Amnesties for crimes against humanity and justice for victims?

Dilemmas and debates

Abstract

States emerging from internal armed conflicts and/or repressive dictatorships face the complex challenge of how to address the serious crimes committed during those periods. Solutions oscillate between justice approaches and the application of amnesty. The aim of this article was to identify the main contributions of amnesty for crimes against humanity and to assess their implications for access to justice. To this end, a scoping review was conducted in accordance with the guidelines of the PRISMA declaration and its extension PRISMA-ScR, which included the examination of a sample of 47 scientific publications. The results revealed several amnesties created under a variety of terms, as well as a growing trend towards restricting their legal effects. The relationship between amnesty and justice was highlighted as debatable, since it involves evaluating, on the one hand, the interests of the victims, the context in which amnesty is approved and the interests that oppose justice; and on the other, the international obligation to investigate, prosecute and punish serious human rights violations.