Reparation For Victims Research Articles

Reconciliation without Justice: The State and the Invalidation of Victimhood in Post-colonial Zimbabwe, 1980–2017

Abstract This article calls for the location of victimhood rather than political convenience at the centre of Zimbabwe’s peace-building matrix. From the attainment of independence in 1980 to the military assisted end of President Robert Mugabe’s rule in November 2017, Zimbabwe’s episodic cycles of violence were concluded through elite bargained amnesty ordinances, state mediated reconciliation pronouncements and clemency orders that unconditionally benefitted perpetrators at the expense of victims. The forgive-and-forget ethic central to these routine and fractional peace building measures, I argue, not only disregarded the rule of law but negated victimhood and rendered justice divisible. Victims of politically motivated violence could not secure redress through the courts of law against amnestied perpetrators as this would amount to double jeopardy. The government withheld prosecutorial justice against perpetrators and disregarded reparations for victims. Within the national legislative framework ordinary legislators could not move motions compelling the government to compensate survivors of violence because only the vice-presidents and ministers could move motions that had the consequence of either depleting state revenues or causing the imposition of additional taxes on citizens. Considering that ministers who had the prerogative to move such motions served in cabinet at the behest of their intractable president they could hardly embarrass or contradict their principal. Essentially, the Robert Mugabe led Zimbabwean government established legal firewalls for perpetrators of politically motivated violence which ipso facto invalidated the quest for justice by victims of the country’s ever recurring cycles of violence. This authoritarian legalism disregarded victimhood and emboldened human rights violators.

Disentangling Law and Religion in the Rohingya Case at the International Criminal Court

ABSTRACT The Rohingya are one of the most persecuted minorities in the world. Military campaigns conducted by Myanmar against the Rohingya have led to numerous deaths, widespread cases of sexual violence, the destruction of hundreds of villages, and the deportation of more than 700,000 people to Bangladesh. These events have triggered proceedings at the International Criminal Court (ICC). The ICC has arguably failed to address the religious dimensions of crimes and facts in some of its previous jurisprudence appropriately. The entanglement of law and religion at the ICC may lead to an impoverished ratio decidendi and disregard for the victims’ claims. We hence argue that, by disentangling law and religion in the proceedings related to the Rohingya, the ICC may be able to enhance the consideration of both elements. This approach should result in (1) appropriate fact-finding related to the Rohingya’s identity on ethnic and religious grounds as well as religious dimensions of mass atrocities; (2) attribution of criminal responsibility for serious violations of human rights, including rights related to the Rohingya’s religious identity, which constitute international crimes; and (3) reparations for victims to redress harm inflicted on them.

Femicides: Different Approaches from the Regional Protection of Human Rights

Since the adoption of the term femicide for gender-based killings of women, the theoretical development and transition of this definition to a legal concept has contributed to the acknowledgment of this phenomenon as the most extreme manifestation of violence against women. In the international sphere, the regional systems of protection of human rights appear as fertile soil for victims of femicide to claim protection. Consequently, the European Court, Inter-American, and the ECOWAS Court of human rights play an important role in the investigation, prosecution, and reparation of femicide in their regions. Nevertheless, through their jurisprudence in the matter, regional courts of human rights have adopted different approaches for femicide. This shows striking differences in the recognition of the phenomenon of femicide, the development of State obligations, and the reparation for victims. The minimalistic approach applied by the European Court in its cases, as well as a single precedent of feminicide studied by the ECOWAS Court, makes us turn the view to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. Based on its maximalist approach, the Inter-American Court has gone beyond its sister courts to establish a consolidated recognition of the phenomenon of femicide, and to develop in a wider and deeper way the scope of State obligations and reparations on femicide cases.

Victims of Corruption: Integral Reparation and Institutional Trust as Cores of Anticorruption Strategies

In the context of the current anti-corruption discourse, it is critical to consider the systemic and structural manipulation of institutions, which potentially increases social/interpersonal and institutional distrust and lack of confidence, and creates the perception of “institutional vacuums” and institutional illegitimacy. In the long run, this dynamic creates a vicious circle between lower social/ interpersonal and institutional trust and higher corruption. Bearing this in mind, in this paper it is argued that integral reparation of individual, collective, and social victims of corruption should be a core principle of any anti-corruption discourse and practice that seeks to restore social/interpersonal and institutional trust and legitimacy. This paper consists of four sections. After the introduction, in the second section it is analyzed how institutional distrust is an unexpected consequence of exposing Macro- corruption and institutional cooptation. In the third section the main strategies for restoring social/interpersonal and institutional trust are discussed. In the final section it is considered the role of integral reparation actions to restore trust and confidence among individual, collective, and social agents.

The Significance of the 2005 UN Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation

INTRODUCTION. The research analyzes the UN Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Gross Violations of International Human Rights Law and Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law (Basic Principles and Guidelines) of December 16, 2005. The Article examines the stages of the adoption of this document, the concept, structure, basic provisions, as well as the importance for the development of modern international law, particularly in the field of human rights protection and international humanitarian law. Consequently, the Article provides a detailed analysis of the approach to the central subject of this document, that is, the right to a remedy and reparation, which is expressed in practical application by universal and regional bodies on human rights and in the field of humanitarian law. In this regard, the position of the right to a remedy and reparation in the complex of human rights is determined, as well as their interconnection and relation to each other.MATERIALS AND METHODS. The theoretical researches of the Russian and foreign experts in the field of international law have been analyzed in this very Article as well as the normative documents, recommendations, and decisions of the treaty bodies on human rights within the UN system, the law enforcement practice of universal and regional judicial and quasi-judicial bodies for the protection of human rights and in the field of international humanitarian law have also been studied. Such methods of scientific cognition as analysis and synthesis, the generalization method, the system-structural method, as well as the historical-legal and legal-technical methods have also been applied in this research.RESEARCH RESULTS. The Article reveals the significance and impact of the mechanism developed in the Basic Principles and Guidelines, in general, on the international human rights system. The Basic Principles and Guidelines are an international document, developed with the best practice of existing legal systems. It was adopted unanimously through the consensus reached by all parties concerned. The Basic Principles and Guidelines are aimed at codifying the provisions on the right to a remedy and reparation enshrined in various international treaties and as well as at developing a unified approach to these rights. Thus, the said international instrument does not create any new rules but classifies and uniforms the set of provisions on the right to a remedy and reparation. This nature of the Basic Principles and Guidelines makes them an attractive tool for international bodies in their law enforcement practice related to ensuring the right to a remedy and reparation. DISCUSSION ANDCONCLUSSIONS. The Basic Principles and Guidelines enshrine the responsibility of States in the field of human rights protection, when the second party to the conflict is individual, or individuals whose rights have been or may be violated. Therefore, the Basic Principles are focused on the interests of the victim of a violation of human rights, that is, they are deliberately humanistic and human rights oriented. The document provides a classification of victims to more adequately cover human rights mechanisms that ensure the protection of persons, individually or collectively. Further, it pays special attention to the protection of victims of gross violations of human rights. In addition, the Basic Principles and Guidelines list and describe forms of reparation for the victims of human rights violations.

Recouping proceeds of corruption: is there any need to reverse extant trends by enacting civil forfeiture legal regime in Nigeria?

PurposeThe aim of this study is to investigate how Nigeria can seek legal assistance on recovery of its stolen assets to reduce corruption and to ensure no sheltered havens for incomes from corruption.Design/methodology/approachThe research adopts a conceptual method by using existing literature with the application of doctrinal legal research technique. The research likewise uses primary and secondary sources of legislations such as legislative provisions, case laws and the provisions of Chapter V of the United Nations Convention against Corruption and the process of asset recovery. The study compares the United Kingdom, USA, Hong Kong in China, South Africa and Nigeria proceeds of corruption recovery laws to gain basic legal features that would be beneficial to Nigeria in reforming its anti-corruption laws.FindingsThe principle of territorial sovereignty under the international law makes the offence of corruption not punishable outside the jurisdiction of the state where the offence was committed. As a result, some developed states boost their economy with these proceeds and the developing states are impoverished. There is also an allegation of discrepancies in the figures of funds recovered by the anti-corruption agencies. Thus, there is the need for transparency; law on civil forfeiture of proceeds of corruption; bilateral treaties; and mutual legal assistance on investigation, confiscation among countries for tracing and returning of proceeds of corruption.Research limitations/implicationsThe estimates of the volume of assets looted from Nigeria vary widely because of the complexity of collecting data on proceeds of corruption as official statistics on proceeds of corruption recovered do not exist as each anti-corruption agency occasionally makes pronouncements on the volume of assets recovered without any breakdown in terms of assets seized, nature of assets and their locations and its values. Such data would aid policymakers to measure the effectiveness of the present assets legislations and to enhance its effectiveness.Practical implicationsConsidering the clandestine manners corruption is being committed, it is tasking to correctly evaluate the amount of money stolen so, their economic impacts on the nation’s economy.Social implicationsAbsence of accurate data would aid policymakers to measure the effectiveness of the present assets legislations and to enhance its effectiveness.Originality/valueThe study offers modules on management of proceeds of corruption by establishing “Assets Management Commission” and “Proceeds of Corruption Forfeiture Funds” for reparation of victims’ of corruption. The study suggests the necessity for civil forfeiture of proceeds of corruption, which is presently lacking, and creation of Proceeds of Corruption Recovery and Management Commission to manage such proceeds and advocate establishment of “Proceeds of Corruption Forfeiture Funds” for reparation of victims of corruption.

Cultural damage and reparation of victims in the Colombian armed conflict. The case of the black peasant community of San Cristóbal (Montes de María – Colombia)

ABSTRACT The aim of this study is to identify and analyze the cultural damage caused by the armed conflict in the black peasant community of San Cristóbal, in Montes de María, one of the regions most affected by the prolonged conflict in Colombia. A conceptual and methodological framework is proposed to address, from a interdisciplinary scope, culture in victim reparation processes, based on the systematization of the conflict effects. Thus, by synthetizing community knowledge and experience on how cultural assets and practices have been affected by violence, capability and asset planning approaches are applied to discuss how the cultural dimension of development should be incorporated into collective reparation measures that are being executed by the Colombian State. It was found that the action of armed groups affected popular feats, traditional medicine, agriculture and community social capital in the broad sense. Hence, the reparation actions that are built under the state initiative consider the cultural dimension, for which they must directly involve the affected community and recover the social capital associated with traditional festivals, where multiple oral traditions and expressions, music, dance and communication were severely damaged for more than two decades of armed disputes in the area.

Kidnapped and Made Brides: Advancing Quantum Reparation for Sexual and Gender-based Victims in Conflict Zones

Conflict is the friction resulting from incompatibilities among people. Conflict has become a common experience in many African countries today which has led to bloodshed, death, starvation, famine, and ravaged communities. In this scenario, women and children have always been the worst hit. The girl child, particularly, and women are sexually abused, raped, kidnapped, and sometimes converted to sex slaves or forced into marriages. Since 2009, Boko Haram, a group of notorious terrorists, has been operating in the Northern part of Nigeria. One major feature of the signage of the group is the abduction of girls and women whom they forced into sexual slavery and marriage. In the years following the onslaughts, many of these girls were returned based on negotiations with the Federal Government of Nigeria. Some of the girls were returned defiled, some with children, and some with pregnancies as evidences of their sex slavery experience in the hands of the insurgents and abductors. While the Boko Haram troop’s attack is still an ongoing experience in Nigeria, little or nothing, however, is relayed about the issue of reparation for the girls and women returnees. Access to justice is one major factor that has not been provided for the victims. Using a desktop research, existing literature is reviewed in an analytical and comparative methodology, as available legal provisions are examined. It is suggested to the Nigerian government to involve the victims in the discourse of reparation and ensure their access to justice. This will ensure that quantum reparation is provided. The paper will be of immense importance to the Nigerian government, policymakers, civil organizations, human rights practitioners, the victims, as well as the citizenry. It will contribute in the way of education and policy making to the mentioned people.

Law Development by the International Criminal Court as a Way to Enhance the Protection of Minorities - The Case for Intersectional Consideration of Mass Atrocities

Mass atrocities almost invariably involve the targeting of racial, ethnic, religious and/or political groups. Other groups, such as homosexuals, have also been vulnerable to targeted destruction. Both experience and international case law demonstrate that atrocity crimes have mostly been inflicted on minorities within minorities. With individuals being targeted on several personal grounds or due to overlapping identities (for example, women and girls belonging to ethnic or religious minorities) there is a strong case for both scholarship and international criminal judiciary to develop an expertise on intersectional discrimination in the context of international crimes that implicate discriminatory intent of a perpetrator. Yet, the International Criminal Court (ICC or Court) has tended to consider atrocities motivated by discrimination on isolated discriminatory grounds and independently from each other. As a prescriptive contribution, the present article challenges this trend by arguing that in more complex criminal cases the protected characteristics need to be considered together with, and not separately from, one another, in order to capture the multi-faceted experiences of mass abuses. Underlying the treatment of the subject matter are thus two basic questions: first, given a full respect for the principle of legality (nullum crimen sine lege), what are the possible avenues for international criminal adjudication to recognize intersectionality so as to overcome conceptual flaws and limitations of single-issue analysis of discrimination in cases involving core international crimes against minorities? For example, can Article 21(3) of the Rome Statute on the interpretation and application of substantive international criminal law in light of international human rights standards serve as a viable tool for the Court to evolve its jurisprudence on this particular issue? Second, how and to what extent should the Court take intersectionality into consideration in the formulation of charges; identification and interpretation of applicable law; determination of criminal sentence; ordering adequate remedies (reparations) for victims; and in considering such aspects as the gravity assessment, or the contextualisation of crimes? Answering these questions, the article shows that by applying, interpreting and, when need be, developing international criminal law in a way that utilizes intersectionality the ICC can make in these areas important jurisprudential contributions with far-reaching socio-legal implications.

Law Development by the International Criminal Court as a Way to Enhance the Protection of Minorities—the Case for Intersectional Consideration of Mass Atrocities

Abstract Mass atrocities almost invariably involve the targeting of racial, ethnic, religious and/or political groups. Other groups, such as homosexuals, have also been vulnerable to targeted destruction. Both experience and international case law demonstrate that atrocity crimes have mostly been inflicted on minorities within minorities. With individuals being targeted on several personal grounds or due to overlapping identities (for example, women and girls belonging to ethnic or religious minorities) there is a strong case for both scholarship and international criminal judiciary to develop an expertise on intersectional discrimination in the context of international crimes that implicate discriminatory intent of a perpetrator. Yet, the International Criminal Court (ICC or Court) has tended to consider atrocities motivated by discrimination on isolated discriminatory grounds and independently from each other. As a prescriptive contribution, the present article challenges this trend by arguing that in more complex criminal cases the protected characteristics need to be considered together with, and not separately from, one another, in order to capture the multi-faceted experiences of mass abuses. Underlying the treatment of the subject matter are thus two basic questions: first, given a full respect for the principle of legality (nullum crimen sine lege), what are the possible avenues for international criminal adjudication to recognize intersectionality so as to overcome conceptual flaws and limitations of single-issue analysis of discrimination in cases involving core international crimes against minorities? For example, can Article 21(3) of the Rome Statute on the interpretation and application of substantive international criminal law in light of international human rights standards serve as a viable tool for the Court to evolve its jurisprudence on this particular issue? Second, how and to what extent should the Court take intersectionality into consideration in the formulation of charges; identification and interpretation of applicable law; determination of criminal sentence; ordering adequate remedies (reparations) for victims; and in considering such aspects as the gravity assessment, or the contextualisation of crimes? Answering these questions, the article shows that by applying, interpreting and, when need be, developing international criminal law in a way that utilizes intersectionality the ICC can make in these areas important jurisprudential contributions with far-reaching socio-legal implications.

Accident and Design: Recognising Victims of Aggression in International Law

International law has not traditionally recognised individuals as victims of the crime of aggression. Recent developments may precipitate a departure from this approach. The activation of the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court over the crime of aggression opens the way for the future application of the Court’s regime of victim participation and reparation in the context of prosecutions for this crime. The determination by the United Nations Human Rights Committee in General Comment No. 36 that any deprivation of life resulting from an act of aggression violates Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights serves to recognise a previously overlooked class of victims. This article explores these recent developments, by discussing their background, meaning and implications for international law and the rights of victims.

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

The Projectification of Reparation

AbstractThere has been increasing use of project-based organization in various areas of human rights practice, including within truth and justice-seeking in the wake of mass atrocities. This article traces the development and deployment of project-based approaches to judicial reparation at the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC), an internationalized (hybrid) criminal tribunal. Drawing on the authors’ many years of close observation in and around the ECCC, it describes and explains how a project-based approach responded to the challenge of ‘moral and collective’ reparation for victims of mass crimes committed by the Khmer Rouge (1975–1979). The article critically examines how development actors nominated, designed and ‘delivered’ so-called ‘reparation projects’. Twenty-four projects were ultimately recognized by the ECCC; key details of these are succinctly tabulated here for the benefit of readers. The article discusses the effects of the projectification of ECCC reparation, including new practices, changed relationships and changed meanings of reparation. It finds that in Cambodia—a state that has experienced decades of international development assistance resulting in the entrenchment of project forms across different fields—the mobilization of new actors and resources has expanded the possibilities for ECCC reparation and provided some benefits to those victims involved. However, a project-based approach also reshaped decision-making and accountability structures underpinning reparation work. The article argues that using ‘projectification’ as an analytical lens expands our capacity to understand how, and with what consequences, global notions of reparation and justice are enacted in different contexts through the coordination and implementation of projects.

Reparation Modalities at the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC)

Abstract In the last decade, the ECCC has ordered reparations for victims of the Khmer Rouge’s mass atrocities committed in Cambodia during the 1970s. Various scholars have examined those reparations ordered by the ECCC. Yet, this is the first academic piece to assess the ECCC’s reparation modalities under the UN Reparation Principles, which contain key standards on reparations for victims of atrocities. Overall, the ECCC has ordered important rehabilitation, satisfaction and guarantees of non-repetition measures to redress victims’ harm. This is a meaningful current development with regard to reparations for victims of atrocities. However, the ECCC’s reparation law and practice exhibits some important deficits under the UN Reparation Principles. At the ECCC, restitution and compensation are excluded and the range of guarantees of non-repetition has been limited. Nonetheless, these deficits must be considered within the ECCC’s mandate as an internationalised criminal court.

Derechos de las víctimas de violaciones a derechos humanos. Una mirada desde la reparación integral y el cumplimiento de sentencias

El trabajo que se plantea en las siguientes líneas parte de la inferencia de que existe un vínculo directo entre las violaciones de derechos humanos, la obligación de reparar el daño y el cumplimiento de las decisiones judiciales internacionales que ordenan tal reparación, pues la propia sentencia y su efectivo cumplimiento constituye una forma de reparación hacia las víctimas de violaciones de derechos humanos.

Transitional Justice Standards on Reparations for Women Subjected to Violence in the CEDAW Committee’s Evolving Legal Practice

Abstract Violence against women continues to be one of the most pressing global concerns. Reparations for women victims of violence have been addressed by the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women Committee over the last 15 years. This article critically examines the evolving practice of the Committee on reparations, in light of the transitional justice doctrinal and normative acquis on gender-sensitive reparations. We systematize legal interpretations, identify trends and milestones, and link them to transitional justice elements. We also suggest that the transitional justice reparations framework can be, and is in fact being, applied to non-transitional contexts, independent of armed conflict and authoritarian regimes. Further, we propose recommendations for the Committee to engage in a more explicit ‘dialogue’ with these ongoing developments to the benefit of women in their everyday lives and in recognition of the structural dimension of violence against women, even in what are other so-called peaceful and stable societies.

Compensation and reparations for victims and bystanders of the U.S. Public Health Service research studies in Tuskegee and Guatemala: Who do we owe what?

Using the infamous research studies in Tuskegee and Guatemala, the article examines the difference between victims and bystanders. The victims can include families, sexual partners, and children not just the participants. There are also the bystanders in the populations who are affected, even vaguely, decades after the initial studies took place. Differing reparations for victims and bystanders through lawsuits and historical acknowledgments has to be part of broader discussions of historical justice, and the weighing of the impact of racism and imperial research endeavors.

Bridging the Gap Between the Reality of Male Sexual Violence and Access to Justice and Accountability

Abstract The limited accountability achieved to date for sexual violence in conflict has largely reflected one specific form: the rape of women and girls. Investigation, prosecution and convictions for other forms of sexual violence have lagged behind significantly. This is the case for sexual violence against men and boys. Using detailed data from over 130 expert medical reports of Syrian male former detainees, the article contrasts known typology of male sexual violence in conflict with penal codes and case law across a range of jurisdictions. It also considers the broader challenges for access to justice, reparation and recovery for such victims and survivors of these crimes. The article then turns to examine how these gaps might be bridged to provide better access and outcomes for justice to male survivors of conflict-related sexual violence. It explores a local Syrian interdisciplinary approach using medical expert documentation which has opened up investigation and awareness of male sexual violence. Lastly, it sets out concluding recommendations for approaching male sexual violence in national investigations and prosecutions.

Imbricaciones dogmático-jurídicas de la institucionalización normativa de revictimización en México

A partir de la instauración del sistema garantista en México, proclamado por la reforma constitucional en materia penal acaecida en 2008, se reafirmaron los derechos de la víctima como sujeto de protección del Estado. Para esto, se emitió en 2013 la Ley General de Víctimas, un ordenamiento que en su diseño normativo adolece de precisión sobre los sujetos obligados a vigilar que se garantice el otorgamiento de la reparación integral como prerrogativa inherente al sujeto pasivo u ofendido del delito.Asimismo, se aprecia que en la reforma al referido ordenamiento legal, acaecida en 2017, se presentan dos graves problemáticas: la tutela simbólica de la participación de la sociedad civil en las acciones tendientes a cumplimentar la reparación integral; y la difuminación la idoneidad del perfil del Comisionado Ejecutivo del Sistema Nacional de Atención a Víctimas. Esto último legitima la presencia de personas que no posean las bases académicas y/o profesionales para garantizar la reparación integral a quienes resintieron los efectos de las conductas punibles, circunstancia que no concuerda con las directrices de un Estado Democrático de Derecho.En esta tesitura, se analizan los elementos esenciales de las políticas públicas tradicionales frente a las políticas públicas con enfoque de derechos humanos. Se busca determinar si, en efecto, el actual diseño normativo de la obligación estatal de garantizar la reparación integral a las víctimas del delito se ajusta al paradigma proteccionista impulsado a través de la positivización de los derechos humanos en la Constitución Política de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos.Introducción: El presente documento contempla la revisión dogmática del derecho victimal y su devenir histórico en México, a través de las reformas constitucionales generadas a partir de 1993. Contempla también el estudio de los elementos esenciales de la reparación integral y su vinculación con el derecho fundamental de dignidad humana, consagrado a nivel federal e internacional. El fin es sentar la base analítica sobre la institucionalización de la revictimización en México, con motivo de la ambigüedad en el diseño de la Ley General de Víctimas relativa al establecimiento puntual de la autoridad legitimada para velar que se garantice la reparación integral, circunstancia que distorsiona la obligación manifiesta del Estado mexicano de generar políticas públicas que protejan la dignidad humana.Método: A partir de la perspectiva de los métodos sistemático jurídico y comparativo, se reflexiona sobre las particularidades del derecho victimal como punto vinculante con los elementos esenciales de una reparación integral, y el concepto de revictimización impulsado por el Modelo Integral de Atención a Víctimas. Esto con el fin de generar un hilo conductor con la explicación sobre la revictimización institucionalizada, producto de la ambigüedad normativa en el señalamiento de los sujetos obligados para vigilar por el cumplimiento de la reparación integral por ministerio de la Ley General de Víctimas en su última reforma de 2017. La circunstancia antes descrita no se ajusta a los postulados de una política pública con perspectiva de derechos humanos, inherente al espíritu proteccionista enaltecido a través de las reformas constitucionales en materia penal y de derechos humanos.Resultados: El diseño normativo de la Ley General de Víctimas impulsada por el Estado mexicano, consagra una revictimización institucional provocada por la ambigüedad en el señalamiento preciso de las autoridades encargadas de vigilar el cumplimiento de la reparación integral. Esta situación trastoca el derecho fundamental de dignidad humana establecido en el artículo 1 de la Constitución Política de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos; el artículo 11.1 de la Convención Americana de Derechos Humanos; el artículo 1 de la Declaración Universal de los Derechos Humanos; y el artículo 10.1 del Pacto Internacional de Derechos Civiles y Políticos, elementos sustanciales del Derecho Internacional de los Derechos Humanos.Discusión o Conclusión: En aras de garantizar la tutela efectiva del derecho fundamental de dignidad humana, el Estado mexicano debe precisar, en el numeral 1° de la Ley General de Víctimas, las autoridades legitimadas para verificar el cumplimiento del derecho de reparación integral; es decir, la puntualización de los sujetos obligados que deben responder por el incumplimiento del deber legal que les imponen el ordenamiento en comento. La Constitución Política de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos y los tratados internacionales como estándar irreductible de las políticas públicas con enfoque de derechos humanos.

La reparación de las víctimas y la justiciabilidad de los derechos fundamentales en la jurisprudencia de la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos

This paper reflects on the reparation of victims from a legal perspective, withing the framework of the State’s international responsibility, and based on International Human Rights Law (IHRL). Arguments are presented in favor of transferring the study of the reparation of victims from the components of the State’s international responsibility towards human rights, taking as core the concept of the victim. Later, the reparation of victims is characterized as a complex human right. Therefore, some judgments on merits of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (I/A Court H.R) are analyzed, to demonstrate the progressive inclination towards the protection of fundamental rights in Latin America, by the guarantee of the victim’s right to reparation.