Yi-Li Lee on Dilemmas and Lessons of Transitional Justice in Latin America(李怡俐論拉丁美洲在轉型正義上的困境與出路)

Yi-Li Lee’s article, Dilemmas and Lessons of Transitional Justice in Latin America has been published by the NTU Law Journal (Vol.45, No.3). She discusses how political regimes in Latin America respond to issues relevant to transitional justice and how the Inter-American Human Right System deals with these matters. Here is the Abstract:

Most new democratic governments in the Latin American region were required to deal with the human rights violations committed by past authoritarian/military regimes after shifts from war to peace or from an authoritarian regime to democracy. Numerous transitional justice mechanisms were adopted by those governments within the context of these transitions and post-conflict settings. The prevalence of impunity and incapacity of judicial institutions, however, often impede the new administrations’ capacity to tackle grave human rights violations such as torture, forced disappearance, extra-legal executions or murders. Hence, the victims and their families eventually bring their cases to the Inter-American Human Rights System to seek judicial resolutions.

Against this background, this paper addresses the following three questions: (1) the ways in which the Inter-American Court of Human Rights deals with cases of genocide, forced disappearances, extra-judicial executions, and torture, (2) the impacts of these court decisions on the domestic government in Latin America and the countries in other regions, and (3) the factors that trigger the court to preside over such cases. This paper argues that there are three primary features produced by the court’s decisions. The first feature is recognition and expansion of state responsibility. The second feature is domestic amnesty laws in violation of the American Convention on Human Rights. The third feature is guarantee of the right to remedy and right to truth for the victims. The decisions of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights have a huge impact on Latin American countries. Particularly, these decisions have triggered several domestic constitutional courts to invalidate existing amnesty laws. This paper argues that the independence and fairness of the Inter-American Commission of Human Rights and Inter-American Court of Human Rights, the influence of international human rights norms and the rise and mobilization of international human rights advocacy are the main factors that facilitate an active response by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights regarding cases of transitional justice.

日前見到這一篇文章:李怡俐,拉丁美洲在轉型正義上的困境與出路:以美洲人權法院的回應為中心(刊載於國立臺灣大學法學論叢,第45卷第3期,臺大法學論叢網頁似乎尚未更新,因此上述連結為法源法律網資訊)。李怡俐老師本身是做轉型正義的議題,這一篇文章詳細地論述了拉丁美洲如何處理轉型正義的課題。文章雖然長,但是資訊很豐富:從威權統治侵害的類型開始、困境之產生、美洲人權法院對於轉型正義困境的回應以及奇可能成立因素等等。

其中關於,轉型正義的困境或許可用以下這一段表示:

從其經驗可發現,僅有少數國家如阿根廷與巴拉圭,採取刑事審判制度處理過去軍事政權的領袖因涉入人權侵害事件的責任。絕大多數拉丁美洲國家在民主轉型路徑,以及威權政權遺緒下,多採取真相委員會、特赦法與金錢賠償等轉型正義制度回應過去人權侵害的議題。此制度選擇雖有其民主脈絡的條件和背景,但從當今聯合國轉型正義的標準來看,這樣的制度選擇有其困境。最大的困境在於加害者的責任無法透過上述制度加以釐清和追究,以及受害者的權利也無法被保障。(頁851)

此外,文中對於美洲人權法院的介紹也非常精彩,非常值得一看!!強烈推薦給大家!



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s