Dissertations / Theses on the topic 'Gross an systematic human rights violations'

"Whereas victims of ordinary crimes such as theft, robbery, assault or murder find it easier to obtain redress, victims of the most serious violatons such as war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity receive less attention insofar as their redress is concerned. Apart from some exceptional cases where victims of serious human rights abuses had their right to redress vindicated, there has not been an effective and comprehensive way of redressing victims of gross human rights violations. In Africa for instance, victims' redress in post-Apartheid South Africa and post-genocide Rwanda have been problematic. Thus, it is meaningful investigating how effectively the victims' right to reparation can be implemented in case of gross and systematic human rights violations. Preliminary to the above interrogation are questions such as: what are gross and systematic human rights violations? What are international standards regarding redress for the victims of such abuses? The case studies of Sierra Leone and the DRC will be closely analysed as an empirical foundation for these questions. ... This study consists of five chapters. Chapter one draws the context in which the study emerges. It provides the foundation and the structure of the dissertation. Chapter two outlines the legal framework that is relevant for answering the questions raised by this study. It explores international human rights standards regarding reparation of vicitms of gross and systematic violations. Chapter three analyses the implementation of victims' reparation in the context of Sierra Leone. It confronts Sierra Leonean responses to war victims with international standards on victims' reparation. Chapter four analyses victims' situation in the post-conflict Democratic Republic of Congo and draws lessons from the Sierra Leonean experience. Chapter five sums up findings of the study." -- Introduction.
Prepared under the supervision of Professor Alejandro Lorite Escorihuela at the Department of Law, American University in Cairo, Egypt
Thesis (LLM (Human Rights and Democratisation in Africa)) -- University of Pretoria, 2006.
http://www.chr.up.ac.za/academic_pro/llm1/dissertations.html
Centre for Human Rights
LLM

Les sessions extraordinaires constituent une des innovations majeures de la réforme de 2006 qui a institué le Conseil des droits de l’homme, en tant qu’organe subsidiaire de l’Assemblée générale des Nations Unies. Alors même que le Conseil tient trois sessions régulières chaque année, les sessions extraordinaires permettent aux Etats de réagir face à une situation de crise en organisant un débat, permettant d’évaluer et de qualifier les violations commises et mettant en place des mécanismes d’enquête et de suivi. L’analyse systématique des vingt-six sessions extraordinaires organisées depuis près de douze ans éclaire ainsi non seulement les rapports de force entre les acteurs en présence mais aussi une dynamique nouvelle du droit international public, intégrant le droit international humanitaire et le droit international pénal dans le champ de compétence du Conseil des droits de l’homme
Special sessions are one of the major innovations of the reform that established the Human Rights Council in 2006 as a subsidiary body of the United Nations General Assembly. While the Council holds three regular sessions each year, a special session allows States to respond to an urgent situation by organizing a debate, to assess and qualify violations and also to establish investigative mechanisms. The systematic analysis of the twenty-six special sessions held in nearly a period of twelve years illuminates, not only the balance of power between the actors involved, but also a new dynamic of international law, integrating international humanitarian law and international criminal law into the field of competence of the Human Rights Council

Background. A nationally representative study of psychiatric disorders in South Africa provided an opportunity to study the association between perpetration of human rights violations (HRVs) during apartheid and psychiatric disorder. Prior work has suggested an association between perpetration and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), but this remains controversial. Methods. Subjects reported on their perpetration of human rights violations, purposeful injury, accidental injury and domestic violence. Lifetime and 12-month prevalence of DSM-IV (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, 4th edition) disorders were assessed with Version 3.0 of the World Health Organization Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI 3.0). Socio-demographic characteristics of these groups were calculated. Odds ratios for the association between the major categories of psychiatric disorders and perpetration were assessed. Results. HRV perpetrators were more likely to be male, black and more educated, while perpetrators of domestic violence (DV) were more likely to be female, older, married, less educated and with lower income. HRV perpetration was associated with lifetime and 12-month anxiety and substance use disorders, particularly PTSD. Purposeful and DV perpetration were associated with lifetime and 12-month history of all categories of disorders, whereas accidental perpetration was associated most strongly with mood disorders. Conclusion. Socio-demographic profiles of perpetrators of HRV and DV in South Africa differ. While the causal relationship between perpetration and psychiatric disorders deserves further study, it is possible that some HRV and DV perpetrators were themselves once victims. The association between accidental perpetration and mood disorder also deserves further attention.

This study focuses on the structure and process of forgiveness as experienced by individuals, from the East London and surrounding areas, who either suffered gross human rights violations or who are related to someone who suffered gross human rights violations during the Apartheid era. Those who participated in the study testified at the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and expressed forgiveness towards the perpetrators of the violations. The aims of the study were to reveal: the participants' structure cif forgiveness, i.e. how they define forgiveness; the process of forgiveness, i.e. the changes that took place from the time of the violation up until the participants forgave the perpetrators: and, the relation. if any. between the participants' structure and process of forgiveness. It is argued that mainstream Psychology has neglected to study forgiveness because the subject matter is incompatible with the natural scientific method. For this reason, the study was approached from a hermeneutical paradigm. This was motivated by its ability to explicate the meaning and content of phenomena. Unstructured qualitative interviews were conducted with the participants. Data was analyzed using a multi-layered process of progressively deeper interpretation, employing a reading guide technique. Results indicated that authentic forgiveness is an unconditional commitment on the part of victims and survivors to relate positively towards the perpetrators. The relationship should include non-bitterness, non-vengeance, unconditional love and respect for their human rights. Another significant dimension of the structure of forgiveness is the fact that the desire for the truth is not abandoned although forgiveness has taken place. Forgiveness also does not take away the effects of the violation. This means that one does not forget although forgiveness has been granted. Results further indicate that the forgiveness process is highly complex, individualized and not instantaneous. The individuals have to deal with various intrapersonal conflicts and anxieties as a result of the violation, before forgiveness is explored as an option, and before they can finally forgive. Significant interrelations between the structure and process of forgiveness were also identified.

This thesis focuses on the importance of truth and memory in the process of transitional justice, within the context of the aftermath of gross violations of human rights that occurred during the military dictatorship of 1976 to 1983 in Argentina. The military junta that ruled Argentina took power under the pretext of national security, arguing that an enemy threatened to destabilize and destroy Argentine society. During the period of the military dictatorship an estimated 30,000 people "disappeared"; relatives of those disappeared mobilized and formed human rights organizations to confront the military regime for its abuses. Once the dictatorship collapsed and democratic rule was reestablished these human rights organizations changed their focus, mobilizing once again to find their missing relatives, learn the truth, and prosecute those responsible of any crimes. A series of amnesty laws and pardons protected the perpetrators of many of the crimes of the military regime through most of the 1990's, until in 2005 the Argentine Supreme Court declared those laws unconstitutional. During the period before the 2005 ruling human rights organizations worked hard to gather the truth about the crimes of the military regime and ensure these crimes were not forgotten. Their initiatives included the famous weekly march to the Plaza de Mayo by members of Madres (Mothers), one of the most important human rights organizations in Argentina; escraches (reveal what is hidden) and public protests by HIJOS (Sons and daughters of the disappeared), actions in which members of HIJOS would go to the houses of known members of the military juntas and protest at their front doors; and programs to find missing grandchildren by Abuelas (Grandmothers), a human rights organization dedicated to searching for the missing children of the disappeared; and others. Because of the structure of terror during the military junta, most Argentines did not know exactly what was happening to the missing persons, and they were afraid to ask. The truth gathering initiatives and the official report of the commission charged with investigating the junta, CONADEP, came into being in response to this lack of knowledge. They helped to inform the Argentine people and the new generations of what had happened during the military dictatorship in hopes of making sure that such abuses do not occur again.

Doctor Legum - LLD
Uganda and her citizens have endured a troubled, violent, conflict-prone history since independence from the British on 9th October 1962. Conflict in Uganda, just like in many an African country, has its primary root causes in the colonial legacy which sowed a fertile ground for several other secondary causes of present day subsisting conflicts. During Uganda's various military conflicts millions have had their human rights and civil liberties violated with impunity. At the end of each conflict and / or crisis, Uganda has had to grapple with the challenge of finding a lasting solution amidst the significant losses made by the country, many ethnic groups and her citizens. No long term viable and efficient solution or mechanism has been introduced or instituted to forestall future conflicts. What appears to have been introduced or instituted are stopgap measures. Since President Yoweri Museveni took over power on 26 January 1986, a military conflict has been raging in northern Uganda and the surrounding areas spanning eastern Uganda, South Sudan, the Democratic Republic of Congo (hereafter: 'DRC'), the Sudan and the Central African Republic (hereafter: 'CAR'). In this decades-old conflict, the war has primarily pitted the Lord's Resistance Army (hereafter: 'LRA') against the Uganda Peoples Defence Forces (hereafter: 'UPDF'). Like many conflicts, the more than twenty-year-old contestation has resulted in the gross violations of human rights of millions of people situated across five African states. The human rights violations, which have resulted in the commission of international crimes have been perpetrated and perpetuated with impunity by both warring parties (LRA and UPDF). Although initially an internal conflict, the conflict in northern Uganda has catapulted itself into an international conflict based on the parties involved, the interest generated, the crimes committed and the areas and people affected by it.

When South Africa made the transition to democracy in 1994, led by the charismatic Nelson Mandela, it proclaimed that it would make human rights a centrepiece of its foreign policy. The international community also expected South Africa to play a leading role in promoting human rights around the world, not least due to the country's own history of gross human rights violations during apartheid. However, in the last 20 years, South Africa's track record in protecting human rights has come under scrutiny. Scholars have accused South Africa of turning a blind eye to gross human rights violations, contradicting its stated commitment to human rights. South Africa's responses to gross human rights violations in Libya, Sudan and Zimbabwe have been particularly criticised. This dissertation analyses the scholarly explanations of South Africa's contradictory behaviour in order to identify the strongest explanations on a bilateral level and a multilateral level in the context of South Africa's membership of the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC). Delving into the literature on South Africa's foreign policy behaviour, I argue that South Africa has indeed failed to live up its promise of standing up for human rights. The emphasis on human rights in the country's foreign policy has also diminished over time. Most importantly, I argue that the major explanations of South Africa's contradictory behaviour are solidarity with African, developing and anti-apartheid allies; deterioration of domestic human rights regime which inevitably affects human rights promotion abroad; and South Africa's desire to be a leading conflict mediator that precludes it from criticising gross human rights violators, although there remain questions over South Africa's neutrality as a mediator.

Bibliography: leaves 71-77.
South Africa established Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) in 1995 to facilitate its nation building. The task of the Commission was to recover truth about the country's past human rights abuse and recommend a policy on reparations for the victims. This study evaluates the impact of the TRC's work of truth recovery and policy on reparations on the reconciliation process. It specifically explores opinions and views of versions of representatives (victims, political parties, former TRC members and Non Governmental Organisations) regarding the impact of TRC's truth recovery and reparations policy on the process of reconciliation. The study found, according to views of respondents interviewed here, that recovery of truth is significant in the process reconciliation. It was specifically found that truth that comes through confession will lead to healing of victims and reconcile them with perpetrators. While truth that comes through state intervention involving investigations and prosecutions may also lead to healing of victims when seeing justice meted out to the wrong doers, this method of truth recovery may alienate perpetrators.

Countries undergoing a transitional process face multiple problems and challenges. The process of transformation from a dictatorial, anti-democratic or authoritarian state into a constitutional democracy which respects the rule of law and the fundamental human rights of its citizens is a difficult and strenuous one. Often equipped with only limited financial resources, many newly elected, democratic governments find themselves confronted with a variety of urgent problems waiting to be resolved: the civil service and the judiciary need to be restructured or reformed, jobs must be created for the hundreds of thousands of unemployed, the economy must be put back on the right track and the poor have to be provided with housing, food and health care. While the extent and nature of these and other challenges naturally vary considerably, depending on the circumstances and the specific situation of the state concerned, there is one issue which has to be faced almost inevitable by every transitional society: the question of how to deal with its own troubled past. Broadly speaking, there are three different approaches for dealing with a burdensome past. Firstly, there is the option to move on, to focus on the future and simply to forget the conflicts of the past. This option is generally characterised by a general amnesty for the perpetrators of the old regime, shielding those who committed atrocities and gross violations of human rights from any criminal prosecutions. Spain is probably the most prominent example for a country having chosen this way but amnesty laws have also been passed, inter alia, in Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Guatemala, Sierra Leone and Uruguay. Secondly, there is the option to prosecute and punish gross human rights offenders and to hold accountable the members of the old regime. In Greece for instance, 18 Generals were convicted for high treason only months after the end of their military dictatorship. Ethiopia is another example for a country having opted for this approach while Rwanda has decided to reappraise its gruesome past by a combination of international and national criminal prosecutions. Finally, there is the option to employ alternative mechanisms and procedures like truth commissions and other non-penal measures. This is, so to speak, the middle course between the two extremes of general amnesties and criminal prosecutions. Numerous truth commissions have been set up so far in countries as different as Argentina, Chile, Guatemala, Timor-Leste, Morocco, Sierra Leone or South Africa, just to mention the most prominent examples. As divergent as these commissions in each of these different countries might have been, they all were established to investigate and verify past human rights violations, to give victims of grave human rights abuses a forum to tell their stories and to acknowledge officially what happened during certain dark and painful periods in their respective countries' histories. This option tries to strike a balance between the need to reappraise a country's past on the one hand and the necessity to preserve its still young and vulnerable democracy on the other.

"In response to President Kabah's request of June 2000, the United Nations Security Council called on the Secretary-General to negotiate an agreement with the government of Sierra Leone for the creation of a special court for Sierra Leone (hereafter SCSL), to investigate the atrocities committed within the country, by Resolution 1315 of 14 August 2000. Under the agreement concluded in February 2001, the SCSL has jurisdiction over crimes against humanity, war crimes and other serious violations of international humanitarian law committed since November 1996. The author assesses in detail the efficacy of the SCSL in dispensing justice up to date. The author concludes that, although the SCSL has accomplished much, it has shortcomings and faces changes that hamper the attainment of its objectives. ... This study is divided into five chapters. Chapter one provides the context in which the study is set, the focus and objectives of the study, its significance and other preliminary issues, including a statement of the problem and the literature review. Analysis of the conflict in Sierra Leone are necessary to grasp the graveness and the nature of the human rights violations and to understand the nature and extent of justice already meted out. Chapter two focuses particularly on the historical background of the conflict and the reasons that necessitate the establishment of the SCSL. The SCSL was established specifically to respond to human rights abuses committed during the civil war in Sierra Leone. Chapter three examines the major achievements of the Court in dispensing justice, and chapter four identifies the shortcomings and the challenges that confront the Court in its aim to fulfil its mandate." -- Chapter one.
Thesis (LLM (Human Rights and Democratisation in Africa)) -- University of Pretoria, 2006.
Prepared under the supervision of Professor Lovell Fernandez, Faculty of Law, University of the Western Cape
http://www.chr.up.ac.za/academic_pro/llm1/dissertations.html
Centre for Human Rights
LLM

Esta dissertação tem como objeto a análise do impacto da condenação do Brasil pela Corte Interamericana de Direitos Humanos no caso Guerrilha do Araguaia sobre a atuação do Ministério Público Federal na persecução penal das graves violações de direitos humanos ocorridas na ditadura militar no Brasil. Considerando a existência de uma norma global de responsabilização penal individual, verifica-se que a demanda doméstica de responsabilização dos agentes da ditadura foi submetida ao Sistema Interamericano de Direitos Humanos e retornou ao plano doméstico de modo a destravar a atuação institucional do Ministério Público Federal na pauta. Se antes da condenação pela corte internacional havia uma atuação de poucos procuradores, depois da sentença se verifica uma gradual institucionalização da pauta internamente no Ministério Público Federal, que tomou para si a determinação da Corte Interamericana de Direitos Humanos de responsabilização dos agentes da ditadura. O estudo discute a movimentação institucional do Ministério Público Federal na pauta, as teses adotadas pelos procuradores, as vinte e seis ações penais ajuizadas desde 2011, os obstáculos encontrados, a recepção do Judiciário e os desafios para a persecução penal hoje no Brasil. Assim, a dissertação sustenta que o Ministério Público Federal tem tido uma atuação fundamental como ator judicial interno na mobilização do direito internacional dos direitos humanos para fazer avançar a cascata da justiça, configurando-se como um ator central para o processo de justiça de transição no Brasil, que sempre encontrou uma limitação no aspecto da responsabilização penal em razão da Lei de Anistia.
This thesis aims to analyze the impact of Brazil\'s conviction by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights regarding the Araguaia Guerrilla on Federal Prosecution Service\'s (MPF) action, namely in the penal prosecution of gross human rights violations that occurred during Brazil\'s military dictatorship. Bearing in mind the existence of an international law of individual penal responsibility, it was noted that the domestic suit against dictatorship agents was submitted to the Inter-American System of Human Rights; it returned to the domestic sphere as to unlock the institutional action of MPF. Before the international court\'s conviction there was little action in the hands of few prosecutors. After the sentence, one can observe a gradual institutionalization and internalization of this subject in the MPF, which took on the responsibilization of dictatorship agents determined by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. The study discusses the institutional mobilization of MPF in the subject, prosecutors\' legal arguments, the 26 penal suits filed since 2011, obstacles found, Judiciary\'s reception, and challenges of criminal prosecution in Brazil. Hence, this thesis holds that the MPF has been crucial as a domestic judicial actor regarding the use of international human rights law to enforce the justice cascade, posing itself as a core actor for Brazil\'s transitional justice, which has been obstructed by the country\'s Amnesty law.

This thesis examines the status of amnesties and the duty to prosecute gross and systematic human rights violations in international law. The thesis begins by distinguishing amnesty from other related concepts, such as impunity, pardon and statutes of limitations and so on. Unlike these related concepts, amnesty aims to address major social or political crises in society, such as to resolve an armed conflict, allow the return of political refugees or bring about peaceful political transition. Amnesty is linked to the duty to prosecute, because it is so often in direct conflict with international law norms and standards on the duty to prosecute and to compensate victims of human rights violations. Before the First World War, amnesty was a well-established customary practice. Even where a peace treaty was silent on the mater, amnesty was implied. Compensation was also part of the regime of peace treaties, but not followed as consistently as amnesty. This practice changed dramatically after the First and Second World Wars, because, in a break with the past, the victors did not consider themselves to be on the same level as the vanquished. This resulted in the abolition of the traditional practice of granting amnesty and the demand rather that those responsible for aggression be prosecuted and compelled to pay compensation, as was the case with Germany. Since 1948, with the adoption of the United Nations' Charter, and other international human rights treaties, the power of states to grant amnesty gradually became constrained by the obligation to prosecute perpetrators of gross human rights violations and to pay compensation to the victims of war crimes. Nevertheless, this phenomenon did not put an end to the practice of states granting amnesty for gross human rights violations. Internal armed conflicts during and after the end of the Cold War, with no victors and no vanquished, made amnesty an inevitable option. A considerable number of states continue to utilise amnesty as a device for peace and reconciliation, and they have granted amnesty for war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity. In customary international law, there is a gap between the actual state practice and the existence of the customary norm creating a duty to prosecute. As a result, the status of the so-called "palatable amnesties" (à la South Africa), often granted as part of a truth and reconciliation process, still remains unclear in international law. This is further exacerbated by the inconsistent practice of the United Nations as the main depository and sponsor of human rights instruments. South Africa and Sierra Leone are used as case studies to illustrate this inconsistency in both state and UN practice on the status of amnesties in international law. As a result, the study proposes a balanced approach model, which is an attempt to strike a balance between accountability, political transformation and social stability in transitional democracies. The balanced approach model proceeds from the premise that the international criminal justice system is not flawless and, therefore, it is important to acknowledge its limitations, such as the lack of enforcement agencies, difficulties in the collection of reliable evidence and a lack of resources to prosecute. In terms of the model, consideration is given to (i) the need to respect the legitimacy of the political process that gives rise to the granting of amnesty; (ii) the amnesty must be proportional to the crimes committed and must be rationally connected to the aims of achieving peace and national reconciliation, the interests of justice, compensation for victims; and finally (iii) the general commitment of the state that grants amnesty to respect international law obligations, which includes the implementation of international obligations as part of municipal law and treaty monitoring obligations as preconditions for the amnesty to pass muster in the balanced approach model. In conclusion, the study proposes model Policy Guidelines on Amnesties Granted for Gross and Systematic Human Rights Violations in International Law for the Assembly of States of the International Criminal Court (ICC) to take note of, and to commend to states and international courts and tribunals, leaving its content to be taken up in the normal processes of the application and development of international law. The status of the Guidelines is that of a code of conduct or guide to practice. In that sense, the Guidelines do not have the character of a binding legal instrument and will serve as the basis for the development of sound principles of international law on amnesties.
Constitutional and International Law
L.LD

LL.D.
The starting point of this research is the observation that the protection of human rights and the prevention of human rights atrocities can only take place through a universal system of different means of accountability which create enough deterrence for the future state or individual offender. This research consists of four parts: Part A explores and outlines the different existing ways and means of traditional human rights protection under the international and regional human rights regimes. It focuses on the aspect of victim protection from human rights violations through protective means available under the different human rights regimes. Part A concludes that the existing means and ways of protecting human rights are by far not sufficient to ensure the compliance of states with the existing provisions on human rights protection and that the protection of human rights remains an unfinished chapter of international law. Parts B and C analyze the evolving approach to hold states and individuals directly accountable for gross human rights violations, via the means of criminal and/or civil responsibility. Part B explores the possibilities of human rights protection by the means of criminal prosecution. It outlines the development of the concept of criminal responsibility from the days of Nuremberg to the present International Criminal Court in The Hague. The main focus is on domestic criminal procedures as a supplement and possibly alternative to international prosecution. This part concludes with the observation that the present mechanisms and means available under the existing international and domestic jurisdictions fail to establish individual criminal accountability at the necessary global scale and therefore fail to deter the commission of future genocide. Part C explains the necessity to establish an international system of civil liability for human rights atrocities as a supplement and (even) alternative to the existing mechanisms of accountability. The present possibilities for the individual victim to obtain financial redress for his suffering under international law are outlined and discussed. The further option of asserting civil legal action for human rights violations under domestic jurisdictions is scrutinized and evaluated with a special focus on the USA as the state which has so far the strongest adjudication of human rights claims. This part concludes with the finding that the individual victim of human rights violations still lacks the necessary forum with the respective judicial means to hold the perpetrator financially liable for his human rights violations. Part D introduces a draft Statute on a (future) Convention on Individual Civil Liability for Human Rights Atrocities as a supplement for the existing ways of human rights protection. Each provision of the draft statute is evaluated in the context of already existing legal instruments, jurisprudence and, if available, examples of customary usage. The draft’s overall aim is the establishment of a working system of civil liability for the individual and corporate human rights perpetrator for a selection of egregious human rights atrocities qualifying as so-called international or transnational human rights torts. This research concludes with the finding that only a combination of the existing ways and means of human rights protection, the consequent application of the existing provisions and finally their further development can safeguard the protection of human rights at a global scale.

This dissertation explores the construction of ordinariness in the accounts of perpetrators of gross human rights violations, who commit their actions in the context of a system. A review of the literature that conceived of perpetrators in this way was undertaken. This was done whilst exploring the social constructionist paradigm, which formed the theoretical backbone to the study. Discourse analysis was the methodology adopted for the two analyses that were undertaken in the thesis. The first was the analysis of the literature review, which was undertaken in order to see how ordinariness was constructed in the literature. The second analysis was that of the transcript of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) Amnesty hearing of the applicant Daniel Petrus Siebert, into the death of Steve Biko. The analyses indicate that there is much similiarity in the ways in which ordinariness is constructed in the local context, and the ways in which it is constructed in the literature. Ordinariness in the context of gross human rights violations is produced through constructions of the perpetrator and the system within which the acts were committed, as passive and active respectively. The construction of the system as the epitome of the evil that is perpetrated enables the humanity or ordinariness of the perpetrator to be kept intact. Ordinariness in the South African context, is based on racist constructions of good whiteness, and bad blackness. Further, in the local political context, the TRC provides the conditions of possibility for the production of ordinariness, and ensures that perpetrators and others who benefited during the apartheid regime, continue to do so, as issues of accountability and responsibility are not adequately addressed.
Thesis (M.A.)-University of Natal, Pietermaritzburg, 2000.

Inadequate laws and the impunity of those who are the perpetrators of gross violations of human rights in past authoritarian regimes fuel the struggle between accountability and social reconciliation in South America. Various incoming governments in Latin America have granted amnesty or impunity to the authors, under one or more previous governments, of gross violations of human rights, ostensibly in order to ensure a smooth transition of power from dictatorships to new democracies. The question of how to deal with past violators of human rights in a transitional justice context is important to international human rights law as it raises complex questions of international legal theory and practice. During the 1970s, Argentina witnessed state-sponsored terrorism on an unprecedented scale. Violations of human rights, such as abductions, torture and disappearance were rampant in everyday society. The military carried out these crimes in a culture of impunity. In this thesis, the author argues that the reign of impunity that existed and continues to exist after Argentina's "dirty war" is in violation of the state's domestic and international obligations. Successor regimes have an obligation in international law to investigate, prosecute, and punish the authors of gross violations of human rights. This duty is reflected in current trends in international law toward furthering accountability by a variety of mechanisms. The author argues that this duty has not been fulfilled by the Argentine government. The author provides a historical analysis of the 'dirty war' and gross violations of human rights that occurred in Argentina. The author presents a doctrinal argument supporting the emerging norm in international law that requires states to investigate, prosecute and provide redress for gross violations of human rights, drawing upon conventional treaty law and customary international law. Finally, the author considers recent events in Argentina reflective of diminishing impunity for crimes against humanity.

Text in English
While intergenerational transmission of trauma has been widely studied, there is a paucity of literature on intergenerational humiliation. Furthermore, humiliation is regarded as a significant feature of transgenerational transmission of trauma and revenge production. Therefore, the present study aimed to contribute to addressing this paucity and to explore and understand intergenerational humiliation as experienced by 20 children and grandchildren of victims of apartheid-era gross human rights violations. Conceptually, historical trauma theory framed the study. A hermeneutic phenomenological methodology was used to achieve the aims. Through purposive-criterion sampling, data was collected and analysed using interpretive phenomenological analysis. Results show that the consequences of intergenerational humiliation are varied as feelings of hurt and loss perpetuate through the generations. Although positive influences counter these feelings within a generation, they remain alive in memories. This has implications on ethnic and racial inter-group relations as transitional societies such as South Africa seek social cohesion.
Psychology
M.A. (Psychology (Research Consultation))

LL.D.
Millions of human lives have been affected by gross human rights violations since 1945. Genocide and crimes against humanity have been perpetrated repeatedly against civilians despite the vow after the Holocaust that such atrocities would “never again” occur. The Holocaust acts were not criminalised as “genocide” in the London Charter, but as “persecutions on political, racial or religious grounds” under the broader international crime of “crimes against humanity”. “Genocide” was criminalised on 9 December 1948 by the adoption of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide by the United Nations General Assembly. Two main obligations were imposed on signatory states by Article I of the Genocide Convention, namely to prevent the commission of the international crime of genocide, and the obligation to punish the perpetrators of such a crime. Both genocide and crimes against humanity form part of the “most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole”, which are also gross human rights violations. It is of interest to all states of the international community to prevent the commission of these gross human rights violations and to prosecute perpetrators. The prohibition of the international crimes of genocide and crimes against humanity is erga omnes in nature. The research objective of this doctoral thesis is to analyse the causes for the repeated failure of the international community to fulfil the erga omnes obligation to prevent and prosecute gross human rights violations. This endeavour is furthermore aimed at formulating recommendations that will enhance future compliance with the erga omnes obligation in accordance with the international legal developments that will form the subject matter of the thesis. The thesis consists of five parts. Part 1 is an introduction in which the research objective and aims of the thesis are explained and demarcated, as well as the issues focused upon. Core legal concepts, terms and notions explained in Part 1 include “gross human rightsviolations”, “erga omnes obligation”, “jus cogens norms”, “customary international law”, “states upon whom the erga omnes obligations to prevent and prosecute gross human rights violations are imposed”, “the obligation to prevent”, “the obligation to prosecute”, “state responsibility”, “individual criminal responsibility”, “state immunity”, and various other terms. Part 1 further explains the research methodology followed in the thesis and contains a brief overview of the parts and chapters.

RESUMÉ IN ENGLISH ENGLISH TITLE OF THE THESIS: OPTIONAL PROTOCOL TO THE CONVENTION ON ELIMINATION OF ALL FORMS OF DISCRIMINATION AGAINST WOMEN The thesis is concerned with the Optional Protocol to the Convention on Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (adopted in 1999 and entered into force on December 22nd, 2000). This international treaty offers women two significant mechanisms to protect their rights - the possibility to submit an individual communication to the Committee on Elimination of Discrimination against Women against a State Party to both the Convention and the Protocol and the competence of the Committee to carry out investigations into grave and systematic violations of rights set out in the Convention. The first chapter focuses on the context of and reasons for the adoption of the Protocol. Firstly, the CEDAW, its origins and implementation mechanisms are introduced. The need for an optional protocol clearly arose from the insufficiency of the protection mechanisms enshrined in CEDAW itself in the quest of protection of women in their everyday encounters with discrimination. The chapter describes the new implementation mechanisms introduced by the Protocol. Furthermore, the second and third chapters compare the protection mechanisms laid down in the Protocol and similar...