Abstract
ABSTRACT The comparative study of relevant Argentine and Spanish legislation and jurisprudence offers a perfect picture of the debate surrounding the role and limits of Criminal Law in transitional contexts. An analysis of these two experiences, and of the different choices they have taken, allows to point out three controversial aspects: firstly, the clash between legislative choices (often implying amnesties or similar measures) and judicial decisions that may somehow attempt to ‘correct’ the former. Secondly, the concerns raised by this creative judicial activity, in terms of its compatibility with the principles of legality and non-retroactivity and the prohibition of arbitrariness. Thirdly, the extent of the duty to prosecute and punish gross human rights violations vis-à-vis the limits of Criminal Justice. The article suggests reminding that, in extraordinary (transitional) contexts, Criminal Justice can and should be combined with other complementary mechanisms aimed at granting truth, justice, reparation and the building of a shared memory.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
