From Impunity to Accountability for Human Rights Violations in Latin America

            We, human rights defenders in Latin America, I think I can say for all, we all really appreciate all the works that are done by researchers in Europe and North America. Besides courageous journalists at home and abroad, the researchers in the human rights field are trying to search for possible solutions for human rights violations that happened and are happening very far away from their homes. I'd like to thank all support that is felt by us here in Latin America and say that I hope to have good news for you all in October. And let's keep the good fight for democracy, justice and dignity. This post is a summary of the two articles. The first with the incomplete title above was written by researchers at Christian Michelsen Institute, from Bergen, Norway. It was published at https://www.cmi.no/publications/file/5034-from-impunity-to-accountability-for-human-rights.pdf. The second was written by Mike Allison, Professor in the political science department at the University of Scranton in Pennsylvania, U.S. It was published at  https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/01/201219818067139.html

            Why have some countries in Latin America over the last two decades shifted from widespread impunity for human rights violation to the implementation of various forms of specific accountability measures, while others have not? This chapter lays out the analytical and methodological framework subsequently applied to the nine Latin American case studies in this volume. The main focus of the framework is twofold: 1) provide a tool for documenting the shift from impunity to accountability in the respective countries; 2) provide a tool for assessing the relative achievement in accountability across countries. Over the 1990s schorlarly debate shifted toward problematizing early heuristic definitions of key concepts such as 'truth' and 'justice' and examining more carefully the mix of short and medium-term aims and claims assigned to particular mechanisms. In this volume, we distinguish between individual and state accountability. Individual accountability is achieved through free and fair trials in either domestic courts, or foreign courts. A state can also be held accountable for violations committed by state agents. The Inter-American Courts of Human Rights have played an increasingly central role in holding states in the region to account for human rights violations. As such, the regional justice system may also contribute to enhancing accountability at the country level. Reparations to those who suffer wrongs or damage are part of any domestic justice system. Reparation can result from civil trials, or they can be part of the sentences in a criminal trial, where the perpetrator is required to pay reparations to the victims who has suffered damage. In a transitional justice context, reparations play a important role in terms of holding the state accountable for violations committed against its citizens. Forms of reparations vary widely but generally fall into one of two categories. Economic reparations consist of payments and health services designed to ameliorate or reverse harm caused to individuals. Symbolic reparations, which often take the form of official memorials, or the like, are designed to restore the social standing of victims as well as to emphasise current societal rejection and repudiation of abuses. Where the state has been the principal perpetrator it is accordingly the state, rather than the victim, which needs to prove itself newly fit to exercise its proper place in society.

                Time Magazine named 'The Protester' as its person of the year 2011. If were to confine the choice to Latin America, I would have to support the human rights defender. While there have been previous successes, 2011 seems to have been a watershed in which nearly every country has made some progtess in bringing those responsible for some of the worst human rights abuses to justice. Human rights groups emerged during the 1980s throughout Latin America in an effort to prevent the continuation of human rights abuses, as well as to hold leaders accountable for what they had already done. As the military returned to the barracks in South America in the mid-1980s and the civil wars in Central America ended in the 1990s, these human rights organisations continued to work for justice. In Guatemala, U.N. and Catholic Church human rights investigations also found that the Guatemala state's security forces committed the majority of crimes that occurred during 36-year conflict. In recent months, the government has moved to arrest several high ranking officials for their participation in the earky 1980s scorched-earth programme, including retired general Hector Lopez and former president Oscar Mejia, who ruled from 1983-1986. Like Uruguay (180 murdered, the Brazilian military (475 murdered or disappeared) is not known for having killed large numbers of subversives during its 21-year rule. However, 50,000 Brazilians were imprisoned. Manuela Picq has written in response to the Brazilian Truth Commission that it is "equipped solely to unveil crimes, shedding light on what really happened during those years. Its purpose is to construct memory. It is an effort to establish an official history, not to punish". Various groups are now mobilising to undermine the progress that human rights defenders have accomplished in Latin America. They are trying to stymie their work in the courts through a variety of legal challenges. They are threatening to bring countercharges against sympathisers in order to obscure the responsibility of the state for human rights violations. And human rights defenders continue to be threatened and killed at an alarming rate.