Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes

CEU eTD Collection

In fulfil partial Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and l ment of the requirements for the degree of Submitted Centralto European University Supervisor: Professor Roger O’keefe

Legal StudiesLegal Department Fisseha Prospects 2013

M. Tekle M.

LL.M Internationalin Human Ri

ghts

Law

CEU eTD Collection they have engage to government, the scholars and civic societies in reparation discourse. so do To reparation. of provision the ensure to victims the by ex exploited be positive to opportunities provide Those themselves. victims the from comes initiative the unless operate cannot globally reparation rights human in development the that concludes paper This outcome is yetnot known wh Genocide Rwandan and Apartheid a even active and have victims laws, rights human from reparations international procure to bymanaged bound not were States the where situations in reparationsfor Holocaust N ill are that law regime human of rights laws. international the of intricacies the to due them accessing challenges tribunals finds thesis This the oflaws war. as such law international of rules peremptory mechanismsa provisions are there Ethiopiabetweoccurred that atrocities in t Particularly, States liveto upto their obligations, or not. mi those of violation of case in avail guarantee shall convention in embodied rights in violations challenges about is research This Executive Summary avigating persistent

ih ead to regard with challenges and Apartheid reparations evince reparationsApartheid and

n domestic in through circumstances his paper explores challenges explores paper his tr af cnuy Te ae holds same The century. a half fter re

pressing

the

to the subjects of their jurisdiction. Moreover they stipulate the remedies States shall States remedies the stipulate they Moreover jurisdiction. their of subjects the to

also

noaie repar innovative victims

blocked h eprecs f te countries other of experiences the uh as such

of victims of

C as ua rgt violations rights human mass .

ourts of of

where States fail States where

those due to the principle ofprinciple the to due xiy f eid f iiain n non and limitation of period of expiry s Ad n h presence the in And .

and customary international laws international customary and

and prospects and and interest groups has groups interest and to mechanisms ation

mass atrocities,mass nimum standards. However, it still remains within the power of power the within remains still it However, standards. nimum responsible S responsible r te itm prit on persist victims the ere en 1974 and 1991 and 1974 en

and prospects and

that it is not only the litigation approach that approach litigation the only not is it that

their obligations their

prohibition of prohibition

to ensure to i

but the moral wrongmoral thebut tates and they are still pus still are they and tates true State

i n

However, . f hs impediments these of jurisprudence for

immunity

for claimi for kept the discourse on Holocaust reparation Holocaust on discourse the kept n hs thesis this in

victims’ reparation for reparation victims’ by

h rprto cam o Suh African South of claims reparation the genocide, torture and grave breaches of breaches grave and torture genocide,

the Dergera the to to avail for

set ng reparation for victims of victims for reparation ng victims even if those if even

s itm reparation victim

- the mini the remedies

utcaiiy f constitutional of justiciability f einl n international and regional of eine o ohr countries other of periences of reveals . The findingsthatindicateThe . egregious violations.egregious of of hing for it. for hing mum standards S standards mum h Dr crimes Derg the . locally

Inte violations pertain topertain violations rset too. prospects mass human rights human mass rnational h rnational , huh their though , -

fitting international ensured The s The o the to

uman trong

Even mass tates face The

the

CEU eTD Collection was thanks who Kebede, Yemisrach indispensible was O’Keefe Roger Prof. of supervision close The Program. CEU of support the appreciate p a is thesis This Acknowledgement

encouraging . I reserve the final statement to statement final the reserve I .

me throughout the study out of roduct

devoted her precious time and edited and time precious her devoted

support and contribution of contribution and support staff in in staff

express my gratitude my express ea Suis Department Studies Legal

period

and thesis ii

individuals writing

my wife, wife, my

this long document, deserves document, long this .

especially hm akolde eey I hereby. acknowledge I whom Dr. Menbere G/Anania, Menbere Dr. in

in produci h Hmn Rights Human the ng

the the special Paper. who

CEU eTD Collection Bibliography Conclusion 4 3 2 1 Introduction List Abbreviationsof Acknowledgement Executive Summary Table ofContents

4.4 4.3 4.2 4.1 3.3 3.2 3.1 2.4 2.3 2.2 2.1 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.1 The Derg Crimes and the Victims National Reparation Experiences 3.3.3 3.3.2 3.3.1 Human Rights Reparations Inin 2.3.2 2.3.1 C

hallenges Reparation of Enforcement

Types of reparations Reparation in Regional Courts andHuman Rights Committee ICCPR of Introduction Jurisdictional Action for reparation Internationalin Tribunals ReparationAction for inDomestic Courts Introduction Victims the and Derg Trials Transitional Justice Measures Ratified International Human Rights Instruments The Post 1974 Mass Atrocities 1974Pre Ethiopia: Brief Summary Ge Apartheid Reparation: South Africa Holocaust Reparation: Germany Introduction

......

...... nocide Reparation: Rwanda

...... Satisfaction Compensation Restitution Breach Customary of ofinternationalBreach Conventionhuman rights

......

Immunity

......

of of States

humanrules rights ternational Tribunals

......

...... iii ......

......

19 17 15 13 13 11 67 63 59 54 50 49 49 45 44 40 39 34 32 32 25 21 . iv . ii 8 8 4 4 4 1

CEU eTD Collection List of FDRE FARG EPRP ECtHR ECHR CAT ANC VCLT UDHR TRC TGE SPO RTMMM RPF PCIJ ILC ICTY ICTR ICL ICJ ICESCR ICCPR IACtHR HRC FRG - - - International Court of Justice - -

I ------Rwandan Patriotic Front - Special Prosecutor’s Office International Criminal law Abbreviations Federal RepublicFederal Germany Truth andReconciliationTruth Com Transitional Government of Ethiopia Permanent Court Internationalof Justice nternational Law Com - Convention Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman Degrading or Treatment - Human Rights Committee - African Natio African - International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda - International Criminal T - -

- Vienna ConventionVienna Lawon the of Treaties - Ethiopian People ConventionEuropean for the Protection of Human Rights Fundamental and Freedoms Federal DemocraticFederal Republic Ethiopia Universal DeclarationUniversal Human of Rights International Covenant on Civil and Po Fonds National pour l’Assistance pour auxFonds National Rescapés duGénocide’ European CourtEuropean of Human Rights - -

International Covenant onEconomic Social and Cultural Rights - Inter Red Terror Martyrs’ Memorial Museum - American Court Humanof Rights nal Congressnal s’

Revolutionary Par m

ission ribunal for former Yugoslavi

mission

ty iv

litical Rights

CEU eTD Collection g had Derg, as known 1974 system add to failed legal national a and laws rights human international where case visible very The difficult achieve. to tribunals international these of establishment the victi for reparations of absence the In security. and peace sustainable ensure to also but victims, the of done harm the redressing of terms in only not step important an is victims of Reparation satisfaction. and compensation, restitution, victi also but perpetrators, the of conviction criminal only rights not human is violations grave of context the in Justice services. medical and schools, water, clean suff victims the damage the rectify effectively to impossible it render that crimes the of nature the gross and heinous the Despite victims. the to remedy effective provide to failure Tribunals’ achieveme these However responsiblein the Formeratrocities forYugoslavia, Rwanda, SierraLeoneamong others. and perpetrators main the of conviction and prosecution in resulted have ICL in developments InternationalCr the and (ICTR) Rwanda International for Tribunal Criminal International the the (ICTY), Yugoslavia former the for Tribunal of Criminal achievements The war. of laws the of breaches grave and humanity interna of perpetrators prosecuting of terms in decades two last the in development unprecedented witnessed has (ICL) law criminal International Introduction ncd; otr, a cie, re ad nua tetet abtay eeto ad fo and detention arbitrary treatment, inhuman and cruel crimes, war torture, enocide; r te uvvr uuly id hmevs n ie ed f upr sc a fo, shelter, food, as such support of need dire in themselves find usually survivors the er,

and 1991 by the military junta government of Ethiopia. The military gov military The Ethiopia. of government junta military the by 1991 and ress reparation of human rights atrocities is the Derg crimes committed between committed crimes Derg the is atrocities rights human of reparation ress

Vict

ims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects

committed egregious atrocities, during its stay in power, such as as such power, in stay its during atrocities, egregious committed t ae o fe fo ciiim seily ih ead o the to regard with especially criticism from free not are nts iminal Court (ICC) marked a new era for ICL. These These ICL. for era new a marked (ICC) Court iminal 1

ms of war crimes, one of the objectives of of objectives the of one crimes, war of ms - nuig ec ad security and peace ensuring tional crimes: genocide, crimes against against crimes genocide, crimes: tional

s reparation: ms’ ernment, also ernment, -

will be be will rced

CEU eTD Collection rights violations. (ICtH Rights Human Inter the (ECtHR), Rights Human of Court European the as such tribunals crimes war and resettlement, com forced crimes, Derg the of victims the to them compares and Holocaust), Nazi the of (victims Germany and Rwanda, in reparation victim of aspects res The satisfaction substantiate State guarantees to remedies of as: addressissues such will it Hence rights violations. perpetrators masshuman of t to addition in priority given not is reparation victim if objectives their fulfilling of short are mechanisms rights human existing the that is research this of thesis The of ofthe violations Dergcrimes. lying challenges and developments important most the analyze to is thesis this of objective the Hence reparation. for agenda their forward push to victims the for conducive are forums legal international the nor domestic the neither crim Derg the of victims the to harms psychological and social economic, the address to directed efforts Reparation officials. Derg the of prosecution and investigation than more little a Dergwas the ofatrocities mass these to response the However bombardment massresettlement ofand civilians; blockader programs; ofhumanitarian Derg The disappearance. mitted by the Derg officials in Ethiopia. It also discuss also It Ethiopia. in officials Derg the by mitted

immunity; and and immunity; ac employ earch

o them for measures the reparation of victims of Derg crimes through crimes Derg of victims of reparation the h hmn ih voain te suffered, they violations right human the

Vict . R), and the Human Rights Committee (HRC) Committee Rights Human the and R), to ims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects

a oprtv approach comparative a s rcdns in precedents li reparation claim

com

itd hs cie through crimes those mitted

ainl regional national,

includ

2 ahead to ensure effective reparation of victims victims of reparation effective ensure to ahead

n ls rsrcie ttt o lmtto and limitation of statute restrictive less ing

o ics te usatv ad procedural and substantive the discuss to

rsne of presence and international practices that that practices international and es

the precedents of international of precedents the restitution, compensation, restitution,

extra e are meager. Moreover, Moreover, meager. are e

on reparati on

- he prosecution of the of prosecution he sufficient procedural procedural sufficient uiil executions; judicial - American Court of American Court

on f on availability or human human or elief. and and

CEU eTD Collection researches rights human systemic the of victims the of reparation Hence victims. the of reparation on coverage scant is there but literatures; scholarly in fairly covered are officials Derg of prosecution the on Topics discussion jurisdictions, other in humanity, against crimes and genocide, crimes, war of victims of reparation to regard with G Rwandan and Holocaust, Nazi Apartheid, African South from lessons drawing Ethiopia, in atrocities thesis The Finally, thereis justic transitional their of part as countries reparationotherexperiencesat of look will mass of victims of reparation to regard with tribunals regional for reparation, o act the wrongful establish international that laws rights human regional and international including levels national two Chapter Derg the of fall the after taken measures and crime Derg the of experiences the narrating part. conclusion the to addition in chapters three has thesis The

will contribute to elucidating to contribute will on the topic. on the enocide reparation experiences. Though there is a reasonable amount of literature of amount reasonable a is there Though experiences. reparation enocide

discusses challenges of seeking r seeking of challenges discusses

ilto of violation a part dedica a part Vict ims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects

ted toconcluding remarks inte

Sae. Chapter States. f

on repatriation of victims of the Derg crimes ar crimes Derg the of victims of repatriation on ntoa hmn ihs a and law rights human rnational

issues pertaining to reparation of the victims of mass mass of victims the of reparation to pertaining issues 3 eparation for victims both at international and and international at both victims for eparation

three .

address violations of Derg of violations it es

atrocities. The fourth C fourth The atrocities. provide

consequen esn fo international from lessons hpe one Chapter s

perspectives on the the on perspectives

and entices and

e, specifically ces, e rare, if any. any. if rare, e

focuses on on focuses e efforte

further hapter

and .

CEU eTD Collection (1977) 8, InstituteofTechnology, 1 (‘ Derg after herein Council, Administration Military Provisional the of atrocity The world. the in violations rights human systematic and w civil bloodshed, horrendous the of one of beginning the marked also it history, Ethiopian in rule monarchial absolute of end the marked has Ethiopia in 1974 in revolution the Though 1.2 by riots. thenationwide power the fill to opportunity the of use made that organization and discipline disorga as However, Student was feudal administration entrenched thedeep of middle inthe revolutionThe erupted 1973 the b enshrined Constitution 1955 Thoughthe Solomon. King decentfrom legend the legitimacyto gave which country, the for type its of second the Constitution, 1955 the using power his fo scramble Europeans the of period the during independence its maintain to managed has country the though wars international and internecine of abundance by marked is history Ethiopian The Sheba. Queen its for throne the to entitlement its pre The 1.1 1

Mekasha Getachew, Getachew, Mekasha

The Derg Crimes and the Victims catalyzed by a high surge of fuel prices, feudalistic rural land ownership, and famine. famine. and ownership, land rural feudalistic prices, fuel of surge high a by catalyzed asic humanontheground. was from rights, it far thereality Pre Summary Brief 1974Ethiopia: The PostThe Atrocities 1974Mass s an s - 1974 Ethiopia was a highly centralized monarchi centralized highly a was Ethiopia 1974 d urban worker’s unions were pioneers of the uprising the of pioneers were unions worker’s urban d Vict An Inside View of the Ethiopian Revolution Ethiopian the of View Inside An nized as the rioters were, it was it were, rioters the as nized ims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects

r the rest of Africa. The las The Africa. of rest the r 1

descent from the union of King Solomon of Israel and and Israel of Solomon King of union the from descent

Derg’ Derg’

t Emperor, Haile Selassie I, Selassie Haile Emperor, t means Council in Council means

the military and the police, with better with police, the and military the , Munger Africana Library Notes, California California Notes, Library Africana Munger , c al empire. The Monarchy claimed claimed Monarchy The empire. al

that ravaged the country. the ravaged that Geez

) ranks 7 ranks )

vacuum created created vacuum

consolidated consolidated th

and it of its its of ar ar CEU eTD Collection 2012) 30, Nov on (Last accessed Terror” 7 http://www.usip.org/files/resources/Ethiopia Rig Human and Criminals War of Process Prosecution 6 http://hrw.org/english/docs/1999/11/29/ethiop5495.htm 5 2012) 30, November on accessed 4 3 2007) Press, University (Oxford 516, 2 the on ab were remains whose 13, and 11 of ages the between children 1,000 over people… “ took 1979 in ended it when Terror Red The (EPRP). Party Revolutionary 121/1977 campaign genocide organized well and systematic its on embarked has Derg the youth, of hundreds of execution with 1976 30, April of genocid acts widespread in resulted that revolution, 1974 the after and during proliferated that groups political among strife of full were regime Derg the of years five first the Specifically powerHaile of Mariam. Mengistu Col. Derg The regime. Derg Church Evangelical Ethiopian the of Secretary Tewophilos Abuna ministers, 20 the in happened that world the in kind

Ibid Firew Dictionary of Christian Biography, available at at available Biography, Christian of Dictionary h Rd err Ma Terror Red The United States Institute of Peace Ethiopia, Ethiopia, Peace of Institute States United Watch, Rights Human

Kebede Tiba, Tiba, Kebede streets of Addis Ababa Addis of streets e, torture, inhuman and degrading treatment. Within this period, that commenced on on commenced that period, this Within treatment. degrading and inhuman torture, e, 6

that outlawed one of the rival political parties, the Ethiopian Peoples’ Peoples’ Ethiopian the parties, political rival the of one outlawed that Vict The Mengistu Genocide Trial in Ethiopia in Trial Genocide Mengistu The r ys Mmra Msu wbie a website, Museum Memorial tyrs’ ims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects tipa Dcao Mnit Hie Mariam Haile Mengistu Dictator Ethiopian

executed

” -

Patriarch of Orthodox Church Orthodox of Patriarch . 7

According to the Red Terror Martyrs’ Memorial Museum Memorial Martyrs’ Terror Red the to According some of its own members own its of some - SPO Dossier SPO 5

eot f h Ofc o te pca Poeuo, h Special The Prosecutor, Special the of Office the of Report - Rd err lte atoie b te Procla the by authorized latter Terror’ ‘Red http://www.dacb.org/stories/ethiopia/gudina_tumsa.html th , (Last accessed on Nov 29, 2012). 29, Nov on accessed (Last , 5 hts Violators in Ethiopia in Violators hts

C. - 4 2.pdf

r aog h hg poie ilns f the of killings profile high the among are 2

albe at vailable h Emperor The , 5 Journal of International Criminal Justice, 513, Justice, Criminal International of Journal 5 ,

(Last accessed on November 30 2012) 30 November on (Last accessed (oebr 4 19) vial at: available 1999) 24, (November ,

http://rtmmm.org/redterror.html - too 3

and Gudina Tumsa Gudina and

in or in , 2 (February 1994) available at at available 1994) (February 2 , ih his with der to consolidate the consolidate to der

8 oiiy and nobility 58 half a million million a half

- andoned General

mation

(Last (Last “Red “Red CEU eTD Collection 14 13 12 http://www.hrw.org/reports/pdfs/e/ethiopia/ethiopia94d.pdf 11 10 163 Ethiopia in Executions 9 8 before themafter families them. ofthebulletusedtokill bury their paying cost the ar youth the of bodies the as mourn, to allowed tortured. being mates prison their of anguish the without congested. rooms dark small the as inhuman and despicable was ‘ Revolutionary Guards, the by conducted were executions summary and tortures, detentions, The torture. and centers ‘ making. decision and guidance policy to execution direct from culpability, of levels different with Terror Red the implemented Officia 175oftorture themwereand women. of1687 of them period. this during crimes the to due died have them of 9546 found court the while Terror, Red the ha who individuals 12315 listed have officials Derg the charged it when (SPO) (RTMMM),

Ibid

Firew Kebede Tiba, Tiba, Kebede Firew Ibid Ibid Ibid 165 Ibid, Human Rights Watch/Africa, 6 6 Watch/Africa, Rights Human - 184, 165 184,

9 ls of Derg from the lowest administrative unit, ‘ unit, administrative lowest the from Derg of ls

h SOs hre lse 28 a vcis f otr ad h cut ofre the confirmed court the and torture of victims as 2681 listed charges SPO’s The 12 - 66, (Pretoria University Law Press, 2011) University LawPress, (Pretoria 66,

“the Red Terror was a modern day holocaust” day modern a was Terror Red “the Moreover tortures are conducted near the rooms so that the others can listen to listen can others the that so rooms the near conducted are tortures Moreover Vict , Chacha Murungu & Japhet Biegon (eds) Prosecuting International Crimes in Africa, Africa, in Crimes International Prosecuting (eds) Biegon Japhet & Murungu Chacha , T Genocide, for Members Derg Other and Mengistu of Trial The ims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects

Abiyot Tibeqa’, Abiyot

tipa eknn udr h Law the under Reckoning Ethiopia

and officials of eachofofficials and Kebeles’ 6

e left in the open streets for days mandatorily mandatorily days for streets open the in left e

(Last accessed on 26 November, 2013) November, 26 on (Last accessed n mltr brak served barracks military and

Families of the executed youth were not were youth executed the of Families 10 Kebele

. Kebele 8 , ’, to the top level officials have have officials level top the to ’,

The Special Public Prosecutor Public Special The (oebr 19) vial at available 1994) (November, 7

. ventilation were usually usually were ventilation 11

Condition of detentionof Condition

orture and Summary Summary and orture ve died during during died ve as detention detention as

CEU eTD Collection 18 17 Ethiopia 16 15 2500 civilians. bombardm aerial long counter of means a as trepidation using of policy systematic of part as but incidents separate and individual civilian of bombing aerial ci of killing mass markets, and villages wells, water poisoning as such crimes officials of Derg variety the committed wars these of conduct the During Somalia. of Republic then the with ethni the with country the of parts all in almost war in was It power. on stayed has it years 17 the for wars international and local fighting was Derg military restrictingand grain traditional and flow thetowns,of the surplus d aid, food blocking by weapon war a as food relief the used Derg the 1986 and 1984 between stations relocation the in food insufficient and logistics of condition poor the of result the as died persons 100,000 these among and force by persons then the of support 600,00 resettled has it Hence popular country. the of part northern the that in fighting groups liberation out dry to was resettlement forced the behind motive guis the under country the forced of parts on Western and embarkedSouthern the Derg to community the the of campaign failed, resettlement has country the of part northern in famine the of nort the in occurred famine whenexcessivegrave an of in1984 sets crimes isfollowed by other The Red period Terror of

Ibid 8 Ibid, 9 Ibid, Tiba, Tiba,

, , 3 The Trial of Trial The

o poiig etl ln fr h vcis f h fmn. oee, h real the However, famine. the of victims the for land fertile providing of e -

Vict insurgency strategy. insurgency Mengistu and Other Derg Members for Genocide, Torture and Summary Executions in in Executions Summary and Torture Genocide, for Members Derg Other and Mengistu ims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects n o oa mre in market local a of ent

hern parts of the country. After its attempt to hide the occurrence the hide to attempt its After country. the of parts hern

18 vilians

The most significant of these incidents was the day day the was incidents these of significant most The 7 17

. These crimes were committed not merely asmerely not committed were crimes These . Hawzen c liberations in addition to the conflict the to addition in liberations c

that claimed the lives of more than more of lives the claimed that iverting food aid to the to aid food iverting 16 .

15 . Moreover . 0 CEU eTD Collection ia&xp_countrySelected=ET&nv=4 23 1949 1948, December 9 of 260(III) resolution 22 1994) March 14 on force entry into 1975, December (XXX)of 9 3452 Assemblyresolution 21 it to 11, on acceded (Ethiopia January 1976 entry 3 force December 1966, into of16 (XXI) 2200A 20 December 1966, of16 19 of Government Transitional the established (EPRDF) Front Democratic Revolutionary People Ethiopian the wars, internecine bloody of years 17 after Derg the of fall the Upon 1.4 hasEthiopia ratified1969. 1949 four in Geneva the Conventions Genocide the ratified had Ethiopia Treatment Degrading of forms other and Inhumane, Torture, Econo on Rights Political and Civil on Covenant Nations United the are ratified treaties rights human international the Among Derg. the of fall the after only ratified pow to coming the before law humanitarian and rights human to relating treaties international of number a ratified, Ethiopia 1.3 See International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Rights, Political and Civil on Covenant International International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Rights, Cultural and Social Economic, on Covenant International Convention against Torture, Inhumane, and other forms of Degrading Treatment, adopted by the General General the by adopted Treatment, Degrading of forms other and Inhumane, Torture, against Convention ovnin on Convention

http://www.icrc.org/applic/ihl/ihl.nsf/vwTreatiesByCountrySelected.xsp?xp_countryLabelSelected=Ethiop )

Transitional JusticeTransitional Measures Ratified

i, oil n Clua Rights Cultural and Social mic, 22

International oe h cmn t pwr f h Dr. ih ead o uaiain laws, humanitarian to regard With Derg. the of power to coming the fore the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, adopted by General Assembly Assembly General by adopted Genocide, of Crime the of Punishment and Prevention the

Vict entry into force entryinto ims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects

ovnin n h Peeto ad uihet f h Cie of Crime the of Punishment and Prevention the on Convention

(Last accessed on 12, November 12, on accessed (Last

Human Rights er of the Derg. However most of the human rights treaties were were treaties rights human the of most However Derg. the of er

M ar. 23, 1976 (Ethiopia acceded to it on 11, June1993) 11, it on to acceded 1976 (Ethiopia 23, ar.

entry into force on 12 January 1951 (Ethiopia ratified it on 1, July July 1, on it ratified (Ethiopia 1951 January 12 on force into entry

Instruments 8 a IEC) ad h U Cneto against Convention UN the and (ICESCR);

dopted by General Assembly resolution 2200A (XXI) (XXI) 2200A resolution Assembly General by dopted

2013) a

dopted by General Assembly resolution resolution Assembly General by dopted 26 June 1987 June1987 26

19 21 23

(ICCPR); the UN Covenant UN the (ICCPR); CT i 19. Moreover, 1993. in (CAT)

(Ethiopia has acceded to it to has acceded (Ethiopia

June1993)

’s CEU eTD Collection Ethiopia 27 8 AM) 2012 3, Dec 26 25 24 orders.” deadly and brutal the of many out carried actually who individuals the and down, orders passed as well as orders out carried who commanders field civilian and Derg…military the of officials military and government, groupings: three in conducted were officials Derg the of trials The prison. 2011 in were remaining the and absentia, in 10 deceased.On tried were Mengistu including them of 25 court, and c Mengistu, Col. including Derg, the of officials top the of 73 of trial The regime. the of crimes mentioned above the for them 13 on officials Derg the of indictment the commenced SPO The (SPO) withProclamation No.22/1992 Office Prosecutor Public Special the established TGE The 1991. June in (TGE) Ethiopia

Ibid, Preamble Ibid, 22/1992 No. Proclamation Establishment Office Prosecutor Public Special Mengistu found guilty of genocide of guilty found Mengistu Tiba, Tiba,

2. 1. commission to commission

, , 169 The Trial of Mengistu and Other Derg Members for Genocide, Torture and Summary Executions in in Executions Summary and Torture Genocide, for Members Derg Other and Mengistu of Trial The educating thepeople of purpose the forplunders andcommitted embezzlement, atrocities, the document To whoassociations areof and committing other thosecrimes persons suspected For

the President gave amnesty to 16 of them because they already served 20 years in years 20 served already they because them of 16 to amnesty gave President the

ra o ofcas f h Dr, ersnaie o ubn wles peasant dwellers, urban of representatives Derg, the of officials of trial

Vict of Decof

death sentences. By the time the trial was concluded 34 of them were in were them of 34 concluded was trial the time the By sentences. death ims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects

ember 2010, the death sentence was altered t altered wassentence death the ember2010,

to ensure non to ensure

, available at available , ame to conclusion in 2007 with conviction with 2007 in conclusion to ame 24 . The SPO was. The purposes: SPO established with dual - recurrence of such crimesrecurrence ofsuch http://news.bbc. 9 27

h SPO The co.uk/2/hi/africa/6171429.stm

eot o h Hue o House the to report , Negarit Gazette (August 8/1992) (August Gazette Negarit , th

“… policy “… December 1994 charging charging 1994 December 25 o life imprisonment andimprisonment life o

- for Genocide for makers, senio makers,

(Accessed on (Accessed Peoples f

CEU eTD Collection Ethiopia, 30 meetings” these of many of tapes audio as well as transcripts these of volumes 200 over are There meetings. critical of made transcripts verbatim the suggesting 37 1994: July 30 Economist Development & Democracy 29 28 However victims. the of reparation the including measures justice transitional on embarked hav should State the character, systemic their and crimes Derg the of gravity the of light In insignificant ofland ofplot for the except the provision Monument the vastly is RTMMM in the Though Terror. Red the of purpose the for Regime Derg the during used were that materials and members, Derg the of minutes the show that documents ex the for which Addis, of Central Square) (MesqelSquarein the built wasTerror Red of martyrsthe of (RTMMM) Museum and Monument Memorial Terror Red the meantime, the In materials that enabled reconstructionandpreservethem. situation of the thethen purpose. trial the for court the to presented evidences of volume large a compiled has SPO the process the In again. happen preservin of the purpose serve to expected was SPO the by violations rights human the of documentation The had filed criminal cases against 5569suspects. prosecutor the that shows 2010 February in Parliament) Federal (Ethiopian Representatives

Ibid 165 Ibid Jeremy Sarkin, Transitional Transitional Sarkin, Jeremy itiative of the Association of the Red Terror Victims, the contribution of the government is government the of contribution the Victims, Terror Red the of Association the of itiative Tiba, Tiba, hibits and the names and photographs persons killed during the Red Terror, archive archive Terror, Red the during killed persons photographs and names the and hibits The Tr The

182

degree of complicity on the part of senior government officials. In many instances, there were were there instances, many In officials. government senior of part the on complicity of degree ial of Mengistu and Other Derg Members for Genocide, Torture and Summary Executions in in Executions Summary and Torture Genocide, for Members Derg Other and Mengistu of ial Vict g the history and educate generations so that the same tragedy will not will tragedy same the that so generations educate and history the g ims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects

, 253, 257, (1999), quoting the statement of US attorney Stuart H Deming in The The in Deming H Stuart attorney US of statement the quoting (1999), 257, 253, justice and the prosecution model: The model: prosecution the and justice - 38

“Not since Nuremberg has such documentary evidence been assembled assembled been evidence documentary such has Nuremberg since “Not

The Derg regime has left behind sufficient documentary and documentary sufficient behind left has regime Derg The 10 28

experience of Ethiopia, Ethiopia, of experience 30 .

3 Journal of Journal 3

Law, e CEU eTD Collection 31 national in victims of participation the ensure to designed measures years, long unnecessarily t of rights substantive the nor procedural the neither fulfilled never has officials Derg the of trial The against theconvicted Derg officials. nor State the by neither victims the of interests monetary and properties restitute to made pro prosecution the in addressed not was State the or perpetrators the against victims the of claims civil of Joinder all. at exist they if rare are reparations and SPO the partici The dissatisfaction w and victims the consulting without officials Derg top of release the Specifically crimes. the of victims of compensation Derg of wrongs the of recognition symbolic to contribution of insignificant apology, public absence reconciliation, and truth through reconciliation national of lack for criticisms the Howev of crime. perpetrators the of prosecution to measures additional and alternative encompass Post 1.5 not party tothe international human rights ins was country the since them to closed is alternative international the and actions judicial those ill is regime legal domestic the since suffered they harms the for justice to access limited have victims the measures, those of absence the in Moreover, country. the in implemented and designed been yet not have measures such no

The challenges will be discussed elaborately willdiscussed challenges be The

- ofit epne t ms arcte ad rv hmn ihs iltos usually violations rights human grave and atrocities mass to responses conflict Victims and he victims of the Derg Regime. Beyond the prosecution of the officials that took took that officials the of prosecution the Beyond Regime. Derg the of victims he pation of the victims in the whole process was limited to provision of evidences to evidences of provision to limited was process whole the in victims the of pation

er, the Ethiopian response to the atrocities of the Derg regime face fierce fierce face regime Derg the of atrocities the to response Ethiopian the er, in the context ofthein the context aforementioned criticisms. Vict

the Derg Trials ims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects

tot aig ulc plg had apology public making ithout

in the in next truments at the time they atthe time weretruments committed. 11

Chapter

- prepared to accommodate to prepared

to pursue reparation reparation pursue to stirred

cess. No effort is effort No cess. additional 31

and and CEU eTD Collection family, people. Ethiopian and the their victims, the to apology of declaration genuine no made have perpetrators individual the and victims, the compensate and restitute to taken is measure no nonexistent, was wrongs the of Assumption minimal. too were endeavors truth and reconciliation Vict ims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects

State

respons ibility for for ibility CEU eTD Collection out handing t compensation only not dictates violations rights human mass systematic for reparation of idea very the Moreover for. up make to perpetrators individual of means financial the beyond victims the violations, human of actions for State the of liability limited Ethiopian In natureDerg ofthe special the accommodate that procedures special of absence the In crimes. the of most for the to due difficult is laws domestic the of provisions liability cour domestic in violations rights human for remedy get to difficult it make country the of laws substantive and procedural the since is alternative this But perpetrators. the and State the against courts Th 2.1 and victims. thesufferings ofthe t establishing victi of rehabilitation reconciliation, the and serves that reparation model justice transitional a launch to willingness of lack this of face the in Hence officials. Derg the prosecute to efforts positive the despite survivors proper The of absence prosecuted. the revealed discussion were perpetrators main the and officials top Derg the which for regime previous The 2

Challenges Reparatiof p Introduction iay lentv fr h victims the for alternative rimary he legal responsibility of the S the of responsibility legal he C urn lgl context legal current o the victims by the perpetrators or the State but also an all an also but State the or perpetrators the by victims the o hapter discussed the main human rights violations committed during the Derg the during committed violations rights human main the discussed hapter Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects crimes tort crimes

action sustain pecuniary and non and pecuniary sustain on Enforcementon

t s ifcl t gt eaain gis the against reparation get to difficult is it is doomed tofail.is doomed ms, this Chapter will discuss the challenges of of challenges the discuss will Chapter this ms,

o li reparation claim to State s Prun rprto truh extra through reparation Pursuing ts. tate and enforcing them to make good the losses the good make to them enforcing and tate State 13

- led initiative t initiative led

officials.

- pecuniary damages that are usually are that damages pecuniary oee, i However, s to is o recompense the victims and victims the recompense o expiry t cin n h domestic the in action rt rarely available for them for available rarely

of period of limitation limitation of period of stain o mass of situations n -

inclusive process inclusive State - contractual contractual

u to due

CEU eTD Collection corrected, (A/56/10), session that of work the 2001, in session, third Acts Wrongful 33 October, 08 on accessed at available 32 show to extra and immunity state the time, that during binding enforcemen laws rights human customary to for or pertaining party a was violations State the laws rights human and humanitarian violations for Even r loca rights human their invoke to Covenants the era Derg govern that rules i interesting an in ushers Covenants rights human the of ratification late The wrongful acts Statetribunals. and enforcedininternational ofthe internationally crimes Derg the makes that law positive of absence and jurisdiction foreign st as such impediments to due challenging also this However tribunals. other The damages as aresultacts sustained officials. victims of ofits official their of justice. restorative of emedies them. are availablefor

International Center for Transitional Justice; Justice; Transitional for Center International nentoa Lw omsin (ILC); Commission Law International Art. : violation of the human rights of the victims the of rights human the of violation

alternative is to pursue justice in courts of foreignof courts in justice pursue to is alternative whether it is possible for the victims of those violations before the ratification of of ratification the before violations those of victims the for possible is it whether , ,

t of those laws is hampered by challenges arising from principles governing governing principles from arising challenges by hampered is laws those of t 5 http://ictj.org/sites/default/files/ICTJ

with Commentaries with duties are attributable to the S the to attributable are duties

the reparations claims of the victims for violations that occurred during the the during occurred that violations for victims the of claims reparations the Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects and submitted to the General Assembly as a part of the Commission’s report covering covering report Commission’s the of part a as Assembly General the to submitted and 2013) 32

Legally reasoning too, since acts of of acts since too, reasoning Legally

- territorial adjudicatory jurisdiction. Whereas it is insufficient insufficient is it Whereas jurisdiction. adjudicatory territorial

, Yearbook of the International Law Commission, 2001 Commission, Law International the of Yearbook (Draft articles on State Responsibility) State on articles (Draft

Draft Articles on the Responsibility of States for Internationally Internationally for States of Responsibility the on Articles Draft Reparations in Theory and Practice and Theory in Reparations - Global 14 tate, the latter is responsi is latter the tate,

lly and lly - Reparations /or

to seek reparation from the S the from reparation seek to

33 internationally, and if so whether whether so if and internationally, - State State Practice

Text adopted by the ILC at its fifty its at ILC the by adopted Text

, or regional or internationalor regional or , officials in the performance the in officials - 2007 ; Rep ; ble to make good the the good make to ble - English.pdf ate immunity from from immunity ate arative Justice Series, Series, Justice arative , vol. II, Part Two, as Two, Part II, vol. ,

ssue about legal about ssue , 2 (Last (Last 2 , tate; - CEU eTD Collection 37 36 35 (1960) 34 court domestic other The from andthe it extra of purpose the for fault of requirement the law, same were officials Derg the strong More liable. State the make to fault as regarded be can measures the allowed them makes Code Penal the in criminalized were actions their that fact mere the since officials Derg the by committed wrongs the for responsible State the make to difficult is it definition this wi falls it and faith good in committed professional. of is actions fault for the liable where is officials State government the that provide Code Civil the of provisions i contractual the address to mechanisms reparation judicial government the earlier, pointed As 2.2 of jurisdiction adjudi the limits immunity state of principle sought. is enforcement which through tribunal a to jurisdiction confer t he he

Ibid, Ibid, (1957) 1, No. Gazeta, Extraordinary Gazette, Negarti 158, No. Proclamation ofEthiopia, Code Penal 2127(1) Ibid, Civil Code of The Empire Of Ethiopia, Pro Ethiopia, Of Empire The of Code Civil

breach Action for Reparation in Domestic Courts Domestic in Reparation for Action

Art. cate and award reparation to victims of customary human rights violations. rights human customary of victims to reparation award and cate

2143 (1) 2143 impediment

shall pertain to international human rights law augmented by rules that that rules by augmented law rights human international to pertain shall

ultra v ultra s. Though the ordinary period of limitation for tortuous action is two years, two is action tortuous for limitation of period ordinary the Though s. State

Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects irus

can becan held liable for that.

. However, the very fact that the Derg officials had passed a law that that law a passed had officials Derg the that fact very the However, . prosecuted and convicted though convicted and prosecuted is expiry

of the period of limitation to institute civil action in the the in action civil institute to limitation of period the of

that replaced the Derg the replaced that clamation No. 165, Negarit Negarit 165, No. clamation thin the scope of the authority of the person. the of authority the of scope the thin 15

se f itm eaain Te extra The reparation. victim of ssue 34

their actions were sanctioned by sanctioned were actions their

It devised neither administrative nor administrative neither devised

- contractual liability will follow follow will liability contractual is courts Gazette Extraordinary Gazette a

professional professional

f foreign of

oevr t Moreover, fault ,

Art. State ly, since since ly,

35 2126 (2) 2126 f t is it if

With s

the the he he to to 37 36 -

CEU eTD Collection 42 1 Gazeta, Negarit 41 1 40 39 38 in international and Rights Human on Covenants International Rights, Human and human with with accordance in deals interpreted that be shall Constitution rights democratic the in Chapter the of provisions Moreover, courts rights human the including Gazeta Negarit on published Proclamation, establishment Gazeta Negarit the per land, the of law the form shall Ethiopia by ratified treaties that states Constitution 1995 t to prior conventions rights human the ratified had State the if Even Derg. the of fall the after ratified are instruments rights human the of most that reason additional an for task daunting es by reparation seek To for death. or imprisonment life with punishable prescribes Code Code. Penal the in offence the for prescribed limitation of period the as same the be shall limitation of period the offences criminal from arising damages for he Derg government, the justiciability of them in domestic courts is courts domestic in them of justiciability the government, Derg he st

Ibid, Ibid, ofEthiopi Code Penal Ibid, 1/1995, No. Proclamation Constitution), (FDRE Ethiopia of Republic Democratic Federal the of Constitution A Proclamation to Provide for the Establishment of the Fede the of Establishment the for Provide to Proclamation A

Year No. No. 3, Year all of the Derg crimes byall ofthe Dergnow. crimes Art. Art. cannot make judicial noticecannot ofthem judicial to make

2(3) (2) 2143 Art.

Year No. (AddisAbaba No. 3 Year that the longest period of limitation shall be twenty years for serious crimes crimes serious for years twenty be shall limitation of period longest the that 9(4), (Addis Ababa (AddisAbaba 9(4),

Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects a, a, Art.

226 (a) (1957) (a) (1957) 226 tablishing the Derg crimes as human rights violations is also a a also is violations rights human as crimes Derg the tablishing

conventions only

– 42

21 . However, However, . st

–

August,1995)

22 ,

nd have

August, 1995) August, 39

enf 16

since since With this, the period of limitation has lapsed has limitation of period the this, With

vr en pub been ever orce them.

41 none of the treaties the State has ratified has State the treaties the of none

Courts Courts ral Negarit Gazeta, Proclamation No. 3/1995, 3/1995, No. Proclamation Gazeta, Negarit ral

te nvra Dcaain of Declaration Universal “the can can ihd n h Ngrt Gazeta Negarit the on lished 38 take

The then The questioning

judicial notice of laws of notice judicial

applica . Though the Though . struments ble Penal ble 40

as ,

CEU eTD Collection responsib international bring to potential their to State” that 47 46 45 44 43 R State I State” that of responsibility international the entails State a of act wrongful responsibil to and laws attributable international of breach in omissions and Acts consequences. legal about bring International responsi legal 2.3 human rights violations or crimes Derg the of suffered they crimes Derg the of victims Hence, Parliament. Ethiopian the of Chamber a Federation, the of House the to Constitution the of interpretation t due curtailed highly is State the by ratified instruments to adjudicateofthe Constitutionand cases onthehuman humanrights based rights provisions Ethiopia”. by adopted nternational responsibility of responsibility nternational

Ibid, Ibid, Responsibility, State on Articles ILC, Ibid, Ibid, Ibid, Art 1 states that states 1 Art Ibid,

Action reparation International Tribunals for in Art. Art. Art. esponsibility,

a provision that does not make distinction between human rights laws and other international laws as as laws international other and laws rights human between distinction make not does that provision a 1 83(3) (2) 13 ity

, 45

unless legal legal unless

. The Articles on State Responsibility provide that provide Responsibility State on Articles The . State Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects

“ 47 Every internationally wrongful act of a State entails the international responsibility of of responsibility international the entails State a of act wrongful internationally Every s are internationally wrongful acts that entail international legal legal international entail that acts wrongful internationally are s 43

. is well is

unless Despite the provision of the Constitution, the power of the judiciary the of power the Constitution, the of provision the Despite reform bility arises from legally wrongful conducts: acts or omissions thatbility conducts: oromissions arises acts legally wrongful from

State captured h S the Art. is implemented implemented is s for international wrongful acts, articulated in Articl in articulated acts, wrongful international for s won’t be able to able be won’t

tate 2

, even prior to the World War II, in decision of the of decision in II, War World the to prior even , ility avails . 17 Hence this provision is not only about wrongful act of of act wrongful about only not is provision this Hence

administrative to accommodate the special circumsta special the accommodate to

pursue judicial remedies for the harms harms the for remedies judicial pursue

o the provision that gives the the gives that provision the o lentvs o drs those address to alternatives “[ E]very internationally internationally E]very

46 .

es on on es nces nces

CEU eTD Collection 52 51 Reports I.C.J. 1986 Judgment, Merits, 50 49 48 Commentaries (quo Bassiouni, Cherif M. See individuals. including organs state non towards obligations of violations of consequences to application their violations of consequences the to as provisions of application the that suggests also See also. entities state non against acts wrongful all covers but state another towards state detail. more in impediments these with deal sections sub subsequent The reparation. for action the entertaining from courts foreign jurisdi international of absence and immunity state of impediment the to pertains second The regime. Derg the by the committed of crimes nature wrongful international the establish that laws substantive of absence the choo they if challenges of sets two face to set are a However would responsibility another State,be international establishedimmediately” law international Case, Morocco Nicaragua against and in reaffirmed in (PCIJ) Justice International of Court Permanent

Phosphates in Morocco Morocco in Phosphates Gabčikovo 1949 Reports I.C.J. Merits, Judgment, Channel, Corfu 74 No. A/B, Series P.C.I.J., 1938, Judgment, Morocco, in Phosphates Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua (Nicaragua Nicaragua against and in Activities Paramilitary and Military ting Crawford, tingCrawford, - Nagymaros Project (Hungary/Slovakia), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1997 I.C.J. Judgment, (Hungary/Slovakia), Project Nagymaros ctions for reparation by victims of the Derg crime in international tribunals tribunals international in crime Derg the of victims by reparation for ctions (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002) at 209 at 2002) Press, University Cambridge (Cambridge:

the decisions of ICJ in ICJ of decisions the The International Law Commission's Articles on State Responsibility: Introduction, Text andText Introduction, Responsibility: State on Articles Commission's Law International The lnmr dcso i ti regard, this in decision landmark a Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects “ attributable to the State and descri and State the to attributable Case,28 International Recognition of Victims' Rights, Rights, Victims' of Recognition International

, 50

and in the in and

, 14, 142, para. 283, and 149, para. 292 para. and 283, 149, para. 142, 14, ,

Corfu Channel Corfu Gabˇcíkovo 18

, 23, 4,

ction inhibiting international tribunals and and tribunals international inhibiting ction - Nagymaros Project Nagymaros Phosphates in Morocco in Phosphates ,

se to do so. The first one pertains to to pertains one first The so. do to se

PCIJ noted that in case of breach of of breach of case in that noted PCIJ Military and Military bed as contrary to the treaty right of right treaty the to contrary as bed - 10). , 10, , 28 10, HRLR HRLR

between States shall not preclude preclude not shall States between 6 (2006), 203, 212 footnote 30 30 footnote 212 203, (2006), 6 v. Paramilitary Activities inActivities Paramilitary

. 51 United States of America), America), of States United , 7, 38, para. 47 38,, para. 7,

In the the In

Case. 52

Phosphates in Phosphates Art. 48

It is also is It

33 which 33

CEU eTD Collection Nations, United 1980, 54 53 treaty the partyato betonot intention its makesit until ratification, the pendingtreaty, a ofpurpose signatory on obligation The violations. rights human through obligation interim treaty of violation the is act wrongful internationally of commission the establish to alternative other The commi rights the of time human the at is State the based on binding era treaty laws relevant Derg of absence the the to of due impossible, violations not if rights intricate, human for reparations co seeking wrongs Accordingly, the establish to violated rights human laws the determine to law international of it intricacies the regime, Derg ransacking the requires during State the on binding was that law treaty of absence the In international the for mechanisms Conventions. Geneva 1949 the and Convention Genocide the except Derg the of fall the after well ratified are conventions the ICESCR, the ICCPR, a is Ethiopia obligations. treaty its on based Derg the of crimes I 2.3.1 t is is t

See theSee Vienna Convention on the law of Treaties, done at Vienna on 23 May 1969, entered into fo into entered 1969, May 23 on Vienna at done Treaties, of law the on Convention Vienna

. difficult 54 Breachinternational human of rights

footnotes

State o sals th establish to

under Section 1.3 Section under Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects Treaty Series Treaty

party to most of international human rights instruments including the the including instruments rights human international of most to party

State

A ad h Gncd Convention Genocide the and CAT Vienna Conventio Vienna

s to a treaty to refrain from acts that defeat the object and and object the defeat that acts from refrain to treaty a to s , vol. 1155, 331 1155, vol. ,

e international responsibility of the Ethiopian State for for State Ethiopian the of responsibility international e

complaint by victims of the States party. States the of victims by complaint However none of these two instruments provide provide instruments two these of none However , Art 18 Art , (a) 18 C 19 onvention n on the Law of Treaties ( Treaties of Law the on n

mmitted by the Derg and its officials. officials. its and Derg the by mmitted

ssion of the violations. the of ssion its its s hw i t in shown As

commission of genocide and other other and genocide of commission . 53

oee ms o these of most However he previous he VCLT

rce on 27 January January 27 on rce )

of the S the of imposes an an imposes C hapter tate tate ,

CEU eTD Collection (May 567 2010) L.,565, Transnat'l J. Vand. 56 138 55 it, the determining for standard acceptable relati in arises usually that ramification Another reciprocal expectation among reasonable any be won’t there jurisdictions, sovereign their within groups and individuals obl impose not do conventions human rights Since, jurisdictions. respective their of subjects of benefit the for but nature their the of obligations the where conventions rights human irre becomes obligations interim of issue the Secondly interim the of breach to yetobligations not whether is bilateral settled ormultilateral thetreaty is one. due damage claiming of possibility the Moreover, uncertain. the multilateral one by is obligation treaty interim the the where violating of Nevertheless consequence it. maintain or treaty the revoke to of the theone of onthe will dependent treatymay be fate the bilateral theof one, If multilateral. is treaty the where especially clear being from far are obligation the of act this However Klabbers, Jan Davis S. Davis - ojc ad ups i a em f r wtot wral definition’ workable a without art of term a is purpose and “object 160 (1997) 160 Jonas and Thomas N. Saunders, Saunders, N. Thomas and Jonas State

Some Problems Regarding The Object And Purpose Of Treaties, Of Purpose And Object The Regarding Problems Some line of argument is not likely to achieve the goal of establishing the wrongful the establishing of goal the achieve to likely not is argument of line

for a number of reasons. First, the consequences for breaching an interim interim an breaching for consequences the First, reasons. of number a for Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects

State s parties to the conventions.s parties tothe The Object a Object The

gtos among igations object and purpose and object 20 nd Purpose of a Treaty: Three Interpretive Methods, Methods, Interpretive Three Treaty: a of Purpose nd

on to Art 18 of the VCLT is lack of of lack is VCLT the of 18 Art to on State State eat ih ead o international to regard with levant

r oe f the of more or of treaties. of s parties mainly, but towards towards but mainly, parties s pris r nt eircl by reciprocal not are parties s

8 Finnish Y.B. Int'l L. 138, 138, L. Int'l Y.B. Finnish 8 55

As one scholar put scholar one As

. 56

State

nme of number A the treaty is a a is treaty the State

ate is parties

parties parties 43 CEU eTD Collection Sources Nature (1995 148 147, L. Comp. & Int'l 58 Klabbers, and 57 or law, rights human as acceptance expectation, legal of patterns conjoi be components generally primary two must has which law rights human customary that agree all “…nearly rights human The 2.3.2 claiming theState. from reparation for basis a as VCLT the of 18 Article of violation the invoking by succeed to crimes Derg the o obligation interim the area surrounding with entities the and claim entertainthe to jurisdiction with tribunal international the determining of terms in important is distinction human the or VCLT the be can claim the for basis the whether ambiguous State ent the confers obligation interim an whom to as being time the for dubious is it VCLT, the of 18 the about consensus of lack the to addition In in the VCLT. determinati the for proposed are standards

Jordan J. Paust J. Jordan For an in depth discussion of these tests, see tests, these of discussion depth in an For itlement to invoke its transgression in the case of human rights treaties. Assuming that a that Assuming treaties. rights human of case the in transgression its invoke to itlement

international law law international

violates the object and the purpose of a human rights treaty before ratification, it is is it ratification, before treaty rights human a of purpose the and object the violates Breach of How to Defeat a Treaty's Object Object Treaty's Defeat a to How 57

and Status as Law of the United States, States, United the of Law as Status and

law , The Complex Nature, Nature, Complex The ,

Customary Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects s . Though there are differences among scholars on the particularities the on scholars among differences are there Though .

rule s violated by the Derg crimes are crimes Derg the by violated s

human rights - 1996), referring to Jordan J. Paust, Paust, J. Jordan to referring 1996),

ned: ned: Sources and and Sources and Purpose Pending Entry into Force, into Entry Pending Purpose and ‘locus standi’ ‘locus f Jonas & Saunders; Saunders; & Jonas (1) (1) State on of the meaning of the term the of meaning the of on rules 21 patterns of practice or behavior, and (2) (2) and behavior, or practice of patterns ‘object and purpose’ and ‘object s parties make it improbable for the victims of victims the for improbable it makeparties s

Evidences Evidences 12 Mich. Mich. 12

to bring the claim. Hence all these grey grey these all Hence claim. bringthe to Object and Purpose of a Treaty, a of Purpose and Object of Customary Human Human Customary of J. Int’l Int’l J. Customary International Law; Its Its Law; International Customary

the customary international international customary the L. 59, 61 (1990) 61 59,

of a treaty as used in Art in used as treaty a of opinio juris” opinio

283 object and purpose and object

rights treaty. This This treaty. rights

Rights

, 25 Ga. J. J. Ga. 25 , 58

565 - 609, 609,

CEU eTD Collection Judgment, Germany/Netherlands) 62 61 60 59 instruments Rights Human of Declaration Ammoun Justice I it” requiring that “belief be to intention their or law a as bound. it consider they because practice the undertaking juris Opinio other commonality. that the share not do common of that exclusion with the to or rule region international one customary a within form can only situation States sufficient. is question in practice o and actions the between homogeneity of degree of practice is there repetition. one Hence n advisory opinion opinion advisory n

Shaw; Colombian Shaw, ot Sa Continent Sea North International Law International International Law International pno juris Opinio “constant and uniform usage uniform and “constant 59 - Peruvian asylum case, asylum case, Peruvian

State The ICJ decision, back in 1950, pr 1950, in back decision, ICJ The

62 “they can bind States on the basis of custom within the meaning meaning the within custom of basis the on States bind can “they law of rule a of existence the by obligatory rendered is practice this and continuity is rule customary a identify to condition necessary or or

Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects oii jrs ie necesitatis’ sive juris ‘opinio s shall not necessarily be strictly uniform. The presence of certain certain of presence The uniform. strictly be necessarily not shall s ,

n his separate opinion, was particular about the Universal Universal the about particular was opinion, separate his n

is demonstrated through through demonstrated is al Shelf, Shelf, al o , , 79 , 76 f

t h I.C.J. I.C.J. e

Judgment of November 20th 1950: I.C.J. Reports, 266, 277 (1950) 277 Reports,266, I.C.J. 1950: 20th November Judgment of I (UDHR) n (Federal Republic Of Germany/Denmark; Federal Republic of of Republic Federal Germany/Denmark; Of Republic (Federal Reports t e r n 61 a t

i , ” o I.C.J. Reports,3 I.C.J. , writing that though that writing , n 60 a

l practiced by by practiced

22 C

o u ovided that customary rule formed when when formed rule customary that ovided

State r refers to the intention of those those of intention the to refers t

missions of of missions o , 44 , f s’ conduct that demonstrates their their demonstrates that conduct s’

(1969) u State s t i c

e not binding as human rights rights human as binding not

s in question in s

( State I C J )

s with regard to the the to regard with s delivered in 1970, 1970, in delivered

However the the However

State State s s CEU eTD Collection 67 66 65 Int'l & CompGa. J. 25 64 (1971) 76 16, Reports, I.C.J. notwith 63 cogens jus the though even provision the of inclusion the VCLT discrimination racial norms Moreover violations. those for responsible internationally pr are which treatment inhuman and torture from freedom liberty, life, to rights of violations UDHR of law. provisions the international of most customary that consensus of matter a is it law, international scholars among law. customary international the of Human parts the become of have Rights Declaration Universal the of provision the that contended usually is It accepted practice general a through custom of force the acquired of

The provision was adopted majority of 87 votes 8 votes against and 12 abstentions, Ibid, 8 Ibid, abstentions, 12 votes against and votes 8 majority of87 adopted was provision The AntonioCassese; 342 Ibid, Hurst Hannum, Hannum, Hurst Legal Consequences for States of the Continued Presence of South Africa in Namibia (South West Africa) Africa) West (South Namibia in Africa South of Presence Continued the of States for Consequences Legal ... because they constituted a codification of customary customary of codification a constituted they because tnig euiy oni Resolution Council Security standing , norms that are peremptory are that norms , tce i te UDHR the in otected had accepted the existence of supreme norms of of norms supreme of existence the accepted had et seqet . some of the human rights rights human the of some 67

Moreover they have left the task of setting criteria for the formation of of formation the for criteria setting of task the left have they Moreover

The Status of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in National and International Law International and National in Rights Human of Declaration Universal the of Status The International Law International Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects . L. 287, 340 (1995 340 L.287, . over over ”.

66 specific provisions provisions specific

The ILC report shows that almost all negotiating negotiating all almost that shows report ILC The

65 n cniee csoay rules; customary considered and , Oxford University Press, 199 (2 199 UniversityOxford Press, ,

- ec, s Hence, 1996)

such as as such

276 (1970), Advisory Opinion, (Ammoun, J. separate opinion) opinion) separate J. (Ammoun, Opinion, Advisory (1970), 276 violated by the D the by violated

ince most of the crimes of the Derg are are Derg the of crimes the of most ince 23 “…self of UDHR UDHR of

y couldn’t agree by then which norms are are norms which then by agree couldn’t y

- determination of peoples, genocide, genocide, peoples, of determination erg erg jus cogens cogens jus nd that that

ed.2005) are law... form form

64 violations of of violations

the Ethiopian State is is State Ethiopian the Despite disagreements Despite

as law.” as

or because they have have they because or while they voted for for voted they while at f customary of part

63 State

jus cogens cogens jus s to the the to jus jus ,

CEU eTD Collection 75 74 73 (2008 53 Law, International in Monographs 72 71 2013) November, 26 on (Last accessed Rights Human of Violations 70 No 69 Assembly General the to Commission the of reports the 68 Cogens” Jus of breaches States non also is order non their non as characterization their from emanates treaties principles and norms law” permitted”. as is characterization derogation its no to which due from law “norm international of source supreme a of emergence of inclusion The report. ILC cogens

Ibid, 243 Ibid, Ibid Ibid ILC report, report, ILC . hrf Bassiouni Cherif M. Michael Byers, Byers, Michael Alexander Orakhelashvili, (Ed. Vaughan Lowe), Lowe), Vaughan (Ed. Orakhelashvili, Alexander rdic J. Int'l L. 211, 215 (1997) 215 211, L. Int'l J. rdic

70 .

73 s to determine wh determine to s

and, as such, such, as and, norms Moreover the consequence for violation of these norms in terms of reparation reparation of terms in norms these of violation for consequence the Moreover

- derogable nature th nature derogable 68 - Documents of the secon the of Documents derogable.

, for future developments in the field as per the recommendation of the the of recommendation the per as field the in developments future for Conceptualising the Relationship between between Relationship the Conceptualising Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects jus cogens jus , Accountability for Violations of International Humanitarian Law and Other Serious Serious Other and Law Humanitarian International of Violations for Accountability 71

, 392 Available at Available 392 , jus cogens cogens jus . Orakhelashvili argues that the the that argues Orakhelashvili . 74 ether and to what extent the reparation is due to the victims of of victims the to due is reparation the extent what to and ether

ec “ Hence . 75

as prerequisites for the validity of treaties has resulted in in resulted has treaties of validity the for prerequisites as Bassouni also claims that crimes such as as such crimes that claims also Bassouni eir protection is in the interest of the international public public international the of interest the in is protection eir d part of the seventeenth session and of the eighteenth session including including session eighteenth the of and session seventeenth the of part d

[i]t lies thus beyond the power of directly interested interested directly of power the beyond thus lies [i]t no )

http://www.sos rms sit at the apex of all other international law law international other all of apex the at sit rms 24 , II Yearbook, 247 247 Yearbook, II , eepoy om i Itrainl Law International in Norms Peremptory

- attentats.org/publications/bassiouni.violations.pdf 69 -

derogable rights. derogable Jus Cogens Cogens Jus u cogens Jus jus cogens jus et seqet

(1966) and and

status of human rights rights human of status are are

Erga Omnes Omnes Erga 72

“the compelling compelling “the

For him, due to to due him, For “… genocide, genocide, “… Rules Oxford , , 66 66 ,

CEU eTD Collection Rights Human 76 T Derg the after countries. ratified were them hand established other at that either case instruments rights the of human of for the since alternatives use feasible judiciaries be not make are the tribunals may international/regional or rights human tribunals of international/regional adjudication The called usually state’. is which state, ‘forum another of court the or judiciary tribunal domestic international/regional effective domestic of absence the In system. judicial domestic effective providing where rights human enforce to challenge the ad universal a the Despite lacks regime legal international controversial. the laws, is rights human substantive courts the in on developments jurisdiction confer and States of immunity customary on based internati action of cause have to succeed may crimes Derg the of victims of hill issue the is problem first The enf problem. practical a be to violated remains have enforcement crimes Derg the and that rights establish human to customary prospect little a is there if Even 2.4 norms. torture” …and crimes war humanity, against crimes

Bassiouni, Bassiouni,

orcing customary human rights in national or international tribunals: the the tribunals: international or national in rights human customary orcing

of customary international human rights law and and law rights human international customary of Jurisdictional Jurisdictional

onal laws or or laws onal Accountability for Violations of International Humanitarian Law and Other Serious Violations of of Violations Serious Other and Law Humanitarian International of Violations for Accountability , 393 , judicator with centralized enforcement mechanisms. This is specifically specifically is This mechanisms. enforcement centralized with judicator

Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects Immunity

jus cogens cogens jus

of States of jus cogens cogens jus norms

, 25 norms for reparation of the Derg crimes, crimes, Derg the of reparation for norms the strength of those norms to override override to norms those of strength the

States

choose to violate them without without them violate to choose 76 jus cogens cogens jus

are violations of of violations are the next resort is to an an to is resort next the norms. Though the the Though norms.

u cogens jus Achilles Achilles he he

CEU eTD Collection 82 81 Theory 80 Law International that jurisdiction the exercising from isprevented court a situations particular in that asserts immunity jurisdictional of principle the hand, other the jurisdiction….On of assertion its in tribunal domestic “Non 79 ICJ ofthe jurisdiction 78 77 a is immunity state Hence absolute. is states equal” an over power no has equal an literally meaning a of acts other no economically, and every politically since Hence laws. international customary of position parallel of reach the practi and scholars among divergence is there However countries. other of courts consent. no that dictate immunity place. taken have violations

Ibid, 749 Ibid, citing 748, Black' Ibid, in above thediscussion See See Lee M. Caplan, M. Lee See the requires 36(2) Art Statute, ICJ instance, For oee sae muiy s itnt rm h picpe f non of principle the from distinct is immunity state However - justiciability… posit an area of international activity of sta of activity international of area an posit justiciability… , 97 Am. J. Int'l L. 741, Am. Int'l L.741, 97 J. , 78

At the same time time same the At State State

, 699 , ihu is osn. h maxim The consent. its without Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects

State Immunity, Human Rights, and Jus and Rights, Human Immunity, State

- s Law Dictionary 1673 (7 Dictionary1673 Law s State 700 immunity.

Sec 1.3 Sec et seqet s towards each other ascribes the basis of state immunity to the the to immunity state of basis the ascribes other each towards s 79 State

State , 2003; and Brownlie, and 2003; ,

80 77

shall be dragged to an international tribunal without its its without tribunal international an to dragged be shall

The view that the state immunity emanates from the the from emanates immunity state the that view The s enjoy a degree of immunity from the jurisdiction of of jurisdiction the from immunity of degree a enjoy s The principles of sovereignty, equality and state state and equality sovereignty, of principles The th ipso fac ipso State

ed.1999) 26

Principles shall interfere in the internal affairs and and affairs internal the in interfere shall to to declaration of each state to accept the compulsory compulsory the accept to state each of declaration

Cogens: Cogens: “ fnaetl right” “fundamental tes that is simply beyond the competence of the of competence the beyond simply is that tes - par in parem non habet imperium, imperium, habet non parem in par utcaiiy huh r coey inter closely are though justiciability Sta , 330 , tioners about the foundation and and foundation the about tioners A Critique of the Normative Hierarchy Hierarchy Normative the of Critique A 81 te

asserts that the immunity of of immunity the that asserts is sovereign, territorially, territorially, sovereign, is

82 it possesses” it possesses”

of of State - linked. linked. Shaw, Shaw, s in in s CEU eTD Collection sources” the in Academic ignored isusually Assembly General the of Committee 88 87 86 85 Theory 84 83 or customary whether law international an to conformity ensure to equipped better are comm are problems these of Some from far is regard this in practice of uniform. state the approach immunity restrictive the state”. every that of jurisdicti part territorial a of exclusive exercise complete the waive to understood is sovereign every which in cases that of case classic the in reflected law. international the not to apt is it that equal” an of sovereignty is states of immunity Hence system. legal that argue others However other every of system legal domestic the per as variation to subject not and law international Caplan, M. Lee Ibid & v.Others, M'Faddon Exchange Schooner The Ibid Ibid Brownlie, “perfect equality and independence of sovereigns…have given rise to a class of of class a to rise given sovereigns…have of independence and equality “perfect

State

97 Am. J. Int'l L. 741, 752 Am. Int'l L.741, 97 J. 88 , as the maxim maxim the as ,

Principles . 83 87

State Immunity, Human Rights, and Jus Cogens: A Critique of the Normative Hierarchy Hierarchy Normative the of Critique A Cogens: Jus and Rights, Human Immunity, State Though many modern international law writers on state immunity favor favor immunity state on writers law international modern many Though State State Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects 30 sae ta the that stated 330, , s is not tantamount to saying that that saying to tantamount not is s s to make an exception to the scope of their sovereign jurisdiction jurisdiction sovereign their of scope the to exception an make to s

par in parem non hab non parem in par 85 -

753, 2003 2003 753,

This opposing view on the sources of state immunity are are immunity state of sources the on view opposing This state Schoone

immunity immunity on to international law in general. However, However, general. in law international to on

“divergenc r Exchange r

on which has been stated to be the attribute of of attribute the be to stated been has which on 11

U.S. 27 i nt nrni t statehood” to intrinsic not “is

is an exclusive domain of each domestic domestic each of domain exclusive an is e of view and the unresponsive attitude of the Sixth Sixth the of attitude unresponsive the and view of e

116 et imperium imperium et ,

3 L. Ed. 287, 7 Cranch 7 116 L. Ed. 287, 3 86 where Chief Justice Marshall wrote wrote Marshall Justice Chief where “an equal has no authority over over authority no has equal “an tries to dictate. to tries

84 They claim claim They

since the the since State s CEU eTD Collection [ICJ] Justice of Court International Spain, v 90 89 bas discrimination” racial and slavery from protection including person, human the of rights basic the concerning rules and principles “genocide… forum a of jurisdiction decisi the establish and immunity state of cogens Jus rights. human those of violation of circumstances in jurisdiction mandatory to court no is there since unaddressed remains convention or charter any to party by violations rights human Finally, enforce. to supposed originally were they face laws the of they parts not are Hence which laws rights charters. human customary and implement to conventions difficulties specific implement to established are between disputes entertain to and unable individuals is however, which, ICJ, the except law rights international customary apply to mandated are them of None them. established that conventions the of coverage geographical and temporal the within arise that issues t tribunals non and rights binding render human regional and international of number a are there Though mechanisms. forum a enforcement such of wield courts in rights human of violation for redress seeking controversy this However, be. may case the as force and pressures, diplomatic measures, reciprocal using based treaty

Caplan, Barcelona Traction, Light and and Light Traction, Barcelona is of conferring jurisdiction on a forum a on jurisdiction conferring of is on of the ICJ in in ICJ the of on

Preliminary Objections, Judgment, [1964] ICJ Rep 6, ICGJ 151 (ICJ 1964), 24th July 1964, 1964, July 24th 1964), (ICJ 151 ICGJ 6, Rep ICJ [1964] Judgment, Objections, Preliminary State Immunity, Human Rights, and Jus and Rights, Human Immunity, State

human rights norms are usually invoked in order to surpass the impediment impediment the surpass to order in invoked usually are norms rights human State Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects s. Moreover the international and regional human rights tribunals tribunals rights human regional and international the Moreover s.

- binding judgments their mandate is limited to interpretation of of interpretation to limited is mandate their judgments binding Power Company, Limited, Belgium v Spain (New Application, 1962), Belgium Belgium 1962), Application, (New Spain v Belgium Limited, Company, Power acln Tato case Traction Barcelona , 32 ,

about state immunity is critically relevant to victims victims to relevant critically is immunity state about 89

Cogens, Cogens, State 28

. This case is important in terms of gaining of terms in important is case This . 97 Am. J. Int'l L.741, Am.97 J. 90

which attributed prohibition of of prohibition attributed which ra omnes erga

747 2003, 747 State biain, s sd a used is obligations, State . The prominent prominent The .

that do not not do that State human human

enjoy enjoy s not not s hat hat CEU eTD Collection 96 Germany 95 94 93 Covenant the to Parties States 92 91 o immunity abrogate to effect its rejected has torture, of freedom Kingdom United immunity state of defense the lift to norms cons rejected consistently has EtCHR the of Chamber Grand the of position The andfundamental freedoms”.rights obl Charter obligations” omnes erga are person human the of rights basic the concerning rules the that fact the from follows pe the in interest legal a has 31 Comment General state” sovereign a as defendant the of face the in jurisdiction, matter to subject importance more giving by rights human of protection the for milestone important an is This genocide. of prohibition and rights human the of rights basic forumain jurisdiction assume to basis a provides it since immunity state to approach restrictive the for grounds

Al Ibid 2 para. Ibid, C Rights Human Brownlie, Al - - Adsani v. UK v. Adsani Adsani v. United Kingdom United v. Adsani

, (dec.), no.59021/00, ECHR 2002 ECHR no.59021/00, (dec.), , Principles gto o member on igation

, para 61 para , ommittee, ommittee, Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects , the Court after appreciating the fundamental nature of the right to to right the of nature fundamental the appreciating after Court the , , 331 , 93

92 two

State Moreover the Committee buttressed this position referring to the UN the to referring position this buttressed Committee the Moreover

is the reflection of this case where it noted that “ that noted it where case this of reflection the is General Comment No.31: The Nature of the General Legal Obligation Imposed on Imposed Obligation Legal General the of Nature The No.31: Comment General , (Adopted on 29 March 2004 at its2004at 2187 March 29 on (Adopted ,

regional human r human regional

, [GC] no. [GC] , since it affirms that allthat affirms it since

frac b eey te Sae at o is biain. This obligations. its of Party State other every by rformance State 94 . 91

t “ to s

35763/97, ECHR 2001; 2001; ECHR 35763/97,

The wording of the Human Rights Committee in its in Committee Rights Human the of wording The rat rmt rset o, n osrac o, human of, observance and for, respect promote ione personae, ione ights tribunals is different on this issue this on different is tribunals ights 29

n nme o cases. of number a in State s have an in anhave s th

Kalogeropoulou et al. v. Greece and and Greece v. al. et Kalogeropoulou which is which meeting, Eightieth session (2004) session meeting, Eightieth equences of of equences terest in the protection ofprotection the in terest f states f “based on the status of status the on “based ain mtra, i.e., materiae, ratione 95 …every State Party State …every

In In 96 . Al

- u cogens jus Adasani v v Adasani . The The .

CEU eTD Collection 101 100 99 98 1 97 of violations for responsibility evade to instruments rights human those of ratification that so rights rul it where IACtHR, the to regard with development positive a is there Atlantic, across However, on based was in decision latest humanity”. against crimes for State another in them against brought damages for claims civil of respect in immunity to entitled not are isn’t there that claiming of prerogative in the on judgment own shadow its to referring ECtHR the manner, same the In foreign a before made jurisdiction.” torture of claim serious a for proceedings avoid to immunity a that contending decision majority to immunity) actions.” state its of on illegality the of those consequences the case, avoid this (in rules lower hierarchically invoke cannot the to due Caflisch, Lucius Jean Rozakis, Wildhaber, Luzius Christos Judges opinion dissenting their in Nevertheless, -

4 Ibid Ibid. Kalog

Ibid, Ibid, Switzerland, v. Nada

Joint Joint para 38 para eropoulou et al. v. Greece and Germany, para para Germany, and Greece v. al. et eropoulou Dissenting Opinion of Judges Rozakis, Caflisch, Wildhaber, Costa, Cabral Barreto, and Vajic, para Vajic, and Barreto, Cabral Costa, Wildhaber, Caflisch, Rozakis, ofJudges DissentingOpinion jus cogens jus

98 State cogens jus

Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects Switzerland, v. Nada s cannot call the defense of their reservation to those rights, or non or rights, those to reservation their of defense the call cannot s [GC],

status of the prohibition of torture of prohibition the of status

- no. 10593/08, 10593/08, no. 101 Paul Costa, Ireneu Cabral Barreto, and Nina Vajic stated that that stated Vajic Nina and Barreto, Cabral Ireneu Costa, Paul “ ed that certain human rights fall under the category of human human of category the under fall rights human certain that ed yet acceptance in international law of the proposition that States that proposition the of law international in acceptance yet

jus cogens cogens jus ECHR2012 State 100

99 30 failed to address the applicant’s claim that that claim applicant’s the address to failed

rnils o override to principles

The G The cannot cannot

rand Chamber of the ECtHR, in its its in ECtHR, the of Chamber rand hd bhn te r the behind “hide 97

Hence they disagreed with the the with disagreed they Hence “a state alleged state “a

the state immunity immunity state the Al

- Adsani, Adsani, ules on state state on ules ly violating it it violating ly jus cogens jus cast a a cast

in in - CEU eTD Collection 106 2012 105 104 103 Inter 62/02, a Rights; Human of Commission American 102 merely their consequence the rejected tribunals the of none that noting worth Hence immunity. state between possess otherwise not would it which jurisdiction ICJ At laws”. domestic their to amendments corresponding through non as recognized is proscription this which in treaties Rights, Conventi U.N. of the status the under attained has 18 persons of age of punishment capital of prohibition the that concluded Court The that of nature indelible the affirmed counterpart, European its to allowed. is derogation no which from norm peremptory rights. human

Ibid, para 93 para Ibid, Ibid, Michael Domingues v. United States, United v. Domingues Michael oga Crsohr hms Uie States United v Thomas Christopher Douglas Jurisdictional Immunities of The State (Germany (Germany State The of Immunities Jurisdictional , para ,95 para “the principal principal “the

para. 85 para. it is recently decided categoricall decided recently is it

jus cogens jus - Am. C.H.R., Doc. 5 rev. 1, 913 (2002) 1, 913 rev. 5 Doc. Am. C.H.R.,

on on the Rights of the Child, and the American Convention on Human Human on Convention American the and Child, the of Rights the on on Hence for IACtHR certain human rights have attained the level of of level the attained have rights human certain IACtHR for Hence Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects norms that deal with obligations of obligations with deal that norms distinguishing feature of these norms is their relative indelibility” relative their is norms these of feature distinguishing

s itntst f ue te d nt ofit ih ah other. each with conflict not do they rules of set distinct as

to over ride state immunity.

para. 49 (quotation omitted) (quotation 49 para. nd nd jus cogens cogens jus Michael Domingues v. United States, United v. Domingues Michael y

that ae 220 Rpr N. 0/3 2 Dcme 20, Inter 2003, December 29 100/03, No. Report 12.240, Case 31 V. jus cogens “does not confer upon the Court a Court the upon confer not “does cogens jus

Ital since since . ” y: Greece Intervening), Intervening), Greece y: jus cogens jus 105

State State The 102

s and procedural matters such as as such matters procedural and s decision had had decision

s have ratified ratified have s

IACtHR, in contradistinction contradistinction in IACtHR, nature of those violations, but violations, those of nature 104 jus cogens cogens jus

- derogable, as well as as well as derogable,

Judgment, I.C.J Reports, Reports, I.C.J Judgment, Case 12.285, Report No. Report 12.285, Case made

“…the ICCPR, ICCPR, “…the rules claiming claiming rules

a distinction a

106

t is It 103

CEU eTD Collection 112 111 110 109 108 See officials. and ofits organs omissions and actions the for responsible is state a that concept wellestablished a is It law. international in State pol and laws executing of process the in organs State and officials 107 act, wrongful PCIJ in for consequences The 3.1 restitution mayof tothe notbefitting circumstances theDergcrimes. system legal national the in available reliefs infrastructure, th to goes tribunals rights to system legal domestic the of limitations crimes, Derg the to similar violations rights human mass address regiona of innovativeness the given Moreover in developed regional as different reparation rights human of scope and content the discuss to is here aim problem indomestic and ofboth non enforcing them the and crimes Derg the for Ethiopia of State the by law rights human international of breach the establish to basis law substantive finding of challenges depicted Chapter previous The 3

Ibid, Ibid, Ibid, Ibid, Responsibility, States on Articles ILC, Factor Discussion on attribution is so evident to be addressed in this research since the crimes committed by Derg Derg by committed crimes the since research this in addressed be to evident so is attribution on Discussion

Human Rights Reparation Internatin 108 Introduction Art. Art. Art.

y at Chorzow at y n te L Atce o Rsosblt o State of Responsibility on Articles ILC the and

31 (b) 30 (a) 30

110

ensure the ensure

Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects

urne o non of guarantee , ( systems

Germany v. Poland v. Germany

ILC, Articles on State Responsibility, arts 4&5 arts Responsibility, State on Articles ILC, entoa rsosblt of responsibility ternational

reparation to etn o pooig eiltv maue ad rvso of provision and measures legislative proposing of extent e

demonstrate Art. ) - will be more evident. While some international human human international some While evident. more be will repetition

Merits 30&31 ,

Judgment No. 13, 1928, P.C.I.J., Series A, No. 17 Series No. P.C.I.J., A, 1928, 13, No. Judgment the 32 111

ad nentoa tiuas o effectively to tribunals international and l setbacks

ional Tribunalsional n reparation and - dome State icy of the Derg are clearly attributable to the the to attributable clearly are Derg the of icy

stic forums. of ae lutae i dcsos of decisions in illustrated are s 109 itm reparation victim Tee r csain f the of cessation are These .

uh s opnain and compensation as such . 112

107

hl te is two first the While

Building onthat

in Ethiopia , , 29

the .

CEU eTD Collection Responsibility 115 114 as ‘ identified it is (alternatively 2006) 21, (Mar. A/RES/60/147 Doc. U.N. 60/147, Res. G.A. Law, Humanitarian International of Violations Serious and Law Rights Human International 113 conspicuous most isthe Crimes ofViolent Compensation of Victims on Europe’s Convention rights human mass and systematic of victims of reparation for inspiration comprehensive providing of terms in development notable a is Reparation and Remedy a to Right the on Guidelines non and to binding relevant adopted have organs its and Nations United The committed been not had act that if existed have probability, all in would, which situation the establish reparation appropriate the determining “ of task the face they whenever courts regional statement T Rights Com Law Humanitarian International Vic as reparation of forms different UN in provided the discuss will it Accordingly, chapter. this of theme th not are consequences [r]eparation must, so far as possible, wi possible, as far must,so [r]eparation he purpose of reparation is to nullify the effect of the violatio the of effect the nullify to is reparation of purpose he For instance, instance, For Factory at Chorzow at Factory Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a to Right the on Guidelines and Principles Basic tims of Gross Violations of International Human Rights Law and Serious Violations of Violations Serious and Law Rights Human International of Violations Gross of tims and humanitarian law violations. violations. law humanitarian and on . ”

m 114

reparations UN UN objective of reparation of objective ittee

Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a RemedyReparationfor andto Right the on Guidelinesand Basic Principles Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation, and Remedy a to Right the on Guidelines and Principles Basic Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects

(HRC)

( Germany v. Poland v. Germany

. e direct concerns of this this of concerns direct e 115 .

mn tee te N eouin on Resolution UN the these, Among

113

n dcsos f h EtR ICH ad h Human the and IACtHR ECtHR, the of decisions and ), ), ( that Merits

From regional human rights systems t systems rights human regional From pe out all the consequences of the illegal act and re act illegal the consequencesthe of all out pe and international the of decisions influences usually

Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Gross Violations of of Violations Gross of Victims for Reparation and Remedy ), 47 ), 33

thesis , the third one, reparation, is the main the is reparation, one, third the , Van Boven/Bassio Van n on the victim. the on n ai Picpe and Principles Basic - idn instruments binding

uni Principles uni

he Council of Council he A As per As rticles on State State on rticles

PCIJ’s ’)

- :

CEU eTD Collection No. 11, Protocol 118 117 February (Entry 1 1988) force: into 24.XI.1983, Strasbourg, 116 State doing wrong the of laws of the in number reparation full a of absence on violation, of dependent finding conditions: reparation order to power court’s the makes provision The which states that: T collaboration. member of sovereignty reparations award to competence Courts’ differences the ECtHR the courts: rights human regional reparation. A 3.2 intentionally. crimes to due violation rights human for reparation addresses that effort regional e ECtHR he og einl ua rgt systems rights human regional mong

Mejia, Mejia, European Convention on the Compensation of Victims of Vio of Victims of Compensation the on Convention European uoen ovnin o te rtcin f ua Rgt ad udmna Fedm, s ame as Freedoms, Fundamental and Rights Human of Protection the for Convention European

, and if and , Reparation in Regional Courts and Human CommitteeReparation Regional Courts and Rights in ICCPR of the injured to satisfaction just afford necessary, if shall, Court the made, be to reparation partial only allows concerned Party Contracting High the of law internal the if and thereto, find Court the If Remedies in the International Human Rights Law, Law, Rights Human the International in Remedies However there is there However ’s

the finds it finds the 116 117

Art. power to award reparation limited by the provision of art 41 of the ECHR ECHR the of 41 art of provision the by limited reparation award to power

n h ntr o hmn ihs iltos n h to continents two the in violations rights human of nature the in

Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects 41 party

s that there has been a violation of the Convention or the protocols the or Convention the of violation a been has there that s 118 State necessary. Though the first condition is a pre a is condition first the Though necessary.

s also an an also

since the enforcement of enforcement the since eminent

hr is there

and the and ,

n the and 34 difference difference

consensus on the overarching objective of of objective overarching the on consensus

IACtHR. 12

CH’ hesi ECtHR’s lent Crimes, Crimes, lent its in the approaches of approaches the in At the back of this divergence are divergence this of back the At

decisions require decisions European Treaty Series Series Treaty European tation mise for all reparation reparation all for mise

not to infringe the the infringe to not

the prominent prominent the States’

and c

ommitted ommitted -

No. 116 No. dd by nded

n the in active active ,

CEU eTD Collection http://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/FS_Pilot_judgments_ENG.pdf 123 Inter the Both of Law Case the between 122 39 para. Party,Ibid Contracting theHigh restitution the ordered and custom its from deviated court 121 120 119 a offer level; national at problems structural or systemic solving …in States “assist but similar of cases numerous influx beginning the following procedure judgment pilot of introduction too. Europe in and Court the in unfold to began changes major has trend this However abreach” hasfound judgment whichtheCourt in that return State Contracting a to order in court satisfacti just award to necessary is it whether determine to appreciation Court’s the to apt is it since automatic, or to empowered is Court the reparation when only is It good. it make to State the of responsibility primary the is it court the by ascertained is violation once that suggests provision The award reparation. to Court the powerof the restrict conditions other the claims,

Ibid, para. 42&43 para. Ibid, France, v Mehemi Papamichalopoulos and Others v Greece, v Others and Papamichalopoulos Juan Carlos Upegui Mejia, Mejia, Upegui Carlos Juan States Parties States ing to France. The same attitude is reflected in reflected is attitude same The France. to ing Mehemi v France v Mehemi ECHR,

ht hr smlr ot causes. root similar share that “ Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects no. are in principle free to choose the means whereby they will comply with a with comply will they whereby means the choose to free principle in are on. It is based on this limited power and its restrictive interpretation the interpretation restrictive its and power limited this on based is It on.

25017/94, ECHR 25017/94,

athe Plt Judgments Pilot Factsheet

started to change during the first decade of this century where two where century this of decade first the during change to started , Remedies in the International Human Rights Law. A Comparative Approach Approach Comparative A Law. Rights Human International the in Remedies 119

” ruled that the that ruled 120 - American Court andCourt American -

40 1997 claimant the when

the concerned State Party’s laws do allow only partial only allow do laws Party’s State concerned the no. no.

14556/89, 14556/89, e a eaain Mroe, reparation Moreover, reparation. a der 35 “ it does not have jurisdiction to issue such an such issue to jurisdiction have not does it

123 . of the property contested between the applicant and and applicant the between contested property the of 121 the European Court of Human Rights, Rights, Human of Court European the Para. 37, ECHR 1995. However in this case the the case this in However 1995. ECHR 37, Para.

h ojcie f io jdmns s to is judgments pilot of objective The obiter dictum obiter

(Last accessed on 5 on (Last accessed ogt o the for sought , 1, available at at available 1, , 122 of the Court, Court, the of

h frt n ws the was one first The

th pcfc eey of remedy specific

November

which states which 5 , 2013) ,

s not is

CEU eTD Collection Justice, Restorative 130 129 128 2013) November, at Available 127 126 125 124 th to approach Court’s the example as taking ECtHR the in ‘cost’ on reparation. to approach fundamental Court’s the of change of consequence a or incidental merely is satisfaction just of construction its regard with ECtHR in change the whether stage this at ascertain to difficult is it However and othersvRussia Moldova and in time same the at States for orders injunction out giving judgment pilot incorporate to Rules its updated in 2004, in delivered was judgment pilot first caused that causes underlying the address att violations rights human forms new of menu a them bynew joined is Europeof Council the Second, operation. its commenced Court the since activated never been has orderthat reparation typeof a affectingpeople, many violations causeforroot procedure concerned”. individuals the to redress speedier of possibility

ention of the ECtHR. Hence the C the Hence ECtHR. the of ention Ilascu and others v Moldova and Russia Moldova and v others and Ilascu Georgia v Assanidze ECHR, Poland v. Broniowski Mejia, Ibid hms . Antkowi M. Thomas

Remedies in the International Human Rights Law, Law, Rights Human the International in Remedies Factsheet Pilot Judgments Pilot Factsheet

allows the ECtHR to order the order to ECtHR the allows http://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/FS_Pilot_judgments_ENG.pdf

47 Stan. J.Int’l L. 279, 289 (2011) 289 L.279, Stan. J.Int’l 47 Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects

[GC], [GC], , [GC], no. ak,

n mrig adt fr nentoa Cut: itm etrd eeis and Remedies Centered Victim Courts: International for Mandate Emerging An no. 71503/01, §203, ECHR§203, 2004 71503/01, no.

31443/96, ECHR (2004) 31443/96, , 2 2 , 129

[GC], [GC], ourt has to shift its appro its shift to has ourt State no. 48787/99, §490, ECHR (2004) §490, 48787/99, no. these human rights violations at violations rights human these State 130 s from Central and Eastern Europe bringing with with bringing EasternEurope andCentral from s

According to Antkowiak, there is still a focus a still is there Antkowiak, to According

concerned on how to address an underlying an address to how on concerned rnosi . Poland v. Broniowski n ac, 2011. March, in

which had not been there before to the the to before there been not had which

Assanidze v Georgia v Assanidze after the fall of soci of fall the after 124 ach to reparation in order to to order in reparation to ach

127 ec te io judgment pilot the Hence

e case of reparation for for reparation of case e h Cut lo started also Court The

126 (Last accessed on 05 05 on accessed (Last

such scale. such

huh h Court the though 128 alist regime alist , and 125 Ilascu

he to CEU eTD Collection 1969) November 22 Rica, Costa José, San Rights, 134 133 Compreh a 132 131 the American onHumanthat: Rights Convention says rights human ECtHR. the to compared reparation justice. wher violations rights comprehensiveand approach of holistic reparation indetermination ofmasshuman tovictims t hand other the On compensation.addition to publi domestic disappearance, the of prosecution and investigation proper the for injunction include shall reparation the approach oriented victim the in the while compensationof payment orders court the forcedwheredisappearance

Mejia, Mejia, Ibid Gina Donoso Gina American Convention on Human Rights, Rights, Human on Convention American

132 freedom thatfair remedied and compensat be the or appropriate, right such if of breach the rule, constituted that situation also or measure shall the of consequence It violated. was that freedom or right his of tha rule shall Court the Convention, this by protected freedom or right a of violation a been has there that finds Court the If Remedies in the International Human Rights Law, Law, Rights Human the International in Remedies ensive Approach, Approach, ensive

h IACtHR The

, system is its reparation system which is more victim focused. victim more is which system reparation its is system Inter Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects - American Court of Human Rights’ Reparation Judgments: Strengths and Challenges for for Challenges and Strengths Judgments: Reparation Rights’ Human of Court American ein reparation addresses both the collective and individual interests for for interests individual and collective the both addresses reparation ein

e Inter he 49 Revista IIDH, 29, 42 29, Revista49 IIDH,

noe, rm h bgnig a ie n oe pwr o award to power open and wide a beginning, the from enjoyed, 131

- American human rights system has adopted a more more a adopted has system rights human American

(Adopted at the Inter the at (Adopted ned te ey itnt aue f h Inter the of nature distinct very the Indeed,

Art.

37 6 3(1)

t the injured party be ensured the enjoyment the ensured be party injured the t

7 cation of the judgment, and apology in in apology and judgment, the of cation

ion bepaid theinjured to party.

- American Specialized Conference on Human Human on Conference Specialized American

133

Art 63 (1) of (1) 63 Art - American 134

CEU eTD Collection 1976) March 23 force entryinto Gene by accession and ratification signature, for 139 138 2012 4, September 137 136 135 th Art reparatio on experience of source other The services ofthe the among violations others. survivors for the resurrect to project a implement to Settlement, Pacux in Negro Rio the for infrastructure and services basic of provision the Afterfin survivors”. the against directed violations subsequent the and members its of elimination “ against directed massacre of decision recent its in depictedwell is reparationstowards IACtHR the of approach comprehensive and oriented victim The victims. the of disappearance the of circumstances the of investigation i for responsible Honduras held Court of case contentious first its on judgment its to with commenced Convention the and in inscribed power remedial the with maneuver courts The compensation, to restitution, from recommendation and administrative of legal measures reparation appropriate of list thefromselect to enablesit that court the for powersrangeof wide gives provision Hencethe e competence of the Committee is too limited to come up with binding reparation reparation binding with up come to limited too is Committee the of competence e

Ibid, 9 Ibid, Veldsquez Mejia, Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Rights, Political and Civil on Covenant International the to Protocol Optional Inter

- of ICCPR of American Court of Human Rights, Rights, Human of Court American

Remedies in the International Human Rights Law, Law, Rights Human the International in Remedies ding the Guatemalan State responsible for human rights violations, the Court ordered Court theviolations, rightshuman for responsible State Guatemalan the ding - Rodriguez v. Honduras Case, (Merits) HondurasCase, v. Rodriguez a case involving the Guatemalan Army and Militia that conducted series of of series conducted that Militia and Army Guatemalan the involving case a (Preliminary objection, merits, reparations and costs), para. 2 para. costs), and merits, reparations objection, (Preliminary . Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects

The HRC receives complaints as per the Additional Protocol Additional the per as complaints receives HRC The

the Mayan community of Río Negro … the persecution and and persecution the … Negro Río of community Mayan the

Maya Achi Maya ts failure to fulfill positive obligation to conduct proper conduct to obligation positive fulfill to failure ts ae f h Ro er Msars . utml, Judgme Guatemala, V. Massacres Negro Río the of Case ral Assembly resolution 2200A (XXI) of 16 December 1966 1966 December 16 of (XXI) 2200A resolution Assembly ral ns for human rights is HRC HRC is rights human for ns (1988) Inter Am. Ct. H.R. (ser. (ser. Am. Ct.H.R. Inter (1988) reform aimedatreform ensuring non Veldsquez 38

culture, to provide medical and medical provide to culture, 8

- Rodriguez v. Honduras v. Rodriguez 138

Art. C) No. 4 para. 181 para. 4 No. C) established as per the the per as established

1, (Adopted and opened opened and (Adopted 1, - repetition

136 mental health mental . 139 ,

where the where

. However 135

t of nt 137

CEU eTD Collection 147 146 145 144 143 142 10 para. 223, p CCPR/C/OP/9, & (1982) 13 para. 141 individual” the 140 subsequently. compensation restitution of: consists reparation Responsibility, State on Articles of provisions the per As satisfaction.just integrum in specific, more responsibility. and conduct wrongful of acknowledgement investi on Depending 3.3 of the Committee’sviews compensation, of payment resti as such take, shall wrongdoing the measures the suggests mechanisms.

Ibid, Ibid, Ibid, Responsibility, State on Articles ILC, 11 para. Ibid, Republic of v Korea Choi and Yoon Montenegro and Serbia v Bodrožić Ibid, Ibid, Mirta Cubas Simones Simones Cubas Mirta

tution of fine, of tution Types of reparations of Types gation and prosecution of violations of human rights, restitution, compensation and and compensation restitution, rights, human of violations of prosecution and gation Art. Art. Art.

37 36 Article 5 (4) states that states (4) 5 Article -

140 (emphasis dded) (emphasis of the victims of human rights violations, restitution violations, rights human of victims the of

146 the discussion here discussion the the

The HRC has not limited itself to finding violations only since it it since only violations finding to itself limited not has HRC The on n Co v eulc f Korea of Republic v Choi and Yoon n satisfaction and Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects

142 context reparation may cover a wide range of remedies to violations from violations to remedies of range wide a cover may reparation context

guarantee of non of guarantee . Uruguay v.

144

, whenever appropriate.

“The Committee shall forward its forward shall Committee “The , , , para. 10 para. , CommunicationNo Communication 147 Art. is . limited to measures that enable the restitut the enable that measures to limited

hs section This 35 - repetition

No. R.17/70, U.N. Doc. Doc. U.N. R.17/70, No.

, Communications Nos. 1321/2004 and 1322/2004, 1322/2004, and 1321/2004 Nos. Communications , . 1180/2003, CCPR/C/OP/9, 15, para 9 para 15, CCPR/C/OP/9, 1180/2003, . 143

el with deals , and satisfaction through the publication the through satisfaction and ,

views ic te ou o ti thesis this of focus the Since

them to the State Party concerned and to and concerned Party State the to , proper , up N. 0 A3/0 174, (A/37/40) 40 No. Supp. in separate

compensation,

ion sub

restitutio - sections usually and 145 141 is ,

CEU eTD Collection 19 para Reparation, for Guidelines 151 150 149 B/25 ST/LEG/SER Series, 148 wider coverage thanensuring restitution whe reparation, and restitution p the from income lost the recompense to awarded compensation unless place first the at taken been not property the had hadhave thewould person income lost sufficecoverthe yearsnot to will ten if instance, For compensation. reparation of forms other by complemented be shall it occurred, not act wrongful the had existed have would that situation the restore to insufficient is itself by restitution since task. easy an not is which situation hypothetical a requires constructing one other the that arguing definition narrower the adopted has ILC The existed. (or existed have would what occurred. not violation the had existed have would that situation a of reconstruction the to refers restitution definition, wider the Under occurrence act” of the wrongful to victim the restoring means Responsibility. State on Articles on commentary place in difference first the at occurred violation the before had just they position restitution, of purpose main The 3.3.1

Ibid Ibid Ibid Ibid, the same approach with regard to the purpose of restitution is adopted in the UN Basic Principles and and Principles Basic UN the in adopted is restitution of purpose the to regard with approach same the Ibid, aeil o te epniiiy f tts o Itrainly rnfl A Wrongful Internationally for States of Responsibility the on Materials

Restitution roperty fo roperty

approach as to the definition of restitution, as noted wisely by the ILC in its its in ILC the by wisely noted as restitution, of definition the to as approach Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects

r the ten years. That years. ten the r , 225, para. 2 (New 2 2012) para. York, 225, ,

“

reby the former former the reby ol nt ae existed have not would a the 149 restitution in integrum, in restitution State .

status quo ante quo status

expropria .

is just another way of making distinction between distinction making of way another just is 150 40 is

This definition requires judges’ judges’ requires definition This tes a property illegally, the return of it after it of return the illegally, property a tes of a narrow a of 148 , i.e. ,

n h nroe sne f ettto, it restitution, of sense narrower the In ) the situation that existed prior to the the to prior existed that situation the

is had the human right violation not not violation right human the had

to place the victims to the original the to victims the place to

scope 151 cts

It can als can It , while the later has wide has later the while , , United Nations Legislative Legislative Nations United Ho .

o be argued that argued be o ee tee is there wever to const to ,

usuall ruct y

CEU eTD Collection 155 Jaenicke Günther amicorum Repara Make to Obligation The act” r 68 154 Law, http://www.zaoerv.de/68_2008/68_2008_1_a_128_154.pdf International 153 152 re restitution, with associated problem this considering Guidelines, and Principles Basic UN the of provision appropriate. wherever reparation of forms the over restitution of use the to primacy close its to Due it clock” the back turn to is violation rights human a since violations, rights human of case the in reparation of the free personItreturningillegally who the liberty, lost theproperty the taken. is setting by right lost the return to doer wrong the for possible is it circumstances of case the in available is restitution Hence, violation. the of consequences the undo to impossible is it disability, physical permanent or death disappearance, forced involving violations of right human most consequencesof Resti wrongdoer. of the purpose this to of proximate act wrongful the to due suffered victim the eradicate is to purpose In thewhole reparation eparations: to wipe out the consequences of the illegal act and to restore the situation as it was before that before was it as situation the restore to and act illegal the of consequences the out wipe to eparations: . 154

Factory at Chorzow, Merits, Chorzow, at Factory Materia Antoine Buyse, Buyse, Antoine See ibid, 133, 133, ibid, See referring to the to referring

violations that are related to deprivation of liberty, or loss of property. In those those In property. of loss or liberty, of deprivation to related are that violations ls on the Responsibility of Sates, Sates, of Responsibility the lson nexus Lost and Regained? Restitution as a Remedy for Human Rights Violations in the Context of of Context the in Violations Rights Human for Remedy a as Restitution Regained? and Lost te datg o rsiuin s ht t s ot n ofriy ih h gnrl ol of goal general the with conformity in most is it that is restitution of advantage “the

Material on the Responsibility of States, 238 and and 238 States, of Responsibility the on Material Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects quires

to the objective o objective the to

–

Zum 85. Geburtstag, 291 Geburtstag, Zum85. S 48 tates to reinstate the victims victims the reinstate to tates tions in Cases of Violations of Human Rights, Rights, Human of Violations of Cases in tions

reparation s violations is not usually possible. For instance in the case case the in Forinstance usually possible. not is violations s ZaöR, 129, 129 (2008). Available at at Available (2008). 129 129, ZaöR, 225, para. 3. para. 225, , f reparations, decisions of international tribunals give tribunals international of decisions reparations, f 152

but the scarcely available one since undoing the undoing since one available scarcely the but 41

- or minimise the harsh consequences and losses theconsequencesand harsh losses minimise or 311, 303 1999) (Berlin 303 311,

(Last accessed on 29, August 2013) August 29, on (Last accessed 153 and restitution is the closest thing to thing closest the is restitution and “to “to “ Felipe H. Paolillo H. Felipe the deepest desire of any victim ofvictim any of desire deepest the the original situation before the before situation original the

n Gt e a. es) Liber (eds.), al. et Götz in:

most pertinent form pertinent form most , On Unfulfilled Duties: Duties: Unfulfilled On , tution is the best best the is tution

155

The CEU eTD Collection 162 161 160 1974, August 159 158 157 156 obligation” contractual integrum in restitutio damages” of amount the establishi for vehicle a as merely employed been has integrum in restitutio of concept “the law. international public in principle recognized a not is I reparation. of mode a as restitution of role and primacy the about tribunals among divergence exists there However compensation. usually mechanisms,alternativeotherredress the of Partyuse makeState shall the that means of instead the that restitution mean not does from that But derive. deriving benefit the to compensation” proportion all of out burden restitution the that requires Responsibility, State on Articles Moreover, the to restore restitution make to duty a has act wrongful internationally the for responsibility bears Responsibility, State on Articles serious” or law rights human internationalof violations gross

Ibid, 36 Ibid, Texaco Ibid Art 35(b) Ibid, S on Articles ILC, 19 principle Guidelines, and Principles Basic UN BP

Exploration Co ( Co Exploration

Overseas Petroleum Company Petroleum Overseas

53 ILR,53 tts u ante quo status

. 158 tate Responsibility, Responsibility, tate Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects

297, 347 297, Accordingly, the cost or restitution shall not exceed the cost the victim canvictim the exceedcost the not shall restitution or cost Accordingly,the Libya of the property constitutes a constitutes property the of

n one case the Tribunal on on Tribunal the case one n ) Ltd ) 162 .

160

ne itrainl n Lba lw nes n other and unless law Libyan and international under v h Tiua i the in Tribunal The

Government of the of Government nes uh restitution such unless

Art.

lo uses also v . The Government of the the of Government The .

35(a) State

similar similar 42

Libyan

s bovd f i of absolved is BP Texaco “normal sanction for non for sanction “normal

language Arab Republic, Arab case argued that restitution as a remedy remedy a as restitution that argued case Lib i nt aeily impossible” materially not “is 159 C yan

ase More specifically, it argued that argued it specifically, More I sae ta te tt w State the that states It . 156

ArabRepublic , ts duty to reparation. It just just It reparation. to duty ts

161 whenever possible. The ILCThe wheneverpossible.

Award, 10 October 1973 and 1 and 1973 October 10 Award, oee, efimd that reaffirmed however, hl nt cause not shall ,

17 I.L.M. 17 - performance of of performance

1 ( 1 1978 wise hich hich . ) “ 157 ng

CEU eTD Collection 171 170 169 168 167 166 ECHR2009 165 164 163 compensation t pension rightto applicant’s the relatedto court domestic a of decision former a with comply to authorities local of failure 6 article Moldo v others and Ilascu date: to cases three to begun has ECtHR the hand, other the On obtain” - exempted is responsible State the which in circumstances be may there rule, the is restitution “ arguedthat Court the case former Inthe Responsibility.State on Articles the of 35 Art (VgT) Schweiz in restitution to priority the reaffirmed has Rights Human of impossible is ante quo status the of “restoration e itm to victim he ul o i part in or fully

Ibid, para. 30 para. Ibid, Herzegovina, and Bosnia v Karanovic Russia Moldova and v others and Ilascu Georgia v Assanidze Herzegovina, and Bosnia v Karanovic Schweiz (VgT) Tierfabriken Gegen Verein Schweiz (VgT) Tierfabriken Gegen Verein Ibid European Court of Human Rights, Rights, Human of Court European

. 166

. eeain f ona n Hreoia eso Fund Pension Herzegovina and Bosnia of Federation 171 v. -

In the last two cases, where the ECtHR determined that there is a violation a is there that determined ECtHR the where cases, two last the In provide obligation, this from Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects Switzerland

[GC], [GC], aaoi v ona n Herzegovina and Bosnia v Karanovic

no. 71503/01, ECHR 2004 71503/01, no. va and Russia and va

164

Guiso and para. 25 para. ECHR 2009 39462/03, no.

[GC], [GC], - v. v. Guiso Gallisay Gallisay Switzerland, Switzerland, 2) (No. Switzerland 169 .

170 no. no. .

order In the first case, the ECtHR found a violation of violation a found ECtHR the case, first the In The Court therefore, ordered the State to transferto State the therefore,ordered Court The Gallisay Gallisay 48787/99, ECHR 2004 48787/99, 43 v.

Italy ta i cn hw ht uh circumstances such that show can it that d

” .

163 restitution para. para. , (just satisfaction) [GC], no. 58858/ no. [GC], satisfaction) (just ,

In the same manner, the European CourtEuropean the manner, same the In v. 86 , [GC], no. 32772/02, para. 86, ECHR 2009 para. 86, 32772/02, no. [GC], , Italy

, , although it has occurred only in in only occurred has it although , 167 165

saiz v Georgia v Assanidze referring to referring Verein Gegen Tierfabriken Tierfabriken Gegen Verein

s el s amn of payment as well as

the provision of provision the 00, para. para. 00, , 168 while while

and 53, 53,

CEU eTD Collection 175 174 173 172 com be can For harm the abuse sexual inflicted. or torture involve harm that violations of case of the in instance type the on depending entails it costs medical and rehabilitation while compensation, of damage moral The has damage moral sa to pertaining Responsibility m Rather fin to reference them. of to goes it violations, one is damage moral and compensation the rights by addressed can which damages those itemizing human mass from arising damages assessable financially t stating After items. compensation of heads the about formulation different a have Reparation on Guidelines and Principles Basic The through restitution addressed be cannot that losses assessing of terms in important is compensation Moreover flexibili relative its to due restitution to compared widely most used is It one. common second is compensation While 3.3.2 ordered immediate releaseapplicants the ofthe pris from applicants the releasing in delay authorities’ the to due 5 article of

Ibid Ibid State on Materials 20(d) para. Guidelines and Principles Basic Georgia, v Assanidze

Compensation 173 oral damages are to be remedied as per the provision of the Articles on State State on Articles the of provision the per as remedied be to are damages oral

As per the commentary of the of commentary the per As ue i trs f h pyhlgcl n sca spot costs. support social and psychological the of terms in puted ancially assessable damages in A in damages assessable ancially Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects responsibility, 231, para. 1 para. 231, responsibility,

per se different dimens different §§ 176, 202&203; 176, §§ 202&203;

oa dmg t idvda big cn e sesd n em of terms in assessed be can beings individual to damage moral State .

cno b qatfe i trs f oe ad ujce to subjected and money of terms in quantified be cannot s

tisfaction. best ions for wrongful acts against S against acts wrongful for ions Ilascu and others v Moldova and Russia, and v others Moldova and Ilascu reparation mechanism reparation

175

ILC on the Articles on State Responsibility, the Responsibility, State on Articles the on ILC This difference can be attributed t attributed be can difference This 44 hat the compensation shall be awarded to any any to awarded be shall compensation the hat . 172

rt 36 excludes moral damages to States. to damages moral excludes 36 rt

n e x t to

restitution, tates and and tates

para.

463 holding no. 22 463 no. holding

human beings human

o the fact that fact the o on, the Court Court the on, it is the most the is it to A the victim victim the ad of ward 174 ty.

CEU eTD Collection 178 177 176 non address that satisfaction of pecuniary damages. measures are burial proper conducting and exhumed activities commemorating of declaration violations, rights t by violation human the for responsible individuals of prosecution illustrates Violations Rights Human Mass of Reparation on Principles Basic The victims. the satisfaction non for repair to restitution and compensation of limitation The victims. against causes act wrongful an is Satisfaction 3.3.3 “ are that damages to compensation of reach the limited has Responsibility State on Articles lo as since interms cannotbequantified the perfect isnot some harm it mechanism provision s a is Compensation the rehabilitating of whilesuch victim individual can gesture be derogatory ininter effect the have can minimal, though compensation, financially assessable”financially

Basic Principles and Guidelines, para. 22 para. Guidelines, and Principles Basic Ibid, Responsibility, State on Articles ILC,

ss of ss Art. Satisfaction - pecuniary damages is rectified by the use of satisfaction measures. In the case of of case the In measures. satisfaction of use the by rectified is damages pecuniary ,

that states that

search a number of of number a body 36(b) e rbnl aooy erecting apology, tribunal, a he

reparation is intended to alleviate moral, legal and security concerns of the of concerns security and legal moral, alleviate to intended is reparation parts ing

other form of repa of form other Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects h dy f h voain etbihet f ud, rt a truth funds, of establishment violation, the of day the

178

mass graves, exhumation of disappeared people, identification of bodies bodies of identification people, disappeared of exhumation graves, mass “

cnay eaain ehns nx t rsiuin s mle i the in implied as restitution to next mechanism reparation econdary or life, and moral damages. It is with this understanding that the ILC the that understanding this with is It damages. moral and life, or restitution” by good made not is damage such as insofar

measures satisfaction may satisfaction measures . 177

Art.

ration that aims that ration

36(a)

monuments, naming streets after the victims the after streets naming monuments,

encompass. Ordering the investigation the Ordering encompass.

at addressing non addressing at - State

situation. situation. - pecuniary harms the the harms pecuniary

d reconciliation nd of money, such

. , m 176

principle 22 principle rl of oral

However

and and an - ,

CEU eTD Collection 181 180 179 are mechanisms those However mechanisms. innovative devised have tribunals the victims, compensat to addition in violations, those nurtured that system the of reform require violation rights demons internation and regional the conclusion In not happenagain” do they that ensure to efforts the to commitment and question in violations rights human the o kin of next their consoling reputation, of effect the has reparation IACtHRreckonedthe in As kin. of next victims’ the or victim the are aimed Whethercollective orindividual, those measures they are better victims. the of conditions privileged also violation. rights human the by affected community the compensation a by awarded is rehabilitation mass the where circumstances violations. rights human by affected was that community the for scheme whe regard this in innovative group or community is IACtHR The compensation. individual specific to addition in relevant are compensation targeted collective that violations rights human mass of situations b reparation collective order may Courts

Ibid 84 para. Ibid, IACtHR, oiae by motivated

infrastructure, improved social service, and access landforinfrastructure,andaffected to social service, the improved community. trations of the progress made in terms of addressing the consequences of human human of consequences the addressing of terms in made progress the of trations villagran

or giving back the right violated right the back giving or

in different systems. Provided that mass and gross human rights violations violations rights human gross and mass that Provided systems. different in Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects - 181 Morales et al v Guatemala, Guatemala, v al et Morales icmtne wee h voain had violations the where circumstances

“recovering the memory of the victims, re victims, the of memory the “recovering

reby it ordered the responsible State to devise a rehabilitation rehabilitation a devise to State responsible the ordered it reby

The r transmitting a message of official condemnation of condemnation official of message a transmitting r sd n h ntr ad xet f h voain In violation. the of extent and nature the on ased Reparations and Costs and Reparations specific 46 l rbnl dsusd n hs C this in discussed tribunals al

per se, per means Collective

but rehabilitation but

collective compensation can compensation collective S

tate curd u t te unde the to due occurred

the rehabilitation measures rehabilitation

, at restoring the dignity of at dignity restoring of the

the aim is not monetary not is aim the Street Children Case Children Street - establishing the their the establishing 179 and satisfaction satisfaction and

Hence, in those in Hence, hapter are are hapter ing the ing

are are 180 be be of of r -

CEU eTD Collection 7 para. 208, Responsibility, State onin Materials quoted the to related the which from and arising States problems two the between 1986 July 9 on concluded agreements two of application 185 State”, 184 183 hand.at topic the not pertinentto they are since discussed not are others the while immunity state discussed chapter last the challenges, these Of (2003). 182 This is “any ormoral” damage, whether material that posited has Responsibility State on Articles reparation” make to obligation an involves engagement t law, of conception general a even and law, international of principle victim. the by sustained damage the of degree and act, v may reparation of form the though relevant, reparation makes act wrongful of presence very is Two absence self of hum development is It ofviolation thec is activism judicial whereby systems legal national in available usually not ary based on the type of the right violated, the extent of harm, the gravity of the wrongful wrongful the of gravity the harm, of extent the violated, right the of type the on based ary

P Emanuela “ ae concer Case Injury includes any damage, whether material or moral, caused by the internationally wrongful act of a of act wrongful internationally the by caused moral, or material whether damage, any includes Injury hosphates in Morocco, Merits Morocco, in hosphates

an rights violations still face still violations rights an motn t cnld te hpe wt sm fnl notes. final some with Chapter the conclude to important Articles on State Responsibility State Articles on

, the existence of material damage is not a a not is damage material of existence the , also - Chiara Gillard, Gillard, Chiara affirmed inthe s

ning the difference between New Zealand and France concerning the interpretation or or interpretation the concerning France and Zealand New between difference the ning within the two humanrights systems the within - executive international law. executive human rights onstitutional order of of power separation Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects

ano Warrior Rainbow Reparation for violations of International Humanitarian Law Humanitarian International of violations for Reparation Rainbow Warrior Rainbow , Judgment No. 13, 1928, P.C.I.J., Series A, No. 17 No. A, Series P.C.I.J., 1928, 13, No. Judgment

Art. serious challenges: peace agreements, peace challenges: serious

31(2) affair

. 184 URA, o. X (Sa XX vol. UNRIAA, , 185 47

case where the Parties agreed that: case where theParties agreed ‘ sine injury

and the HRC and the - quo As PCIJ has already stated stated already has PCIJ As ’ 182

s to include but not not but include to 183 - .

non

. ht s h at 12 o the of 31(2) art why is That condition for reparation. The The reparation. for condition

e N. /.3V3, 1 (1990), 110 E/F.93.V.3), No. les with regard to reparation for for toreparation with regard n i t nt ta the that note to is One , , 29 hat any breach of an an of breach any hat State

, 85 85 , to

im osdrd as considered IRRC, 529, 537, 529, IRRC, be limited to limited be munity, and and munity,

“ “ it is a a is it s e

CEU eTD Collection 186

Ibid, 266 Ibid, State ac those if even reparation, adequate receive to State victim the entitle State, a of prestige or dignity non against action Unlawful – 267, paras. 107&109, quoted in Materials on State Responsibility, 208, para. 7 para. 208, Responsibility, State onin Materials quoted 107&109, paras. 267, 186 .

Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects

ts have not resulted in a pecuniary or material loss for the Claimant the for loss material or pecuniary a in resulted not have ts

- aeil neet, uh s cs fetn te honor, the affecting acts as such interests, material 48

CEU eTD Collection d to that is programs reparation countries’ these from drawn be to lesson The are uniqueexperiences for chosen reparation.with regard tovictim their Germany countries The violations. rights human past repair to strategies their to as lesson a draw to as so place and history of span the r the at look to is chapter this in task The atrocities inthe future. non and victims the of rights human the ensuring initiatives justice of formula i there Though extent. greater to vary democracy to transition under situa sociological justice transitional their of part as adopt Sates 4.1 of suffering the ofpreviousvictims humanrights infli atrocities repairing on focuses justice Restorative of regimes. victims dictatorship of previous reparation on focuses that justice restorative is which among Transitional components violations. rights human mass of victims C This 4

emocracy had adopted different reparation measures that focused on victims despite the the despite victims on focused that measures reparation different adopted had emocracy National Introduction hapter is about exploring the experiences of countries with regard to reparation of of reparation to regard with countries of experiences the exploring about is hapter is a pioneer in the experience of victim reparation, while South Africa and Rwanda Rwanda and Africa South while reparation, victim of experience the in pioneer a is

rniinl utc ta wrs o all for works that justice transitional different Reparation E tions of the country in transition in country the of tions Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects are

approach

measured in terms of their contribution towards the promoting and and promoting the towards contribution their of terms in measured

in order to address the restorative justice needs of the victims victims the of needs justice restorative the address to order in the thesis the xperie policy nces estorative justice initiatives of differentof initiatives justice estorative

focus . Depending on the political history, funding and and funding history, political the on Depending .

49 es cte

on d byauthoritarian the regimes. State ,

the transitional justice scheme of scheme justice transitional the are - repetition of the similar human rights rights human similar the of repetition

, h aporaees f trans of appropriateness the s, Germany, South Africa and Rwanda. Rwanda. and Africa South Germany, utc acmoae different accommodates justice n one no s

State

s in transition in s State

- size s across s - fits itional itional State - all all s CEU eTD Collection Fordham 191 190 189 188 see atrocities, those of commission the during CAT or Convention, Genocide ICCR, the to parties state were Africa 187 wrong the only not shocked detail the and displaced were victims Jewish war the After in million Nuremburgthan six Jewry more Trials, were during p killed this held killed, been have millions Jewry subjected labor concentrationand tohard camps, the against Nazis the by 1945. waged in campaign WWII the of end the until continued ‘ (called holocaust The nationals. foreign of victims for also but nationals own its to limited th from different is reparation holocaust The 4.2 to addres and victims the of sufferings the amend to programs reparation judicial and/or administrative from differ measures the Though atrocities the of commission the of time the during laws rights human binding of absence shoah’

Ibid Ibid http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/history.html This is the case for the holocaust reparation and apartheid reparations reparations apartheid and reparation holocaust the for case the is This eahm . oesf a Rosensaft Z. Menachem

http://treaties.un.org/Pages/Trea

Holocaust Reparation:Holocaust Germany of

Int'l n erw hd omne a te ie f h cmn t pwr f h Hitler the of power to coming the of time the at commenced had Hebrew) in s past human rights atrocities. s pasthumanrights s h arcte te uebr Tet ws ind ewe Gray n Ire in Israel and Germany between signed was Treaty Luxemburg the atrocities the

f ilrs fnl ouin o h Jw question’ Jews the to solution ‘final Hitler’s of L.J. 1, 1 (2001). 1 1, L.J. Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects foreigners

d on D Rosensaft, D. Joana nd ties.aspx?id=4&subid=A&lang=en

but also the Germans themselves. In order In themselves. Germans the also but one State one

to 50

h Ery itr o German of History Early The ohr countries other e another

189 b e 188

c Based on numbers that emerged from theBased thatemerged from onnumbers a m

, experiences show that show experiences , In the unprecedented unprecedented the In e

refugees in across Europe. across in refugees

(last accessed on 12 October 2013) October 12 on accessed (last

were were where neither Germany nor South South nor Germany neither where

ic te viola the since revealed to the world, it it world, the to revealed eriod. - eih Reparations Jewish

to address moral moral address to 190 St extermination

tion was not not was tion

ates 191

devised devised

When

, 25 25 , 187 . CEU eTD Collection 196 Nazi the of Victims 195 May Online, Scholarship Poi 194 ofgivenIsrael the State to moreworth$25,000,000 than property 193 1953 27, March on intoforce 192 Supplementary Federal the as 1953 in passed was law Federal first The holocaust. of victims Federal the Treaty Luxemburg of the Republic of part second the of requirement the to According rehabilitation needsoftheNazi Party ofvictims determinedConference as by theClaims Israe to million DM450 making of payment and about was scheme second The Germany. compensation within victims individual for restitution of payment direct about was scheme first The schemes. two to damages the for 1953, from commencing years 12 of period a over Israel, of State the to payable is which $3billion of treaty The of of proofs,appropriation necessary and loss of case in burden evidential less with discrimination, without propertyof restitution with Zones. property ‘ayranized’ of restitution 1952.

Rosensaft & Rosensaft, Rosensaft, & Rosensaft The Property worth o worth Property Ariel Colonomos & Andrea Armstrong, Armstrong, Andrea & Colonomos Ariel nt in the History of Reparations of History the in nt Ibid, 393 citing Christian Pross, Pross, Christian citing 393 Ibid, 192

Reparations Agreement between Israel and West Germany, signed on September 10, 1952, and entered entered and 1952, 10, September on signed Germany, West and Israel between Agreement Reparations 194

oee te ray ok nprto fo te as f h ale pwr 14 for 1947 powers allied the of laws the from inspiration took treaty the However

In addition, Germany had Germany Inaddition, outlined

emn ( Germany Terror, Terror, f $250,000,000 was reclaimed from the American Zone alone, while proceeds of heirless heirless of proceeds while alone, Zone American the from reclaimed was $250,000,000 f Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects

two categories of reparations. The first category deals with compensation with deals category first The reparations. of categories two - 06) German 20,

l to transfer to the Claims Conference to cover the resettlement, and and resettlement, the cover to Conference Claims the to transfer to l

FRG

(Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Johns MD: (Baltimore, - eatd eis f as ie a aimed laws of series enacted )

, Pablo de Greiff de Pablo , Jewish Reparations, Jewish

Paying for the Past: The Struggle Over Reparations for the Surviving Surviving the for Reparations Over Struggle The Past: the for Paying Jews resettled in Israel. The second reparation category had had category reparation second The Israel. in resettled Jews 193

promised to the allied powers to adopt laws that facilitatethat laws adopt to powers allied the to promised , and the 1949 law on compens on law 1949 the and , emn eaain t te es fe Wrd a II War World after Jews the to Reparations German

funds to satisfy ofrestitution.funds to claims

(ed.), (ed.), 51

The Handbook of Reparations of Handbook The

University Press, 1998) Press, University

fclttn rprto for reparation facilitating t ation in the US Occupied US the in ation

, 390, 392 (Oxford (Oxford 392 390, , 195

; A Turning Turning A . 196

CEU eTD Collection 208 207 206 205 204 203 202 201 200 199 198 197 law. new the per as cases adjudicated previously the enabled and atrocities Nazi with death and harm establishing for proof of burden the easedthat 1965 in time second increased ofdamages heads for some vict of group more law this per As 1956. in law new a with up came FRG the shortcomings these rectify orderto criticized. also were procedure indemnification the of procedure unfriendly victim and in ended period filing the since bloc Soviet former However the refugees from compensationlife fororpension lossof insurance. taxes, discriminatory health, for compensation persons” stateless of community Jewish the of compensation the Persecution Socialist Nationalof Victims of Compensation the forLaw

Ibid Ibid 405 Ibid 405 403, Ibid, Ibid Ibid 405 Ibid Ibid 404 Ibid Ibid Ibid 403 Ibid,

Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects . ims were made eligible for reparations and the amount of compensation is compensation of amount the and reparations for eligible made were ims 198

202 h has f aae fr eaain ee opnain o life, for compensation were reparation for damages of heads The

200 opnain o cre o eooi advancement, economic or career for compensation

compensation for freedom, for compensation

1966. . 207 205

Germany modified law theFederal for reparation the

Moreover the complicated bureaucratic procedure bureaucratic complicated the Moreover 52

were not able to benefit from this arrangement this from benefit able to not were

204 “former German citizens, refugees and and refugees citizens, German “former

201

compensation for property, assets, property, for compensation 197

which provided for provided which

208

Moreover the Moreover 203

206 and

199 In

CEU eTD Collection 215 214 213 212 211 210 209 then the As Germany. of State the Germa of Chancellor of part the on wrongdoing the of character moral the of emblematic is it Moreover suffered. they grief and violence the of consequences harsh horrendous the rectify won’t it reparations. of history the in scheme reparation biggest the of one is bureaucraticprocessit cold schemeand inclusive under the forfacedreparation shortcomings compe German the per as compensation individual to goes billion $37.5 which of out reparations in billion $61.5 paid had Germany general In of DM5,000. lump a survivor holocaust each paid Germany arrangement this per As fil to deadline 1965 countries the meet to Bloc failed they since Communist reparation get to the managed from refugees that 1980 in Fund’ ‘Hardship of creation confinement. victims’ of condition like’ ‘jail the for compensation ther though law the in recognized not was labor forced for slave for Compensation antisocial, the laborers, forced officials, native their in remained who victims as such groups laws for compensation 10,000. of DM ceiling to education the raised Law, Final Compensation Federal the law, new

Ibid Ibid 409 Ibid, 408 Ibid, Ibid th Ibid, 406 Ibid,

e term antisocial refers to commercial sex workers, beggars and vagabonds and workers,beggars sex commercial to termrefers e antisocial

Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects ny spoke to the parliament the to spoke ny

209

oee te e lw ald o opnae lk te previo the like compensate, to failed law new the However

xeine f h vcis t otiue i aeirtn the ameliorating in contributes it victims the of experience 210 53

omnss gpis n communists. and gypsies communists, “…unspeakable crimes were committed in committed were crimes “…unspeakable sto laws. nsation State s though persecuted by Nazi by persecuted though s 214 215

212 huh h Holocaust the Though -

The reparation thoughreparation The sum

t s ny fe the after only is It

onetime e application. e

payment payment e was was e 213 211 us

CEU eTD Collection 219 218 217 216 days 156 as long as emergency of state declare Act Safety Public The government. white the of repression the 1953 In one from Moving Africa. South the homeland toanother passes requires and notobserving entails serious it punishments. not but homelands these to belong people black apportions every that law Bantu a with up came government the 1951 In system. apartheid the of continuity of series enacted government dominated white The becomesdefines everything that category. one in Asians and mixed the puts that racially white or black neither who is isaperson black colored.Colored or showshis/herwhite, identification race, that card requires was law a 1950 In jobs. only white created or race per as jobs of accessibility inter TheyAfricansanctioned citizens. South of economiclife Those 1948. in laws Apartheid of adoptio the from commencing decades for went Africa South in situation rights human The 4.3 as import is which responsibility holocaust the of recognition are Germany of endeavors reparation the reparations” material and moral of duty a create which people, German the of name the

South A South Africa, South Africa, South 394 Ibid,

Apartheid Reparation: South Africa ApartheidSouth Reparation:

ant as the restitution andant compensation astherestitution schemes implemented. frica, ail rfln te population the profiling racial

white National Party government adopted two laws that tightened the grip of of grip the tightened that laws two adopted government Party National white Public Safety Act, 1953 Act, Safety Public of1951 68 No Act Act, Authorities Bantu ActNo Registration Population

black people people black Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects

once residence, education, social status and professionaleducation, social residence,once status and life. one four astheir homelands ofthe per ancestry.

as ae ae o eemn te social the determine to race made laws .

30 of1950 30 ,

hrb ev whereby

so that so

blacks can blacks ery citizen is required to carry an an carry to required is citizen ery other other 219 -

laws purported to ensure the the ensure to purported laws empowered the government to government the empowered racial marriage and limited the limited andmarriage racial

be detained for six months six for detained be

, political and and political , 217 218 adopted that that adopted

Hence race Hence

Hence the

, 216 n

CEU eTD Collection tha rather compromise political a of more is perpetrators the to amnesty give and Reconciliation and Truth the establish to decision 223 http://www.justice.gov.za/legislation/acts/1995 222 221 Commission, Reconciliation and Truth 220 victims them gives it as perpetrators the for advantageous is It victims. and perpetrators for opportunity an staged it that is TRC the of nature notable One operated. partie the and compromise and Unity National of Act. Promotion Reconciliation by sanctioned (TRC) Commission Reconciliation elected democratically waythe pave to deal the of part As ANC. the and party ruling the between When tortu disappearanceand rape. murder, as such place took violations rights human gross whereby repression, and violence to resort to had government the discrimination racial Mandela. Nelson leader, the of imprisonment the in resulted that National African the by led Africa South in ensued uprisings and resistance persons ausuallyconditions. without court and warrant ininhuman

Ibid Simcock, Simcock, Julian Simcock, Simcock, Julian ot Arc, rmto o Nationa of Promotion Africa, South

decades

could had died due to the horrible conditions of their incarceration. Hence series of of series Hence incarceration. their of conditions horrible the to due died had 223 Unfinished Business: Business: Unfinished

find out the truth with regard to the violation that happened to them or their their or them to happened that violation the to regard with truth the out find

f prhi ea ae o n n i 1990s in end an to came era apartheid of Unfinished Business: Reconciling the Apartheid Reparation Litigation with South Africa’s Africa’s South with Litigation Reparation Apartheid the Reconciling Business: Unfinished Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects n a reflection of popular will. ofpopular nreflection a 222

The whole process of enacting this Act needed needed Act this enacting of process whole The government 221

' epcie arfcs hpd h cnet n hc te TRC the which in context the shaped sacrifices respective s' Reconciling Reparation Litigation, Litigation, Reparation Reconciling

47 Stan. J. Int'l L. 239, 243, (2011) 243, Int'l L.239, Stan. J. 47

Uiy n Rcniito At 4 1 Jl 19, vial at available 1995, July 19 34, Act Reconciliation and Unity l and end apartheid, they agreed to establish a Truth and and Truth a establish to agreed they apartheid, end and - 034.pdf

(Last accessed on 30 October, 2013) October, 30 on (Last accessed

amnesty by telling the truth the telling by amnesty 239. Moreover the writer claims that the the that claims writer the Moreover 239. Moreover, m ,

re, inhuman treatment, forced forced treatment, inhuman re,

the transition was negotiated negotiated was transition the 220

To sustain this policy of policy this sustain To ost ost gnie political “genuine to

of the imprisoned of the imprisoned Congress (ANC) (ANC) Congress

cede power cede , whil , e the the e

to a to CEU eTD Collection 228 227 226 225 2013) http://www.constitutionalcourt.org.za/site/constitution/english 224 that has apowertorecommend int authority lacks Commission reparations.” for opportunity the and truth of degree a provided were victims was Commission process. judicial through reparation civil pursuing from victims the preclude not does document original the in reparation on provision of absence the Moreover TRC. d main the of part not was victims of reparation the truth the of excavation and reconciliation to committed was commission the As victims. the of claims civil the address to intended never was TRC the reparation, economic to regard With need for a retaliation, not but reparation for need a vengeance, for not but understanding for need a program. transition the in telling truth and reconciliation criminal of role the downplay to factor contributing ubuntu deepen judicial punitive and retributive to resorting without African South the among reconciliation facilitate to purported was TRC the Hence members. family close

South Africa, Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act 34, 34, Act Reconciliation Unityand ofNational Promotion Africa, South Ibid Ibid Ibid osiuin o Constitution

which is also included in the epilogue of the Interim Constitution South Africa is a is Africa South Constitution Interim the of epilogue the in included also is which h cevg aog h aray oaie community. polarized already the among cleavage the ubuntu but not fo but not f The Republic of South Africa, Act 200 of 1993, 1993, of 200 Act Africa, South of Republic The f Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects a pathway “a

r victimization” ,

it is composed of a Committee on Reparation and Rehabilitation and Reparationon Committee a of composed is it

by erim reparation for victims. hc t ach to which . 225

ee ogvns wie lo nuig that ensuring also while forgiveness ieve - web/interim/ investigation and prosecution in lieu of of lieu in prosecution and investigation 224 eal in the process of negotiating the the negotiating of process the in eal

The epilogue states that states epilogue The Art. 228

Ls acse o accessed (Last

25 (1995) 25 h Arcn ocpin of conception African The

p rocess that may further may that rocess Epilogue

227 n 25 November, November, 25 n 226 ;

Though the Though Available at at Available ahr the Rather “there is “there CEU eTD Collection 235 at available 234 Victims), to gg25695_nn1660.pdf Reparation Regarding 233 33 Daly, Erin also See TRC. the of work the about reservations’ 232 231 http://www.info.gov.za/otherdocs/2003/trc/5_7.pdf 230 south 229 the government R haspaid person. per 000 R30, kin, of next their and victims to payment reparation time one of payment the for provided had government withreparations.TRC per of2003 theRegulationsReparation toVictims As Regarding violations. rights human Apartheid the of victims the to State the of name the in apologized and Commissions the of recommendations and findings the adopted fully has government African South The wealth ondomestic businesses tax time one of imposition and fund, trust reparation a of establishment years, six for annually Societies. by implemented be to measures reparations specific regarding State the to recommendations made has TRC the Act the of provisions the per As hearings.public in happened them of 2000 which among witnesses 21,000 heard TRC The

S Ibid 726 Ibid, South Africa, Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act, 1995 (Act No. 34 Of 1995): Of 34 No. (Act 1995 Act, Reconciliation and Unity National of Promotion Africa, South (2003) 384, Mem.L. U. Rev., 367, SP Tuh omsin Suh fia aalbe at available Africa, South Commission: Truth USIP, IS Tuh omsin ot Arc; oee, hb Mei xrse ta te AN the that expressed Mbeki Thabo However, Africa; South Commission Truth UIPS, rt ad eoclain omsin f ot Arc Rpr, 2, Mrh 03, vial at Available 2003), (March 726, Report, Africa South of Commission Reconciliation and Truth imcock, - africa Art. 230

, (Last accessed on Oct 15, 2013) 15, Oct on accessed (Last , - 3 27, 27, Unfinished Business: Reconciling Reparation Litigation, Litigation, Reparation Reconciling Business: Unfinished

Among these is the payment of between R between of payment the is these Among Simcock, 232 , (Last accessed on 10 October, 2013) October, 10 on (Last , accessed Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects

The Unfinished Business: Reconciling Reparation Litigation, Litigation, Reparation Reconciling Business: Unfinished

State 510

has also taken measures to provide victims who victims provide to measures taken also has million for 16,837 million victims.

231

234

According to this com this to According

(Last accessed on 12 November, 2013) November, 12 on (Last accessed 57

http://www.usip.org/publications/truth

Reparations in South Africa: a Cautionary Tale Cautionary a Africa: South in Reparations the State in collaboration with the Civil the with collaboration in State the http://www.justice.gov.za/Trc/legal/20031112 17, 235 247

029 and R23,230 and 029

pensation scheme, as of 2007, of scheme,as pensation 247

for the victims the for testified to the to testified C has ‘serious ‘serious has C - commission

Regulations Regulations 233

the 229 - - ,

CEU eTD Collection 239 238 237 236 whole the in culpability of degree their Though Africa. South in apartheid the to due labor of cost low from benefitted that businesses among accountability of lack the is observed contention was that problem other The years. consecutive six family their and victims for compensation of i payment the do nor partial and implemented been not had the is mechanism reparation ForTRC. recommendations instance once the ofthe African South the with yet. materialize didn’t that victims the to reparation proper with hand in hand supposedtowork was theamnestynoted, As Daly morethe feeling ofacute. injustice perpetrthe of hands the in theysuffered atrocities the of result a aspoverty in toil still they that fact the pocket, their in money put not will perpetrators the of punishment the ge to able not were victims their and amnesty get to able were perpetrators most since injustice glaring a is This stigmatization.” social … and deprivations; …educational conditions; labor …oppressive suffered has overcrow population and arid to black removals “forced the of Millions Act. the of meaning the within ‘gross’ of definition the within fall wouldn’t violations rightswhose victims those out left it Henceacts. command instigation, incitement, conspiracy, attempt, ill severe or torture abduction, killing, “the as defined are which officials apartheid the of violations rights human gross into look shall TRC the that Act TRC the in defined as violations rights human serious of victims only addressed it since criticisms serious faced has process transition the these all Despite

Ibi ErinDaly, Art Act, 1& Reconciliation Unityand ofNational Promotion Africa, South Ibid d, d, 379

- 80 Reparations in South Africa: a Cautionary Tale Cautionary a Africa: South in Reparations

Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects t the requisite reparation as per the recommendations of the TRC. Though TRC. the of recommendations the per as reparation requisite the t

ded land; the…legal restrictions from birth to death; death; to birth from restrictions the…legal land; ded 58

, 33 ,33 - off wealth tax recommended wealthby tax theTRCoff U. Mem. L. Rev., 367, 373, (2003) 373, Mem. U. Rev.,367, L. r rcrmn t commit” to procurement or - ramn o ay esn o a or person; any of treatment

236 239

. T . s tl a atr of matter a still is

peetto of mplementation The other problem other The

he Act provides Act he ators makes makes ators

237

those 238 ny ny

CEU eTD Collection Huyse 243 358 357, Gender, Lawand Weitz, 242 ICTR, 241 240 ICTY, the in genocide the of perpetrators has the of prosecution community and investigation international the ensured the with cooperation in Government Rwandan the Hence African South experie the replicate to donors foreign of insistence the despite tolerated be more no will impunity of culture the that clear it made government incumbent the country, the the of end Afterthe differences,geo and landovercrowding, ethnic of manipulation colonial as such groups ethnic Hutu and Tutsi the between animosity the of causes the ascribe writers Many State. populating groups ethnic major two the between conflict long centuries’ 1,000,000. and 800,000 between numbers the put usually causal of number exact the if Even 4.4 salarypopulation, low forced of scale workersand black labor. black of mobility low the to due benefit of margin their increasing of terms in beneficiaries investiga future of matter a is apartheid of policy

Simcock, Catharine Newbury, Newbury, Catharine Megan M. Westberg, Westberg, M. Megan Peter Uvin, Uvin, Peter

59 Kan. L. Rev. 331, 331 (2011) 331 331, L. Kan. Rev. 59 (Eds.) Reconciliation after Violent Conflict, (IDEA, Handbook Series) Handbook (IDEA, Conflict, Violent after Reconciliation (Eds.) GenocideRwanda Reparation: Rwandan Genocide: Taking Notes from the Holocaust Reparations Movement, Movement, Reparations Holocaust the from Notes Taking Genocide: Rwandan nceand reconciliationRwanda. oftruthin Unfinished Business: Reconciling Reparation Litigation, Litigation, Reparation Reconciling Business: Unfinished The The Gacaca Gacaca Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects Background to Ge to Background Genocide when the Rwandese Patriotic Front (RPF) army took control of of control took army (RPF) Front Patriotic Rwandese the when Genocide Rwanda's Use of Transitional Justice After Genocide: The Gacaca Courts and the the and Courts Gacaca The Genocide: After Justice Transitional of Use Rwanda's - 59, (2009) 59,

rbnl i Rad, (case Rwanda, in Tribunals

Rwandan Genocide to multiple of factors in addition to the ethnic ethnic the to addition in factors of multiple to Genocide Rwandan

nocide: Rwanda nocide: ities in Rwandan 1993 Genocide is not known reports reports known not is Genocide 1993 Rwandan in ities

- political location of theCountry.political 59

, 23 Issue: A Journal of Opinion, 12, 16 (1995); Yael (1995); 16 12, Opinion, of Journal A Issue: 23 , 243 study)

in Suh fia Cmais were Companies African South tion, , David Bloomfield &Teresa Barnes and Luc Luc and Barnes &Teresa Bloomfield David 250 241

The 1994 is the culmination of culmination the is 1994 The 240

116, 116 (2003) 116 116, 242 15 Cardozo Journal of Journal Cardozo 15

CEU eTD Collection 250 249 Special (OG. NA by 69/2008 Law No repealed 248 Annex,Art 1 (1994), S/Res/955 Doc. U.N. mtg, 247 246 52 2008, reports/Extradition_Report_Final_Version_Sept_08.pdf September Challenges, 245 2013) November 20 on accessed 244 commemorate the Ge whole a as nation the and survivors the whereby country the throughout Genocide the of victims for memorials and monuments built has government the measures justice restorative of compensation cover not does FARG. the finance to budget annual its of 6% avails Rwanda of government The services. housing and health, education, of provision Génocide’, du established has government Rwandan The tocriminalthe jurisdictionof limited theCourtis prosecution only. genocide. of crimes States foreign of courts ICTR the in entertained are cases criminal domestic ordinary and courts

See See See It is established is It See Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, SC res. 955, UN SCOR 49th sess., 3453rd 3453rd sess., 49th SCOR UN 955, res. SC Rwanda, for Tribunal Criminal International the of Statute See e Wbie f h Tiua at Tribunal the of Website See fia Rgt & ERS, xrdtn Gncd Sset fo Erp t Rwanda to Europe from Suspects Genocide Extraditing REDRESS, & Rights African http://genocidememorials.cga.harvard.edu/data.html http://www.farg.gov.rw/index.php?id=28 http://www.gov.rw/justice by the Governmen theby (FARG). Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects 246 nocide.

How . 245 248

Moreover as of November 2013, 100,000 suspects are charged for charged are suspects 100,000 2013, November of as Moreover

- ever reparation for the victims is non is victims the for reparation ever reconciliation 250 h FARG The ‘gacaca’

t of Rwanda to support to Rwanda of t

htt general of terms In Genocide. the of victims the to damages - p://www.unictr.org/Cases/StatusofCases/tabid/204/Default.aspx 0 Aalbe at Available 60;

of 15/04/2009). of15/04/2009).

ustice on the grass) courts. As of November 2013, 75 Novembercourts. grass)2013,75 ustice Asof onthe uprs h ney uvvr o te eoie in genocide the of survivors needy the supports 249 ‘Fonds National pour l’Assistance aux Rescapés Rescapés aux l’Assistance pour National ‘Fonds , 244 60

(Last Accessed on 27 November, 2013) November, 27 on Accessed (Last However this fund for assistance of survivors of assistance for fund this However

n diin o hs poeue i domestic in prosecuted those to addition in

genocide survivors by Law No 02/98 of 02/98 No Law by survivors genocide

http://www.redress.org/downloads/country - existent in the ICTR since ICTR the in existent 247

Issues and and Issues

which was was which

(L ast ast - CEU eTD Collection 255 africa/rwanda/International%20Criminal%20Tribunal%20for%20Rwanda%20Justice%20Delayed.pdf http://www.crisisgroup.org/~/media/Files/africa/central 254 253 13 2013) para Tutsi, http://www.redress.org/downloads/country against Genocide 252 spec the before that states 3 08/96 No. Law Organic 1990, 1, October Since Committed 251 ability the 2000 in fund. government of unavailability or perpetrators, the of indigence the to due government the nor perpetrators c the of awards reparation the However damage. moral and losses material for million $100 to close awarded Courts the perpetrators 4000 decisions. earliest their in generous were they f though judgments was Courts Specialized the of decisions the in compensation liable. jointly as the State against the awards and compensation perpetrators get to managed them of half and courts domestic the two in almost compensation ofLaw Rwanda. Organic per 2000as perpetrators 1996to since ‘ as participate to able were Victims

Ibid, para 16 para Ibid, 13 para Ibid, Organisation of Prosecutions for Offences Constituting the Crime of Genocide or Crimes Against Humanity Humanity Against Crimes or Genocide of Crime the Constituting Offences for Prosecutions of Organisation ers, ih t Rprto fr uvvr: Recommendati Survivors: for Reparation to Right Redress, bd ctn Itrainl rss ru, fia eot o 0 7 ue 01 p3, at p.33, 2001, June 7 30, No Report Africa Group, Crisis International citing Ibid,

254 “the ordinary rules governing denunciations, complaints and civil actions are applicable to cases cases to applicable are actions civil and complaints denunciations, governing rules ordinary “the

ializ

ed chambers” ed 255 Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects of claimants to claim compensation from the State is hindered since the the since hindered is State the from compensation claim to claimants of

Moreover after the adoption of a law that established the the established that law a of adoption the after Moreover

– thirds of the cases relating to the genoc the to relating cases the of thirds

- rep - 5 ( 15 orts/121031right_to_rep.pdf party civile’ civile’ party ut wr al t b efre nihr gis the against neither enforced be to able were ourts discussion paper, paper, discussion 61 - 252

oee te oaiy o assmn of assessment for modality the However of 30 August 1996, Article 29 (1), (2), (3), ANNEX ANNEX (3), (2), (1), 29 Article 1996, August 30 of ons for Reparations for Survivors of the 1994 1994 the of Survivors for Reparations for ons in the criminal proceedings against against proceedings criminal the in

October 2012) Available at at Available 2012) October (Last accessed on 22 November, November, 22 on accessed (Last 251 253

Hence the victims filedforvictims Hence the

ar from clear from their their from clear from ar For instance, after trial of trial after instance, For ide perpetrators seen in in seen perpetrators ide

gacaca .

courts CEU eTD Collection civi of feedback thefor circulated 259 16 No Law Organic 1994, 31, December and 1990 1, October between committed humanity, against crimes other and genocide of crime the of perpetrators the trying and prosecuting with charged courts gacaca of functioning 258 257 No Law Art 91 40/2000, Organic 1994, 31, December and 1990 1, October between committed humanity against crimes or 256 yetnot the despite collected judgments. reparation having court the established that Law Organic to expected is Fund modal the and Genocide of Victims the to Fund Compensation the of decisions the damages. moral for not but losses bodily the before pending cases t of judgments previous of enforcement the affects it retroactively, applicable inadmissible. as State the against claims civil that declared law he State for compensation of victims. With regard to claims for compensation in criminal in compensation for claims to regard With victims. of compensation for State he

/2004, Art 75, Annex 5) it is provided that other forms of reparation of victims will be dealt in specific laws. inspecific dealt will be ofvictims reparation of forms that other Annex it isprovided Art 5) 75, /2004, Ibid, Art 90 Ibid, Setting up Gacaca Ju Gacaca up Setting Redress, Right to Reparation for Survivors, para 28 (There was a draft law for the Compensation Fund that that Fund Compensation the for law draft a was (There 28 para Survivors, for Reparation to Right Redress, Ibid, Art 90, Annex 4. 4. Annex 90, Art Ibid, ities for granting compensation forgranting ities

Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects risdictions and organising prosecutions for offences constituting the crime of genocide genocide of crime the constituting offences for prosecutions organising and risdictions

gacaca gacaca n nte l another In gacaca l societies but that has not yet been adopted) adopted) yet been has not but that l societies

n aeil n bdl lse sal e owre t the to forwarded be shall losses bodily and material on gacaca gacaca w dpe i 20 (Establ 2004 in adopted aw Courts, ” . 258 257 courts has not yet materialized and the victims have have victims the and materialized yet not has courts

the claimants can file civil cases for material and and material for cases civil file can claimants the However the Compensation FundHowever spec

Moreover according to the provisi the to according Moreover 62

ishing the organization, competence and and competence organization, the ishing 259

256

ic te rvso is provision the Since

C on of this law, this of on ourts against ourts ulated in theulated in “ i the fix

CEU eTD Collection (ed.) 260 forum the victim the gives proceeding judicial a Moreover suffered. they harms and losses the to equivalent less or more compensation get to victims the enables it is approach with victims the oppor provides approach judicial The remedy. judicial is approach other The of amount the is approach this compensation may notbesufficient they loss compared tothe suffered. of disadvantage The helps community. and the victims the with of reintegrate moral the redresses it victims the to done harms the the of gesture symbolic as Moreover service. legal competent engage victims especially requirementsThisis are whereproceduralapplied. evidential the advantageous and stringent where alternative judicial as stringent as not are retribution the get to requirements pr it that is approach this body. administrative the of decision the with dissatisfied if law of court a i victims. the to amount sum the of organs property of restitution involve also may It outlets. administrative servic rehabilitation and compensation of provision involves them of mix a or mechanism, judicial or administrative Reparation reparation. through atrocities past different of experiences in evidenced As Conclusion m

p Jaime E. Malamud E. Jaime l The Handbook of Reparations, Theof Handbook e m tunity to claim reparation for the damages they sustained. The good side of this this of side good The sustained. they damages the for reparation claim to tunity e have difficulty proving their cases due to loss of evidences and economic difficulty to difficultyto economic evidencesandof loss to due cases their difficultyhaveproving n t a t i o

n State

reparation Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects ‐

whenever possible. Usually this mechanism involves payment of lump of payment involves mechanism this Usually possible. whenever Goti and Lucas Sebastián Grosman, Grosman, Sebastián Lucas and Goti

though in the case of Germany though case of inthe

The experience of Germany of experience The

ovides victims with more accessible reparation since the the since reparation accessible more with victims ovides

540, 541 (2006) 541 540, State

63 s, transition to democra to transition s,

o itm i usually is victims to Reparations and Civil Litigation, Litigation, Civil and Reparations

and South Africa South and

. claimant 260

h amnsrtv mechanism administrative The s o h vcis through victims the to es s

e through administrative administrative through r addressing dictates cy i e

m State

entitled to appeal to toappealentitled to p

f l

The advantage of of advantage The e i t m

s that recognizes recognizes that

e administrative n Pablo de Greiff de Pablo t e d

to speak speak to hm to them through - CEU eTD Collection 262 261 past the of violations rights human the remedy to responsibility Ethiopian the that is thesis this of out comes that conclusion other The sustained due and tothe andintegration crimes facilitatestheir reconciliation tothe society. t on impact economic only has which liability civil for indefinite remain shall it reason, stronger I liability. civil tha clear is It crimes. those from arise that liabilities civil to goes same the limitation, of period by limited be cannot crimes those of perpetrators the of liability criminal the that provides constitution the if that argue to crim war and humanity against crimes genocide, to relating crimes courts. national limitation of the period be not shall in there the provides 1994 of claims Constitution FDRE the civil However bring to limitation of period the to due enforced be b Code Civil the in recognized is redress civil to crimes of victims the of rights The though some prospectsthere are tobemaximized. E H though CompensationFu theproposed than them. reconciling rather defendant the and claimant the embattles proceedings judicial of nature very ca the be not may which organs judicial in case their prove to success their to subject is this before said as However approaches. administrative in case the not is which perpetrators the with face to face and public in sufferings of story their t o

h FDRE Constitution, Art 28 FDREConstitution, 544 Ibid, w i he perpetrators or the the or perpetrators he o e p v i e a r .

H t h e e n r e c

e f the period of limitation is indefinite for criminal prosecution, then, for the for then, prosecution, criminal for indefinite is limitation of period the f i

s c 261

Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects hallenges of enforcing reparation for victims of the Derg crimes abound abound crimes Derg the of victims for reparation enforcing of hallenges n

e The Rwandan experience to victim reparation falls within this approach, this within falls reparation victim to experience Rwandan The i t h

e r

a State d m

i n , which benefits the victim by redressing the damages they they damages the redressing by victim the benefits which , i s ciia laiiy a mr srnos consequenc strenuous more has liability criminal t t r a t i nd law inserts annd lawadministrative toit. inserts element v e

n o r

64 j u

d i c

i a se always. The other disadvantage is the the is disadvantage other The always. se l

m e c h a n i s

m regime to the extent that the that extent the to regime

t es o

262 c

l State has international international has State a . Hence it is possible is it Hence . i m

c o m p e n

ut cannot cannot ut s a s than es t i o n

i n

CEU eTD Collection Law Journal ofInternational Nordic Holocaust 264 for http://web.ceu.hu/jewishstudies/yb03/13peresztegi.pdf Reparation See regime. Apartheid the of end the after Convention Genocide the and CAT, ICCPR, the 263 victims and scholars Africa, world. the all over dispersed tothevictims disbursement funds of the the and victims the of reparation for advocating in role important played have associations v the to reparation provide to hesitations of importance the States’ the despite alive discourse the maintaining is to scholars and associations, their victims, endeavors reparation the in observed feature important other The health and housing as such services social basic provision in survivors Genocide neediest the support much are Rwanda to Fund a of established State the by initiatives where experience Ethiopian the The to compared progressive countries. these of experiences the from lesson of community of member a as Ethiopian The crimes. the of nature wrong morally the to due victims the of reparation Holocaus Africa As evinced in crimes are of violations the of some And laws. international customary attained have humanity against crimes and deprivation arbitrary as such crimes Derg Chapter second the in discussed As laws. rights human customary the violate crimes Derg

Peter Van Der Auweraert Der Van Peter t Virtually 263

t the Apartheid crimes. However those countries have chosen to engage in in engage to chosen have countries those However crimes. Apartheid the t ee at t te ua rgt Cvnns t h tm o te omsin f the of commission the of time the at Covenants rights human the to party were here was not international human rights system during the holocaust while South Africa ratified ratified Africa South while holocaust the during system rights human international not was here

the experience the the of Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects .

jus cogens , Holocaust Reparation Claims Fifty Years After: The Swiss Banks Lit Banks Swiss The After: Years Fifty Claims Reparation Holocaust

, 557, 557 557, , soitos r sil nae i rprto avcce and advocacies reparation in engaged still are associations State - r Hmn ihs Violations Rights Human Era norms.

countries to victim reparation, n tovictim countries s and as a as and s - 558, (2002) 558,

of liberty, murder, torture and inhuman treatment, inhuman and torture murder, liberty, of

65 (Last accessed on 15 May 2013) May 15 on2013) accessed (Last ictims. In Holocaust reparations the Jewish Jewish the reparations Holocaust In ictims.

State

in transition to democracy shall take a a take shall democracy to transition in either Germany South either nor 264

Inand South Rwanda

Ágnes Peresztegi Ágnes a ,

education, education, igation vailable vailable State , 71 , ,

CEU eTD Collection that attained than more law rights human international demo are situations those Hence victims. on damages fail violations rights human mass reparation. their facilitate the crimes Derg the like rights to failed had system has rights human human international of violation flagrant is there where situations duty primary inherent the systems rights human victims international human the of the deficiency of rights human of violation the to remedies provide to system imped legal General In a disincentive for the H Ethiopia. in academia the and victims the of case the in case the not is which discourses, e n c e ,

t he absence of enforcement mechanism for these human rights violations mus violations rights human these for mechanism enforcement of absence he

empty rhetoric, rhetoric, empty victims victims mns o noc ter rights. their enforce to iments jus cogens - err fr mlmnain f ua rgt wti ter uidcin, in jurisdictions, their within rights human of implementation for bearers Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects of Derg crimes Derg of v i c norms in international in lawnorms t i m In situations like the Derg crimes, the State that was active in the the in active was that State the crimes, Derg the like situations In a s t

l e a s c

s l a t o accompani not

i f m were not able to get reparation due to administrative and and administrative to due reparation get to able not were ed o

reparation.

t to assume subsequent responsibility to address the the address to responsibility subsequent assume to h e

i n diin o the to addition In c 66 t i m

ed by enforcement mechanisms mechanisms enforcement by ed s . ,

in the face of violations of human rights human of violations of face the in intervene nstrations of t of nstrations

is visible. Though visible. is

so as to prot to as so f a i l he standard setting role of of role setting standard he u r e

of ect the victims and victims the ect the

n State ational i s

s t not be be not t nothing are the are

legal

CEU eTD Collection 15. 14. 13. 12. 11. 10. 9. 8. 7. 6. 5. 4. 3. 2. 1. Bibliography

10 Octoberand 1August 1974, 1973 BP Bodrožić v Serbia Montenegro and http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/6171429.stm BBC. (2006) Bassiouni, Cherif. M. 2013) attentats.org/publi Human of OtherRights and SeriousViolations Law Bassiou InternationalLaw, Res. Humanitarian U.N. 60/147, G.A. Doc.(2006) A/RES/60/147 InternationalLawof Gross of Violations HumanRights of and Serious Violations Basicand ontheRemedy Right Guidelines aand Principlesto Reparationfor Victims 1962 Application, (New andPowerCompany, BelgiumBarcelona Limited, v Light Spain Traction, ICGJ 151(ICJ 1964) Barcelona Belgium v Traction, Spain, Banks Li Auweraert, Van Peter Der. vAssanidze Georgia vAssanidze Georgia Centered R Antkowiak, ThomasM. Conference SanJosé, Rica,Rights, Costa 22November onHuman 1969) American Human Rights, on Convention Al November, 2013) reports/Extradition_Report_Final_Version_Sept_08.pdf http://www.redress.org/downloads/country to Europe from Suspects Genocide Rwanda Extraditing REDRESS, and Rights African - Adsani v.United Kingdom Exploration Co ( Exploration Co

Mengistu found guilty ofgenocide foundguilty Mengistu

ni, M. Cherif.ni, M. - tigation, tigation,

Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects emedies and Restorativeemedies Justice, and Issues and Challenges, September 2008. Available at at Available 2008. September Challenges, and Issues

71 ), cations/bassiouni.violations.pdf

Libya

Nordic Journal of InternationalNordicLaw, of Journal 557,(2002)

[GC], [GC], [GC],

International Recognition of Victims' Rights, Rights, Recognition Victims' of International forViolations International Humanitarian of Accountability

An Emerging Mandate for International Courts: Victim Courts: An EmergingInternational Mandate for ) Ltd Holocaust Reparation Claims Fifty Holocaust After: Reparation Claims Years The Swiss no. 71503/01, ECHR no. 71503/01,ECHR 2004 no. 71503/01,ECHR 2004 , [GC] no , [GC]

Government of the of Government , Communication No. 1180/2003, CCPR/C/OP/9, No.1180/2003,CCPR/C/OP/9, Communication

53 ILR,53

67 PreliminaryICJ Rep 6, Objections, Judgment, . 35763/97, 2001 ECHR , available at

(Adopted at the Inter 47 Stan. J.Int’l L. J.Int’l 279,(2011) 47 Stan. 297

(AccessedAM) onDec 3,20128

(LastNovember, accessed on26 , 383Available at

Libyan

Ls Acse o 27 on Accessed (Last

Arab Republic, - American Specialized

HRLR

http://www.sos

6, 203

Award,

CEU eTD Collection 29. 28. 27. 26. 25. 24. 23. 22. 21. 20. 19. 18. 17. 16.

Corfu Channel, Merits, Channel, Judgment,Corfu 1949 I.C.J. Reports January 1951 260(III)General resolution 1948, Assembly December of 9 and onthePrevention Convention Pu forceinto adopted byAssembly theGeneral 3452(XXX) 9December1975, entry resolution of againstConvention Inhumane, ofDegrading Torture, andforms Treatment, other 2013)accessed on25November, http://www.constitutionalcourt.org.za/site/constitution/english of The RepublicConstitution Africa, ofSouth 200of1993;Available Act at Proclamation No.1/1995,1 of theFederal Constitution of Democratic(FDRE Ethiopia Republic Constitution), 390,(2006) The Handbook of Reparations, WorldWarII Ariel, andColonomos, Andrea Armstrong. 266, (1950) Colombian Extraordinary CodeofTheCivil Empire Of InternationalLaw,Cassese, Antonio. Oxford(2 University Press, affair related States andwhich two the totheproblems from arising orapplication agreementsinterpretation two of concluded on9July 19 concerningCase thedifference andFrance concerning NewZealand between Normative Hierarchy Theory LeeCaplan, M. Omnes Byers, Michael. August 2013) at theContext in Violations 68 Law, of International Buyse, Antoine. v.PolandBroniowski http://www.zaoerv.de/68_2008/68_2008_1_a_128_154.pdf , UNRIAA, (Sales 110(1990) No. vol.XX E/F.93.V.3), Rules 26 June 1987 26 June Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects - Peruvian case, asylum

, 66 Nordic J. Int'lJ. L. , 66Nordic 211,(1997)

;

A Turning Point in theHistoryof in Reparations Point A Turning (1960) State Immunity Conceptualising theRelationshipConceptualising between Lost and Regained? Restitution as a Remedy for Human Rights Regained? aRemedy Restitutionas Rights and Lost forHuman , [GC], no. , [GC],

st , 97 Am. J. Int'l L. (2003) , 97Am.J. 741,

Ethiopia, Proclamation No.165,Negarit Proclamation Ethiopia, Year Ababa No. 3,(Addis , Human andJus Rights,

31443/96, ECHR 31443/96, ECHR (20

Judgment of November 20th 1950: I.C.J.Judgment of November Reports, 20th1950: nishment oftheCrime ofGenocide, by adopted 68

German Reparations to theJews ReparationsGerman to after

ZaöR,Available(2008). 129 129, 04) , 4 Cogens:

–

Jus Cogens 21

entry into force 12 entry force into , Pablo deGreiff

/ st - Rainbow Warrior Rainbow

web/interim/

(Last on29, accessed August, 1995) nd A Critique ofthe A Critique

ed. 2005)

Gazette and and 86 between the 86 between Erga

(Last

(ed.), CEU eTD Collection 45. 44. 43. 42. 41. 40. 39. 38. 37. 36. 35. 34. 33. 32. 31. 30.

and International Law Hannum, Hurst. Guiso Law Gillard, Emanuela InstituteLibrary(California ofTechnology, 1977) Notes, Getachew, Mekasha. Gabčikovo Series A,No.17 Factory atChorzow Factory atChorzow Treaty Series European theCompensation ofVictims ofViolent Crimes, on Convention Freedoms, as amendedbyProtocol No.11 European theProtection for Convention of 31, 1994,OrganicLaw 16/2004 No other against Crimes between Humanity, Committed December 1,1990 October and Charged of withProsecuting theCrimeof thePerpetrators and Genocide Trying and Establishing Competence theOrganization, Function and 05 November, 2013) http://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/FS_Pilot_judgments_ENG.pdf ECHR, 5 http://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/FS_Pilot_judgments_ENG.pdf ECHR, DecemberInter of 2003, AmericanHu Commission ThomasDouglas Christopher v UnitedStates acomprehensiveStrengths andChallenges for approach, Donoso, Gina. 30, 2012) http://www.dacb.org/stories/ethiopia/gudina_tumsa.html Dictionary Biography, of Christian availableat (2003) Daly, Erin. th

November, 2013) , 85 -

Gallisay Gallisay Factsheet Pilo Factsheet Judgments Pilot IRRC, 529,(2003)

Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects - Nagymaros Project (Hungary/Slovakia), Project 1997 Judgment, Reports Nagymaros I.C.J. Reparations in SouthAfrica:Reparations aCautionary in Tale -

Int No. 116 No. v. , 29 The Status of theUniversal of ofHumanRightsinThe Status Declaration National Italy er - Chiara. Chiara.

- , (

( Human Reparation of Rights’ Court Judgments: American An Inside Revolution Viewofthe Ethiopian An Ger Germany v. Poland , (just satisfaction) [GC], no. satisfaction), (just 2009 [GC], 58858/00, ECHR t Judgments , 25 Ga. , Strasbourg,, February (Entry 24.XI.1983, force: into 1 1988) many v. Poland

Reparation f J. Int'l L.287, (1995J. & Comp. , 2Available at , 1,availableat

69 or violations of International Humanitarian Humanitarian International of or violations

), ( ), )

Merits Human Rights Human andFundamental Merits

Case 12.240, Report No. 100/03, 29 12.240,Report No.Case 100/03, , ), 47 Judgment No. 13, 1928, P.C.I.J.,Judgment 13,1928, No. man Rights

(LastNovember accessed on ing ofGacaca Courts

49 Revista IIDH,49 Revista 29 , 33 - 1996) U. Mem. L. Rev.,367, U. Mem.

, Munger Africana, Munger

(Last accessed(Last on

European

, 7

CEU eTD Collection 58. 57. 56. 55. 54. 53. 52. 51. 50. 49. 48. 47. 46.

200 work ofthat (A/56/10), session tothe General reportsubmitted Assembly covering Commission’s a the part as of the Responsibility) Wrongful for Internationally Acts International (ILC),Law Commission 1976 Assembly 2200A(XXI) of16 resolution 1966, December 3 January entry force into International Economic,Cultural Rights, Social Covenantand Ado on ofresolution 16December 2200A(XXI) 1966, International and Political Civil Rights, Covenant on Reparations Reparative available Series, at Justice International forTransitional Justice, Center reparations and costs) Guatemala,September Judgment of 4,2012 Inter II eighteenth theGeneralAssembly includingthe reportsoftheto session Commission ILC report, Ilascu andothersvRussia Moldova Ilascu andothersvRussia Moldova November, 2013) http://www.hrw.org/reports/pdfs/e/ethiopia/ethiopia94d.pdf (November, available at 1994) Human Rights Watch/Africa, 6 accessed on Nov 29, 2012). 1999) availableat: Human Rights Watch, 2004 at 2187 its ImposedLegal Obligation tothe onStates Parties Covenant Human Righ http://www.farg.gov.rw/index.php?id=28 http://genocidememorials.cga.harvard.edu/data.html

Yearbook, (1966) 1 - , vol. II,, vol. corrected Two, as Part American Court of HumanAmerican Rights, of Court

Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects Documents of the second ofthe seventeenth part Documents of andofthe session - Practice ts Committee, ts Committee, Text adopted by the ILC by adopted at fifty Text theits th

meeting, (2004) Eightieth session http://hrw.org/english/docs/1999/11/29/ethiop5495.htm

- 2007

Ethiopian Dictator Mengistu Dictator HaileMariEthiopian - English.pdf General ofthe The No.31: Nature General Comment

Ethiopia ReckoningEthiopia underthe Law Yearbook of the International Law Commission, ofthe International Law Yearbook , with Commentarieswith

http://ictj.org/sites/default/files/ICTJ 70 Draft Articles on the Responsibility of States onthe ResponsibilityofStates Articles Draft , 2 (Last, 2access

Case ofCase V. the RíoNegro Massacres [GC], [GC], [GC],

(Preliminary merits, objection, Reparations in TheoryReparations in no. 2004 48787/99,ECHR no. entry into force into entry - third session,third in2001,and 48787/99, ECHR (2004) 48787/99, ECHR

AdoptedAssembly by General , ed on08October, 2013) (Draft articles

(Last accessed on 26 (Last accessed , (Adopted on 29March, (Adopted on

am 23 March,1976 , (November 24, ,

No. 11 and Practice

pted by General on State

, (Last -

Global

; - , CEU eTD Collection 75. 74. 73. 72. 71. 70. 69. 68. 67. 66. 65. 64. 63. 62. 61. 60. 59.

2200A (XXI) of16 December 1966entry force into 23 March 1976 and opened signature, ratification for by and accession resolution Assembly General International the Optional Protocol to andPolitical Civil Rights, Covenant adopted on Republic ofGermany/Netherlands) Judgment, Shelf, SeaNorth Continental Opinion, 12,(1995) Newbury, Catharine. v.Nada Switzerland, 40 (A/37/40) 174, (1982) Simones Cubas Mirta v.Uruguay America),States of 14 Judgment, Merits, I.C.J.Reports, andMilitary Paramilitary Activities inandag Doc.C.H.R., (2002) 5rev. 1,913 Michael States, v. United Domingues Ltd., Publications (2009) the Comparative theInter ofBoth Approach theCaseLaw between CarlosMejia, Upegui. Juan MehemiFrance, v LegislativeNations Materials forInternationally ontheWrongful ResponsibilityofStates Acts Litigation, Malamud separateI.C.J.Advisory Reports, (19 16, J. opinion) Opinion,(Ammoun, (SouthWest Security Council Africa) notwithstanding Resolution Presence theContinued LegalStates Consequencesof Namibia Africa for in ofSouth Finnish Klabbers, Jan. Karanovic v BosniaandHerzegovina, etal.v.GreeceKalogeropoulou andGermany I.C.JJudgment, Reports, 2012 ImmunitiesJurisdictional ofTheState (Germany Interpretive Methods, Davis S, Jonas

European Court of HumanEuropean of Rights, Court Y.B.Int'lL. (1997) 138, ‐ Goti, Jaime E, and Lucas E,and Goti, Jaime Grosman. Sebastián Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects Pablo deGreiff Reparations, The (ed.) of Handbook 540,(2006)

Some Regarding TheAndPurposeOf Object Problems Treaties, and Thomas N.Saunders. no

Series, ST/LEG/SER B/25 ST/LEG/SER Series,

. [GC], [GC], Background to Genocide:Background to Rwanda 43 Vand. J. Transnat'l43 Vand.L., J. (May 2010) 565, 25017/94, ECHR ECHR 25017/94,

no. 10593/08, Remedies HumanRightsLaw. A inthe International (Federal Germany/Denmark;Federal Republic Of

, Communication No. R.17/70, U.N. No.R.17/70, , Communication Doc.

Case 12.285, Report No. 62/02, InterCase 12.285,Report No. 62/02, 71 European Public LawEuropean Series, Public ed. n o. 39462/03, ECHR 2009 ECHR o. 39462/03, 1997

The Object andPurposeofaTreaty: Three The Object ECHR ECHR 2012

, 225, para. 2012) 2(NewYork, ainst Nicaragua (Nicaragua Nicaragua ainst , (dec.), no.59021/00, ECHR 2002 , (dec.), no.59021/00, ECHR I.C.J. I.C.J. V. Italy: GreeceInterveni Reports

, 23 Issue:, 23 of AJournal (1986 Reparations and Civil Reparations Civil and , I.C.J. Reports, 3 )

- American Court and Court American

276 (1970),

ESPERIA 71) , - v. ng),

Am. United Supp. No. Supp.

United

(1969) 8

CEU eTD Collection 92. 91. 90. 89. 88. 87. 86. 85. 84. 83. 82. 81. 80. 79. 78. 77. 76.

South Africa,South South Africa, L. 239,243,(2011) SouthAfrica’swith Litigation Reconciliation and Truth Commiss Simcock, Julian. InternationalShaw,Law, Malcolm N., University Cambridge (6 Press, Octoberand Dece 1,1990 Constituting theCrimeof GenocideHumanity Crimes between against or Committed Setting upGacaca and Jurisdictions Organising for Prosecutions Offences Ethiopia, Sarkin, Jeremy. Transitional Jewish Reparations Rosensaft,Z, and MenachemD.Rosensaft. Joana reports/121031r Available at Survivors of the1994Genocide against ( Tutsi, Right Reparation to REDRESS, for Survivors: Recommendatio August, 1995) Proclamation No.3/1995,Negarit Gazeta, 1 Proclamation toProvidefor Federal Gazeta, theEstablishment ofthe Negarit Phosphates inMorocco,Merits Phosphates inMorocco,Judgment, Series 74 A/B,No. 1938,P.C.I.J., http://web.ceu.hu/jewishstudies/yb03/13peresztegi.pdf Peresztegi, Gazeta, No. 1, (1957) Penal Code ofEthiopia, Proc Rights Paust, Jordan J. Papamichalopoulos andOthers vGreece, of 30 August 1996 AgainstCrimes Humanity Since 1,1990, October Organic Committed Organisation for of Prosecutions Offences Constituting or theCrimeof Genocide InternationalLaw, in Law, Oxford Monographs (2008) Orakhelashvili, Alexa , 25 Ga. J. Int'l & Comp. L. Int'l, 25Ga. J. Comp. & 147,(1995 3 of Journal Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects Ágnes http://www.redress.org/downloads/country Bantu Authorities Act, Act No 68of 1951 Population RegistrationPopulation of Act 1950 No.30

ight_to_rep.pdf The Complex Nature, .

Unfinished Business: Reconciling the ApartheidReparation Reparation for Holocaust

, 25Fordham

nder. (Ed.Lowe),PeremptoryInternationalnder. Vaughan Norms in Law, Democracy& Development mber 31, 1994, Organic Lawmber No 31,1994,Organic 40/2000 justice and the prosecution model:justice andtheprosecution The lamation No.158,Negarti Gazette, Extraordinary

, (Last accessed22 November,(Last on 2013) Judgment No. 13, 19 Judgment 13, No.

Int'l

Sources and Sources and L.J. S1 1,(2001) 72

- Era Human Rights Violations

no. st

- 1996) 14556/89, Year No. 3(AddisYear Ababa discussion paper,discussion

/ The EarlyHistoryof German

(Last accessed on 15 May 2013) Evidences

28, P.C.I.J., Series A, No. 17 28, P.C.I.J.,No. Series A, -

- S45 ,

ECHR 1995 ECHR 253, (1999)

of Customary Human of Customary ns for Reparations for ion, October 2012)

experience of

, available at

, 10 47 Stan. J. Int'l 47 Stan. J.

th Law No. 08/96

– ed. 2008)

22 nd

CEU eTD Collection 106. 105. 104. 103. 102. 101. 100. 99. 98. 97. 96. 95. 94. 93.

Violators inEthiopia Violators Prosecutor,ProsecutionThe Special InstituteUnited States Peace of Ethiopia, November, 2013) Available at ofSouthTruth Commission Africa 2003), andReconciliation 726,(March Report, 2011) InternationalProsecuting inAfrica, Crimes 163 and Summar Tiba, Firew K. Criminal 513 Justice, Tiba, Firew K. 116 &The Schoonerv. M'Faddon Exchange Others, http://rtmmm.org/redterror.html The RedMemorial Available Terror Museumwebsite, Martyrs’ at Republic Texaco 49th sess.,U.N. 3453rdmtg, Doc. S/Res International ofStatute the Rwanda, Tribunal SCOR Criminal res. for SC 955,UN http://untreaty.un.org/cod/avl/pdf/ha/sicj/icj_statute_e.pdf International ofStatute the (available of Court Justice, at Gazette (August 8/1992) Special Office22/1992 Public Prosecutor EstablishmentProclamationNo. South Africa, on 10October, 2013) http://www.justice.gov.za/Trc/legal/20031112 Of available 1995): Regarding Regulations Reparationat toVictims), Africa,South Promotion Africa,South of National Promotion and Act Unity Reconciliation 34,(1995) 30 October, 2013) available at Africa,South of National Promotion and Act Unity Reconciliation 34,19July 1995,

Overseas Petroleum Company Overseas Petroleum , 17 I.L.M.17 Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects http://www.justice.gov.za/legislation/acts/1995 y Executions inEthiopia y Executions http://www.info.gov.za/otherdocs/2003/trc/5_7.pdf Public Safety Act,1953 The Trial ofMengistu andOtherMembersGenocide, Torture for Derg The Trial Genocide inEthiopia Trial The Mengistu

1 ( , (February available at 1994) -

528, (Oxford University 2007) Press, 1978

of Nationaland Act, Unity No.34 Reconciliation 1995(Act )

“Red

, Chacha Murungu& Biegon Japhet (eds) Process of War Criminals and Human Rights War Rights Process Human and of Criminals

Terror” (Last accessedTerror” Nov30,2012) (Last on 73

v . The Government of the of . The Government /955 (1994)

Report ofthe OfficeReport ofthe Special - gg256 - 184, (PretoriaLaw184, University Press, 11

U.S.

95_nn1660.pdf

, 5 Journal of International of , 5Journal 116 )

034.pdf , 3 L., 3

(Last on12 accessed Libyan Ed. 287, 7CranchEd. 287,

(Last accessed on , (Last accessed, (Last

Arab , Negarit

CEU eTD Collection 114. 113. 112. 111. 110. 109. 108. 107.

1322/2004, CCPR/C/OP/9 and vRepublicChoi Yoon ofKorea Gacaca andtheICTR, Courts Westberg, M. Megan Movement, Yael.Weitz, forceinto 1980, UnitedNations, Treaty on27January Series, 1155, vol. Vienna onthelaw Convention ofVienna entered Treaties,at on23May Done 1969, 2009 ECHR Verein(VgT) Tierfabriken Gegen Schweiz No. 4 Veldsquez Handbook(2003) Series) 116, &TeresaBarnesHuyseLuc and Uvin, Peter. Oct 15,2013) http://www.usip.org/publications/truth Africa,USIP, South at Truth available Commission: N http://www.usip.org/files/resources/Ethiopia ovember 302012)

- Victims Reparation for Derg Crimes: Challenges and Prospects Rodriguez v. Honduras Case, (Merits) (Merits) Honduras Case, Rodriguez v. 15 Cardozo Journal of Law Journal15 Cardozo 357, (2009) ofand Gender,

T Rwandan Genocide: Taking Notes from the Holocaust Reparations theRwandan Genocide: Holocaust Reparations from Taking Notes

he Gacaca

Rwanda's Use ofTransitional Justice TheRwanda's After Genocide: Tribunals in Rwanda,(case in Tribunals study)

59 Kan. L.59 Kan. Re

(Eds.) Reconciliation after(IDEA,(Eds.) Reconciliation ViolentConflict, , Communications Nos.1321/2004and , Communications 74 - commission

v. - v. 331, (2011) v. 331, Switzerland (No.Switzerland 2) SPO Dossier SPO (1988) Inter(1988) (ser. H.R. Am. Ct. - south - - africa

2.pdf , David BloomfieldDavid , (Last accessed on , (Lastaccessed

, [GC], no.32772/02, , [GC], (Last accessed on accessed (Last

331

C) C)