Search

The military rulers of Burma (also known as Myanmar) convened a National Convention to draft a new constitution. After many delays, the convention completed the draft on September 3, 2007. An analysis of the constitution’s provisions suggests that instead of being a true catalyst for lasting change, it further entrenches the military within the government and the associated culture of impunity.

As the first truth commission in the region, Morocco’s Equity and Reconciliation Commission sought to address the legacy of more than 40 years of repression and human rights violations known as the “Years of Lead.” The commission was part of a gradual process of dealing with the past, an opening that began in the early 1990s. Since completion of the commission’s final report in 2005, Moroccans have taken further steps toward reckoning with the past.

While not seen as sufficient in and of themselves as a means of reparation, the concept of “collective reparations” has been one of the ways in which reparation advocates have respond to practical challenges and to the overall complexity of responding to massive violations of human rights. Collective reparations are conceived from the perspective of who they are meant to benefit. They are focused on delivering a benefit to groups of victims that suffered from human rights violations.

In 1996, six years after Nepal replaced its absolute monarchy with multi-party democracy, Maoist rebels launched an armed struggle that led to an estimated 13,000 deaths over the next decade. In November 2006 the rebels and government made peace, paving the way for the abolition of the monarchy. A Maoist-led government took power after national elections in 2008. Nepal now faces steep challenges in establishing truth, justice and accountability for past human rights violations.

This report is intended to contribute to the work of National Commission for Social Action (NaCSA) and of other organizations involved in providing reparations to victims in Sierra Leone. It aims to identify some of the lessons from the Year One Program program, and to help define the next steps that Sierra Leone, with the assistance from the international community, should take to address the consequences that the civil war had on victims.

The Special Court for Sierra Leone-which began with the hope that it would be accessible to millions of Sierra Leoneans- has fallen short of its domestic goals. The decision to try Taylor in The Hague, rather than in Freetown, and the lack of adequate outreach activities made the court’s proceedings difficult to access for many in Sierra Leone and thus greatly lessened its impact upon the populace.

The Special Court for Sierra Leone (SCSL or Special Court) was established in 2002 when the two United Nations (UN) ad hoc international tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and for Rwanda had already existed for several years and when the first lessons could be drawn from their experiences. Many observers praised the Special Court model as an innovation because it contained several important features that distinguish it from the purely international tribunals.

In July 2008 the Timorese-Indonesian Commission of Truth and Friendship (CTF) submitted its final report on atrocities committed in East Timor in 1999. Previously the CTF had been criticized by human rights groups, especially in relation to its power to recommend amnesties and its controversial public hearings. Many saw it as a tool of impunity. Against this backdrop, the CTF's final report came as a surprise to many. It concluded that crimes against humanity had been committed by Indonesian security forces in East Timor during 1999.

Details the range of measures that will be needed to address the consequences of abuses committed during the U.S. "war on terror," including independent investigations, public disclosure of the truth, prosecutions of those responsible for abuses and redress for victims of serious harms.

Response to the first 100 days of the Obama administration and the disclosure of evidence detailing abusive treatment of detainees in the "war on terror." ICTJ recommends the appointment of a special prosecutor, the creation of an independent, nonpartisan commission of inquiry and continued declassification of information.