Explore the issues
Read the following scenarios, and then answer the multiple choice question. Click on answer to see if you chose correctly.
SCENARIO 1
A racist regime establishes and maintains a system under which a black majority population is denied equal rights, subject to arbitrary restrictions on movement, and all forms of dissent and protest are harshly suppressed. Thousands are arbitrarily imprisoned and tortured, and hundreds of demonstrators killed; political opponents are murdered. Eventually, under international pressure, the regime negotiates with the opposition, a constitution guaranteeing equal rights is agreed and democratic elections lead to a new government.
How should the new government deal with the past abuses?
Answer: How did the new government deal with the past abuses? The scenario approximates the situation in South Africa, when apartheid ended and a democratic government was elected in 1994. The government established a Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC), which researched and documented in a public report the many human rights abuses committed under 40 years of apartheid rule. Those who ordered or perpetrated these abuses were invited to give a full accounting to the TRC, in return for an amnesty from prosecution. Those who refused to testify to the TRC would face criminal trials. Most co-operated with the TRC; of those who did not, only in a very few cases were they charged and convicted. The South African Constitutional Court upheld the TRC process, denying the family of a prominent anti-apartheid activist who was tortured and murdered by the regime the right to see his killers put on trial.
SCENARIO 2
A man arrives in Canada from Rwanda and claims asylum. Evidence emerges that he led a militia whose members raped and killed dozens of Tutsis in the genocide in Rwanda in 1994, and that he orchestrated a massacre of 300-400 Tutsis in a church. His asylum claim is rejected. There is no evidence that any of his victims had any ties to Canada; all of the alleged crimes were committed in Rwanda.
What further action should Canada take?
Answer: What action did Canada take? The case describes that of Desire Munyaneza, a Rwandan businessman who came to Canada in 1997. His asylum claim was rejected in 2000. After an investigation, in 2005 Munyaneza was charged under Canada’s Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes Act, and convicted on several counts including genocide in 2009, and sentenced to life imprisonment. The Act allows for a form of universal jurisdiction, whereby Canada can bring war criminals to trial in Canada for crimes committed outside of Canada, even if no Canadians were affected.
SCENARIO 3
A civil war lasting over 50 years is finally concluded when the government signs a peace deal with the leaders of an armed insurgent group. In the course of the war, the armed group had regularly taken and on occasion killed hostages, and had assassinated perceived opponents, and financed itself through criminality including drug trafficking. The government armed forces had murdered many hundreds of perceived sympathisers of the group, and tens of thousands of civilians were displaced.
How should the belligerents – now partners in peace – deal with the crimes committed in the war?
Answer: What did they agree on? This situation approximates the war in Colombia, between the government and the FARC (Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia), that was ended through negotiations in 2016. The peace accord does not grant a general amnesty, but requires both the rebels and military soldiers implicated in crimes to testify before a “Special Jurisdiction for Peace’, a form of judicial tribunal. Those who give a full accounting will be given non-penal punishments – forms of restricted movement and community service for up to 7 years. Those who refuse to testify may face criminal prosecution. Colombia is a party to the Rome Statute giving the International Criminal Court jurisdiction over war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in Colombia. But the ICC Prosecutor welcomed the peace deal, meaning it is unlikely the ICC will pursue further investigations in Colombia.
SCENARIO 4
A powerful country faces repeated attacks – at home and abroad – by a terrorist group with a global reach. The country’s security and intelligence agencies establish a clandestine operation to seize and interrogate terrorist suspects. Over one hundred are detained, often in secret, all are harshly interrogated and in at least 40 cases the methods used are later found to amount to torture. At least one is killed. Many dozens of other detainees are illegally and clandestinely transferred into the custody of other countries where they are tortured. Eventually, the programme is exposed and disbanded and a parliamentary investigation documents its illegality and the human rights abuses involved.
How should the government respond?
Answer: How did the government respond? This situation describes the CIA’s Detention and Interrogation Program that operated from 2001-2006. A US Senate Committee investigated the program and submitted a 6000-page report to the President and CIA in 2012. A much reduced, 500-page version of the report was released in 2014. There has been no further action taken against those who established, managed or participated in the program.
Were you surprised – or confused – by any of the answers? The next sections will help you understand better the difficulties in pursuing accountability for human rights violations.