Combating Impunity: Some Thoughts on the Way Forward

Abstract

The very fact that an international meeting of experts convenes to consider the issue of impunity for international crimes and serious violations of human rights is itself a measure of changing times. Although some legal obligations to investigate, prosecute, and punish perpetrators or compensate victims already existed,' until the 1990s the issue was not on the agenda of either the human rights community or states. The last ten years has seen a sea change, prompted both by the end of the cold war and by recognition that the seeds of future violations are sown, in part, in the failure to come to terms with past cycles of violations. Accountability is now routinely demanded and assessed by international human rights groups, and anti-impunity measures are no longer seen as simply a question of national choice. The United States now announces that accountability is a mainstay of its foreign policy, especially in situations of transition. The U.S. State Department Country Reports now refer to impunity as a major problem in a number of countries. The Ad-hoc Tribunals on the Former Yugoslavia and Rwanda2 have, of course, helped advance the law by signaling, at least in theory, that certain international crimes must be prosecuted. And the creation of an International Criminal Court is finally firmly on the agenda, with a Diplomatic Conference scheduled for 1998 and a series of Preparatory Committee meetings this year. On a national level, courts and legislatures have begun grappling with the issues of impunity and amnesty. Recent amnesty laws in South Africa and