations,
internationaland regional 44
3.1 Introduction 44
3.2 Theinternationalhuman rightstreaty body system 45
3.3 TheEuropean systemfor human rights protection 57
3.4 TheInter-American systemfor human rights
protection 66
3.5 TheAfricansystemfor human rightsprotection 76
3.6 Conclusions 82
4 Reparations ininternational criminal law 86
4.1 Introduction 86
4.2 Origins ofreparation provisions in international
criminal law 87
4.3 Reparationsand the adhoc international tribunals 89
4.4 Reparationsin the RomeStatute of the International
CriminalCourt 99
4.5 International Criminal Court TrustFund for Victims 105
4.6 Steps backwards? TheSpecialPanels for Serious
Crimes in East Timor, the SpecialCourt for Sierra
Leone andthe Extraordinary Chambersin the
Courts ofCambodia 110
4.7 Contributing factors to the shift in the focus on
victims’ rightswithin internationalcriminal law 117
4.8 Conclusions 122
5 Conclusions Part I– legal state ofplay: convergence of
internationallaw andreparation as an individual legal
right with customary recognition 125
Part II Transferring standards into reality 129
6 The role of the UN andthe promotionof victims’
rights andreparations in practice 131
6.1 Introduction to transitional justicemechanisms
andtruth commissions 131
6.2 TheUnitedNations Compensation Commission 139
6.3 Compensation in Darfur? 144
contents vii
7 Case study:reparationsin Guatemala 146
7.1 Introduction 146
7.2 Brief historical background 147
7.3 Peace negotiations 148
7.4 Establishment andmandate ofthe Truth Commission 149
7.5 Operationalaspects of the Historical Clarification
Commission 151
7.6 The Final Report ofthe Historical Clarification
Commission 152
7.7 Follow-up and implementation ofthe
recommendations regarding reparations 155
7.8 Conclusions 161
8 Case study:reparationsin Sierra Leone 164
8.1 Introduction 164
8.2 Brief historical background 165
8.3 Lome´PeaceAgreement 166
8.4 The Truth andReconciliation Commission Act of2000 169
8.5 Operationalaspects of the Truth and Reconciliation
Commission 172
8.6 The relationship between the Truth Commission and
the Special Court 174
8.7 The Final Report ofthe Truth Commission andits
Recommendations 176
8.8 Follow-up and implementation ofthe
recommendations regarding reparations 180
8.9 Conclusions 183
9 Case study:reparationsin East Timor 185
9.1 Introduction 185
9.2 Brief historical background 186
9.3 Prosecutions andtheTruth Commission 188
9.4 Establishment ofthe Commission for Reception,
Truth and Reconciliation 189
9.5 Operationalaspects of the Commission for Reception,
Truth and Reconciliation 191
9.6 The Final Report ofthe Truth Commission andits
Recommendations 195
viii contents
9.7 Follow-up andimplementation of the
recommendations regardingreparations 198
9.8 Conclusions 201
10 Case study: reparationsin Colombia 203
10.1 Introduction 203
10.2 Briefhistorical background 204
10.3 Negotiations with the paramilitaries 207
10.4 The ‘AlternativeJustice’ bill 210
10.5 Law 975 of 2005: La Leyde Justicia y Paz 211
10.6 Reparations inLaw975 of2005 213
10.7 National Commission on Reparations and
Reconciliation 215
10.8 Administrative reparationsprogramme 217
10.9 The Law on Victims’Right to Comprehensive
Reparation and Land Restitution:Law1448 219
10.10 Conclusions 220
11 Conclusions Part II – reparationsin practice:comparative
analysis ofpractice,lessons learnt and future challenges 223
12 Final remarks:the right to reparation and
implementationof the legal norm: emergingconvergence
oflaw andpractice? 231
Bibliography 239
Index 265
Acknowledgements
This topic has been a long-standing interest of mine since undertaking
volunteerworkin1999withvictimsofthearmedconflictinGuatemala.
Thestrengthofvictimsofhumanrightsviolationsandoftheadvocates
who act on their behalf hasconstituted the major source of inspiration
duringthis research.
This book is based on a Ph.D. thesis successfully defended at the
London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE) in November
2010.IwishtoexpressgratitudetoProf.StanleyCohenforencouraging
me to apply to LSE, to Prof. Gerry Simpson for his supervision and to
DrMargotSalomonforhersupervisionandimportantguidanceduring
the final stages. I also wish to thank Prof. Manfred Nowak and Prof.
Francesca Klug for their invaluable comments in the context of the
examination ofthe thesis.
A warm expression of appreciation to my supervisors at the UN
Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR): Jane
Connors and Mercedes Morales for their vital advice and support,
without which this project could not have been undertaken. I wish
to thank the many colleagues and friends I have had the pleasure of
workingwithandlearningfromatOHCHR,especiallyintheColombia
Office (gracias) and within the Human Rights Treaties Division and
Special Procedures Branch in Geneva. A particularly warm appreci-
ation to Maja Andrijasevic-Boko, Linnea Arvidsson, Therese Bjo¨rk,
Elisabeth da Costa, Helle Dahl Iversen, Joana Miquel Gelabert and
Katarina Ma˚nsson for many shared smiles and for encouragement
over the years. I could not have done this without you. For their
friendship and inspiring commitment to human rights work, I also
thank: Estelle Askew-Renaut, Carmen Bejarano, Ugo Cedrangolo,
MartinCinnamond,EllenColthoff,ClaudiadelaFuente,SaraGustafsson,
ix