Financial Reparations Research Articles

Roadmap to Reparations: A Global Exploration into the Past and Future of Financial Reparations Programs

Roadmap to Reparations: A Global Exploration into the Past and Future of Financial Reparations Programs

Time to pay the piper: Fossil fuel companies’ reparations for climate damages

Time to pay the piper: Fossil fuel companies’ reparations for climate damages

Remembering the Herero-Nama Genocide in Namibia

Remembering the Herero-Nama Genocide in Namibia

Fighting to Preserve a Nation's Soul: America's Ecumenical War on Poverty

Fighting to Preserve a Nation's Soul: America's Ecumenical War on Poverty

Demon in a Dress?

Demon in a Dress?

The Afterlives of the Terror: Facing the Legacies of Mass Violence in Postrevolutionary France by Ronen Steinberg

Reviewed by: The Afterlives of the Terror: Facing the Legacies of Mass Violence in Postrevolutionary France by Ronen Steinberg Kate M. Bonin Steinberg, Ronen. The Afterlives of the Terror: Facing the Legacies of Mass Violence in Postrevolutionary France. Cornell UP, 2019. ISBN 978-1-5017-3924-8. Pp. 222. Of course, the French Revolution did not end on 9 Thermidor, Year II (27 July 1794). This was, however, the date of Maximilien Robespierre's arrest. It marks the end of the eighteen-month Reign of Terror, which left tens of thousands of French dead, hundreds of thousands imprisoned, and the rest of the nation struggling to come to grips with the legacies of atrocity and mass violence. How this struggle played out forms the subject of The Afterlives of the Terror, which analyzes the immediate Thermidorian Reaction through the Napoleonic Empire and the Bourbon Restoration's heavy-handed efforts to reconstruct, restitute, and re-sacralize. In an era when governance had become the shared responsibility of all (or most men, rather), which individuals were to be held accountable for mass crimes (other than the excoriated Robespierre, already dead)? In the years after 9 Thermidor, subsequent regimes debated financial reparation for victims' families; restitution of victims' tarnished reputations; and what to do about mass graves (focal points for commemorating the past that threatened to ignite opposition to current authority). Ronen Steinberg has an eye for choosing obscure documents and episodes that both elucidate his point and grip readers' attention. For instance, the chapter that opens with a somewhat-dry meditation on the origins and meanings of "accountability" is livened by its account of the trial and execution of Joseph Le Bon, the last of the government functionaries to be guillotined for his actions during the Terror. Moreover, Steinberg is conscientious in his use of modern tools to discuss historic events. For example, he proposes to examine the Thermidorian Reaction as a period of "transitional justice," or the search for greater equity in societies that are newly emerging from periods of oppression and violence. "Transitional justice" is a term more typically applied to liberal regimes in South Africa, Latin America, and Eastern Europe, emerging in the 1990s. The value of applying this modern concept to the revolutionary past is in highlighting an ineluctable dilemma of the post-Thermidor period: the need to demonstrate that the Terror was safely in the past, balanced against the fact that dealing with the Terror was still very much the business of the uneasy present. Similarly, Steinberg avoids using the anachronistic terms "trauma" and "post-traumatic stress disorder" in connection with eighteenth- and nineteenth-century men, women, and children who predate these [End Page 258] concepts. Without modern tools to conceptualize and process the events of 1793–94, how did French society work to "liquidat[e] the heritage of the Terror" (118)? To answer this question, Steinberg brings together a series of seemingly-unrelated phenomena, including: the Gothic literary vogue; "phantasmagoria" lantern shows, which purported to "resurrect" the ghosts of Rousseau, Voltaire, Marat, and others; and contemporary medical debates about how long guillotine victims retained consciousness, and whether they felt pain. The very disparateness of these responses evokes the stumbling and irresolution of a society that was far from finished with the appalling spectacle of state-sanctioned mass violence. Gripping reading. Kate M. Bonin Arcadia University (PA) Copyright © 2021 American Association of Teachers of French

Princípio da precaução, irreparabilidade dos danos ambientais e tutela do meio ambiente

O homem, desde os primórdios, degradou o ambiente, causando diversos reflexos negativos. Uma vez lesado o meio ambiente, torna-se muito difícil, ou mesmo impossível, retornar ao estado anterior. Ademais, a reparação pecuniária não se mostra equivalente, vez que o meio ambiente não possui valor monetário. O Princípio da Precaução, enquanto medida preventiva, pode ser medida efetiva para a preservação ambiental. O artigo objetiva analisar o dever de preservação ambiental ante à sua degradação, verificando a previsão constitucional e infraconstitucional em relação ao Princípio da Precaução, além de analisar se o princípio é medida efetiva na proteção do meio ambiente, para tanto, o método abordado será o hermenêutico. Concluiu-se que, o Princípio da Precaução, ao permitir a tomada de medidas que evitem danos ao ambiente, mesmo sem certeza científica, é meio hábil para tutelar o meio ambiente, não podendo, contudo, dissociar-se da proporcionalidade.

Restricted Generosity in the New Testament

In a revised form of his dissertation at the University of Nottingham under Professor Roland Deines, Dr. Timothy Murray contributes the following volume to the growing field of NT wealth ethics. Specifically, Murray is concerned with when, how, and why the first Christians restricted their material generosity. The focus on restriction is a novelty among studies of NT wealth ethics. The argument of the book is arranged around two parts that are further separated into nine chapters. After situating his argument within the field of NT ethics in general and wealth ethics in particular, Murray helpfully clarifies some of the terms used throughout the volume (ch. 1). Murray depends heavily on the “implicit ethics” model of Ruben Zimmermann throughout his work. The first half of the monograph is devoted to comparative studies (chs. 2–5). Specifically, individual chapters detail the restricted generosity of Roman oikos (ch. 3), Greco-Roman associations (ch. 4), and first-century Jewish groups (ch. 5). Interestingly, Murray concludes from his evaluation of various texts that there is little difference in how these groups viewed generosity and its restrictions. Generosity was reciprocal and was restricted in cases where one party failed to uphold their end of the obligation. Controversially, Murray argues that there is little evidence to argue for a system of poor care among first-century Jewish groups. One highlight of this section is the evidence mined from inscriptions. As many will attest, epigraphy is important, but often the cost outweighs the benefit. Murray’s work is exceptional in this regard and illuminating to his argument.The comparative studies of the first half of the volume transition to NT texts in the second half of the volume. In this section, Murray focuses on three areas. First, he argues that the NT is replete with fictive kinship language (ch. 6). Murray explores what can be made of the church as a family. Next, Murray explores two test cases in the NT where restrictions on generosity form the background for Paul’s exhortations: the Thessalonian correspondence (ch. 7) and 1 Tim 5:3–16 (ch. 8). These final chapters follow the same basic ordering: current interpretive options followed by the “implicit ethic” in each text.The volume closes with a summary of the above findings and a short paragraph of its implications for further study. First, early Christians embodied financial mutuality, and this must be taken seriously. Second, mutuality among the first Christians was primarily concerned with internal relations. Third, the poor-care practices of early Christians cannot be assumed to be modeled after the poor-care practices by Jewish groups.In reading this volume, I was immediately impressed with the care by which Murray engages the NT texts. He evaluates the interpretive options and finds merit where merit is due. Thankfully, Murray does not attempt to synthesize his conclusions with all the major views to avoid controversy. He follows the evidence and then shows its relationship to the major commentaries on the subject, even if that relationship is strained. Murray’s preference for Zimmermann’s “implicit ethics” is initially exciting, but when it is used to understand the Thessalonian correspondence and 1 Timothy, it does not appear immediately evident how this approach is different from other models.The true value in this volume may be the timely nature of its findings. In contemporary discussion about the church and its responsibility to outsiders in regard to financial reparations, Murray has provided a nuanced understanding of the biblical texts. Too often, biblical texts are generalized and wrong conclusions reached. Murray does exactly what he sets out to do—he provides an in-depth analysis of generosity and its restrictions in the NT. If his conclusions are accepted, one will find that giving in the ancient world in general, and the NT world specifically, followed specific patterns that were regulated by self-identification, reciprocity, differences in material gifts, and ethical expectations for the recipient and giver beyond the gift/giving. This volume is recommended and necessary reading for those exploring wealth ethics in the ancient world.

Can unity be achieved through restoration? A case study of how restorative justice mechanisms impacted national unity in post-apartheid South Africa

ABSTRACTThis paper examines three key restorative justice mechanisms – participation, narrative, and reparation – used by the post-apartheid South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC), in order to determine how restorative tools can affect national unity and interracial reconciliation following a period of violent conflict. Insights from thirteen interviewees involved in the TRC process reveal that the restorative justice mechanisms of participation and narrative were generally successful in promoting national unity, while flawed attempts at financial reparations significantly harmed interracial relations. This research demonstrates that restorative justice tools can successfully engender national unity, but can also prevent reconciliation if executed incorrectly. This work provides three key takeaways for future practitioners: (1) Restorative tools can adversely impact reconciliation among some groups while fomenting national unity among others; (2) Developing unrealistic expectations about restorative process outcomes is harmful for reconciliation; (3) Restorative justice mechanisms do not operate in isolation but are interrelated.

Indigenous Knowledge in a Postgenomic Landscape: The Politics of Epigenetic Hope and Reparation in Australia

A history of colonization inflicts psychological, physical, and structural disadvantages that endure across generations. For an increasing number of Indigenous Australians, environmental epigenetics offers an important explanatory framework that links the social past with the biological present, providing a culturally relevant way of understanding the various intergenerational effects of historical trauma. In this paper, we critically examine the strategic uptake of environmental epigenetics by Indigenous researchers and policy advocates. We focus on the relationship between epigenetic processes and Indigenous views of Country and health—views that locate health not in individual bodies but within relational contexts of Indigenous ontologies that embody interconnected environments of kin/animals/matter/bodies across time and space. This drawing together of Indigenous experience and epigenetic knowledge has strengthened calls for action including state-supported calls for financial reparations. We examine the consequences of this reimagining of disease responsibility in the context of “strategic biological essentialism,” a distinct form of biopolitics that, in this case, incorporates environmental determinism. We conclude that the shaping of the right to protection from biosocial injury is potentially empowering but also has the capacity to conceal forms of governance through claimants’ identification as “damaged,” thus furthering State justification of biopolitical intervention in Indigenous lives.

Normative Consensus and Contentious Practice: Challenges to Universalism in International Human Rights Courts

Normative Consensus and Contentious Practice: Challenges to Universalism in International Human Rights Courts Courtney Hillebrecht (bio) I. INTRODUCTION In 2015 the Russian Constitutional Court announced that it would review all of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) rulings against Russia for their constitutionality.1 This decision, which both the Duma and the Kremlin supported, underscored a fundamental disagreement between Russia and the ECHR about both the substance of human rights norms and the ways in which disagreements about human rights can and should be resolved. Russia has been a member of the Council of Europe since 1996 and agreed to accept the compulsory jurisdiction of the ECHR in 1998. Russian citizens regularly seek recourse at the ECHR and Russia even complies with many of the Court’s demands to pay financial reparations to victims. And yet, Russia’s prolonged tensions with the ECHR are textbook examples of the [End Page 190] persistent, unresolved disputes at the center of the promotion and adjudication of universal human rights. Russia’s relationship with the ECHR suggests that underneath the façade of the institutionalization and judicialization of human rights remain fundamental divides about which rights “count,” and if and how those divides should be bridged. Simply engineering a different court or judicial process cannot ameliorate Russia’s contentious relationship with the ECHR. Instead, as we can learn from Reza Afshari’s long history of grappling with these inconsistencies in the international human rights regime, the problem runs much deeper than institutional design; they cannot be easily resolved. In his 2007 Human Rights Quarterly article titled “On Historiography of Human Rights,” Afshari begins with an observation about a related fundamental inconsistency in the historiography of the international human rights regime. He writes: One of the main issues that the current historiography has to grapple with is the apparent disparity between the often-celebrated normative global achievements in codifying human rights values among the UN member states and the often-lamented failures to enforce them. . . . I argue that the link should not be seen as mechanical or procedural. Weaknesses so obviously apparent in the enforcement process signify the lack of vigor in the normative consensus; the vim and vigor by which the face was adorned by high-flying colors might in fact have masked a frail body.2 This pattern of inconsistency is visible across a wide range of issue areas, from women’s rights to economic justice, and in diverse political contexts, from Iran to the United States. Examining the disjuncture between “often-celebrated” international human rights judicial instruments and their “often-lamented” enforcement and cooperation failures can give scholars and practitioners alike a clear view of the tensions that Afshari describes. II. UNVEILING THE DIVISIONS IN THE INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS JUSTICE REGIME As Afshari reminds us, high levels of state membership and participation in international human rights and criminal tribunals sometimes mask deep divisions among their members over both the meaning of human rights and their understanding of how human rights disputes should be resolved. This is, in essence, illustrative of variations in states’ levels of commitment to [End Page 191] international human rights institutions, as well as the basic norms under-girding them. As part of an in-progress book project, I examine four extreme manifestations of these variations in states’ normative and political commitments to international human rights tribunals: 1) member states’ withdrawing, or threatening to withdraw, from the courts; 2) member states and political elites’ undermining and usurping legal cases; 3) stakeholders’ imposing financial restrictions on the tribunals; and 4) both members and non-members’ creating alternatives to the tribunals. In each of these circumstances, while contenders are calling into question the form and function of the tribunals, they are also casting doubt on the underlying norms themselves. For example, Venezuela’s withdrawal from the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in 2012 and the Organization of American States in 2017 cannot simply be dismissed as the consequences of a state’s displeasure with the international human rights system.3 Instead, it calls into question the principles of universality, compulsory jurisdiction, and the ability of international human rights laws and norms to protect individuals’ rights when the going gets...

Ferenczi as social trauma thinker.

In the 21st century, the notion of trauma is so commonly used that one can speak of a culture of trauma. Today, a wide variety of people claim victimhood, pointing to their traumas as validation. Fassin and Rechtman denounce the way in which recognition strategies make use of the identity of victim to justify compensation policies and financial reparations. This paper presents Sándor Ferenczi's contributions on trauma, showing how his theory takes into consideration relational and political aspects that were underemphasized by Freud. When Ferenczi is compared to contemporary recognition thinkers (such as Honneth, Fraser and Butler), one can see that what is at stake in his theory is neither identity nor victimization. It is deeper: Ferenczi shows the importance of the vulnerable dimension in all of us, suggesting that recognizing mutual vulnerability is a basis of the sense of connectedness and solidarity with the other.

Holding fossil fuel companies accountable for their contribution to climate change: Where does the law stand?

ABSTRACTThe judge who called for a climate tutorial in a federal court in San Francisco accepted the science that says that human-caused emissions of carbon dioxide play the central role in rising average global temperatures, increased sea levels, and coastal flooding – but threw out a lawsuit calling for financial reparations from the oil companies for causing these problems. Why? And what might the decision mean for other cases in other states, along similar lines, that are still in the works? Two environmental lawyers, one of whom was in the courtroom for the tutorial, explain.

Truth-Seeking for Jeju and the Debates on Compliance

The April 3 Incident in the Island of Jeju marked one of the gravest human rights violations in Korean history involving a majority of victims who were non-politically motivated innocent civilians caught in the crossfire between the state, foreign actors, and a leftist political party and its armed affiliates. The violence, which continued from 1947 to 1954, resulted in the highest number of casualties, following that of the Korean War (1950-1953). Despite the gravity of the human rights violations, it was only after South Korea transitioned to a democracy and prosecuted two former heads of states that the state engaged in efforts to address the April 3 Incident. This study examines the Special Act for the Investigation of the Jeju April 3 Incident and Recovering the Honor of Victims (1999) and the National Committee for the Investigation of the Truth about the Jeju April 3 Events, which established the Jeju April 3 Commission (2000). Specifically, the study focuses on the status of state compliance with the list of recommendations and article provisions from the Special Act and the National Committee, which included policies for truth-seeking, reparations, and accountability measures for the state. The article finds that while on truth-seeking and symbolic reparations the state reflected a good record of complying with the recommendations, on financial and medical reparations, and criminal accountability measures, the state was relatively less proactive in compliance. The selective level of compliance from the state provides some insight as to the state’s respect for these policies and the possible conditions that may have resulted in the differences of state behavior.

Archives on “Stolen” Childhood: Sensitive Files Finally Described and Opened, if Still Existing…

The paper discusses a part of “Swiss dark social history” and its effect on the reorganization of archival fonds, in order to find information about people concerned with coercive measures for assistance. The term “Stolen Childhood” refers to the treatment inflicted by the authorities of Switzerland to children, orphans or from divorced families, forcibly placed in institutions and foster families, which amount to an estimated 100,000 between 1800 and 1980. In relation to this sensitive data, a survey was made about the institutions and repositories which might have kept individual files of these children. Cantonal archives have now centralized this information as much as possible, and described it. Since conservation recommendations and guaranteed access for the people concerned have been issued, special attention is given to records like court orders, divorce papers, which can trace the fate of victims. Other types of traces can be found in municipal archives. On April 12, 2013, Federal Councilor Simonetta Sommaruga officially apologized on behalf of the Swiss Confederation, and asked forgiveness for the suffering inflicted. A measure was passed for distributing financial reparation, as the victims still alive often lead a precarious life.

Project REENCONTRO: ethical aspects of genetic identification in families separated by the compulsory isolation of leprosy patients in Brazil

In this paper, we discuss the experience of a team of geneticists, working in partnership with a Brazilian social movement aimed at promoting the rights of victims of Hansen's disease. These university researchers propose to use DNA test results to ascertain kinship connections and thereby reunite families that were sundered apart by draconian state policies of the mid-twentieth century that decreed the forced segregation of leprosy patients and the institutionalization of their children. The team's aim is to help revert stigma and reinforce positive group identity as well as to facilitate judicial claims to moral and financial reparation from the Brazilian state. We will discuss how, notwithstanding the voluntary nature of tests, mediated at all times through the social movement, the geneticists take care to follow clear ethical guidelines in the collection and stocking of DNA samples as well as in the devolution of test results. The subsequent inclusion of anthropologists in the team brings to the fore new ethical dilemmas ranging from procedures in field research to the possible consequences of research results.

From The Hague to the Balkans: A Victim-oriented Reparations Approach to Improved International Criminal Justice

The international crimes committed in the territory of the former Yugoslavia during the 1990s have been the subject of both State responsibility claims and prosecutions establishing individual criminal responsibility. On 26 February 2007 the International Court of Justice handed down its judgment in the Genocide case while it is expected that in 2014 the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia will conclude all appeals from prosecutions. While these initiatives contribute to the acknowledgement of the commission of international crimes they have not provided the victims with any financial reparations. Instead victims have had to make compensation claims under domestic law. The article examines how, in addition to the international initiatives at The Hague, a regionally focused victim oriented reparations approach can assist in attaining improved international criminal justice for international crimes committed during the Yugoslav wars. A victim oriented reparations approach would enhance victims’ rights through the provision of financial reparations, reflect improved international criminal justice and assist in the attainment long-term stability in the war-torn States of the former Yugoslavia.

Systemic Mediation: Moral Reasoning and Boundaries of Concern

This paper outlines a new systemic mediation approach, based on the idea that the most important thing for many participants in mediation is to have their moral reasoning understood and appreciated. This is frequently more important to people than financial reparation. We compare our mediation approach with others to demonstrate that many previous approaches share the assumption that once the interests of a participant have been identified, these should not be questioned. In contrast, our systemic mediation approach encourages participants to explore their own and other people's moral frameworks to enable critical reflection on their interests. Indeed, the concept of an ‘interest’ can be reframed as the boundary that a participant uses to delimit his or her concerns, and boundaries can be shifted in response to moral reasoning. Our mediation approach aims to generate both personal insights and improvements in mutual understanding. The mediator plays a facilitative role but cannot be neutral: the morality of the mediator unavoidably influences his or her facilitative interventions. Therefore, personal reflection by the mediator on his or her own moral framework is essential, so that its influences can be made visible and the facilitator can thereby be held accountable for them in dialogue with his or her peers. Tools are provided in our systemic mediation approach to support reflection on moral frameworks and boundaries of concern, and a practical example of their use in Colombian mediation practice is provided. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Compensation for Research-Related Injury in NIH-Sponsored HIV/AIDS Clinical Trials in Africa

Concern has been voiced in the research ethics literature that under U.S. federal regulations U.S. sponsors, particularly the NIH, are not required to provide compensation for the treatment of research-related injury for trial participants or to allow grant funds to be used by investigators for appropriate insurance. This is problematic in developing country contexts because most participants are unlikely to have health insurance, resulting in overburdened and under-resourced health systems in many developing countries being responsible for providing care and treatment for research-related injury. This study provides preliminary insight into how respondent principal investigators of NIH-sponsored HIV/AIDS clinical trials in Africa and African research ethics committees deal with compensation for research-related injury. The majority of PIs surveyed provided free treatment for research-related injury, but few provided other forms of financial reparation to participants. The study also found that half of the PIs surveyed indicated that NIH funds were used for compensation, highlighting a contradiction between literature and practice. The majority of REC chairs surveyed indicated that their RECs routinely reviewed compensation plans for research-related injury and that their ethics application forms specifically requested information on compensation. Findings from one southern African country revealed that NIH funds were not used to provide treatment and/or financial reparation for research-related injury. Instead, PIs from this country relied on the government or the individual research participant (and/or their medical aid/health insurer) to cover the costs of research-related injury. The findings are discussed in the light of the recent (December 2011) U.S. Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethics report which recommends that research participants are morally entitled to compensation for research-related injury.

Cash for Genocide? The Politics of Memory in the Herero Case for Reparations

Legal remedies for historical injustices rely upon the politicization of memory, as current debates about the 1904–1907 genocide of the Herero in German Southwest Africa (contemporary Namibia) demonstrate. Here the author shows how claims for financial reparations obscure historical influences on the Herero community and the Namibian nation-state: German colonial rule and local actors complicit in it, the intervening period of South African rule; and the post-independence context. Bringing into a single conversation historical, ethnographic, media, and legal research, the author argues that the politics of compensation can distort historical narratives, and, more specifically, undermine opportunities for post-apartheid Namibia to come to terms with both distant and recent histories of dispossession.