Against Impunity Challenges to Amnesties for Past Human Rights Violations

Accountability for human rights violations committed by past regimes has been a thorny issue for transitional countries. While evidence suggests that an “age of accountability” during which countries have overcome barriers to prosecution has emerged, our research shows instead that such a view overlooks worrying trends, specifically the persistence of amnesty laws and their continued enactment. Further, the absence of amnesties does not necessarily translate into access to justice; de facto processes still block justice. Those trends notwithstanding, several factors have contributed to the capacity of a few countries to weaken the power of amnesty laws and initiate justice processes: timing and sequencing; civil society demand; international pressure; and democratic institutional (executive and judicial) leadership. We apply these factors to four pathways to justice to test their explanatory power. We conclude that the process of challenging amnesty laws is as important as the laws themselves. Furthermore, attitudes toward amnesties have evolved over time and this change may produce a different set of processes and outcomes. The article concludes with ideas about how advocates and policy-makers might reduce the power of amnesties and allow for accountability, identifying existing amnesties and practices to be targeted by anti-impunity campaigns.