Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-lrblm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-11T14:26:34.278Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Dealing With Crimes of a Past Regime. Is Amnesty Still an Option?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 March 2004

Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

From time immemorial amnesty has been employed as a means of promoting a political settlement and advancing reconciliation in societies that have emerged from repression. At present there is a trend in support of prosecution of those who have committed international crimes, such as torture and crimes against humanity, which excludes the possibility of amnesty. That amnesty is no longer favored is illustrated by the failure of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court to recognize amnesty as a defence to prosecution. While there is no place for unconditional amnesty in the contemporary international legal order an intermediate solution such as a Truth and Reconciliation Commission with power to grant amnesty after investigation, of the South African kind, may contribute to the achievement of peace and justice in a society in transition more effectively than mandatory prosecution.

Type
HAGUE INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNALS: International Criminal Court
Copyright
© 1999 Kluwer Law International

Footnotes

This article is based on the Third Manfred Lachs Memorial Lecture, delivered at the Peace Palace, The Hague, on 15 April 1999.