Document Library

Key Text Reparation

Author: S Vandeginste
Date: 2003
Size: 17 pages (267 KB)

Summary

Reparation has generally been conceived in terms of compensation for loss or harm, but the definition is widening. What are the different kinds of reparation and how are they used?

This chapter in a book from the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (IDEA) discusses various forms of reparation, their merits and limitations, and offers guidance on establishing a reparation programme. It is not enough to just institute human rights - the new administration must assume legal responsibility for past abuses and make amends. Beyond the legal obligations associated with human rights, reparation has an ethical and political dimension: it acknowledges the victims' experiences and promotes reconciliation. Where criminal proceedings against all perpetrators are not feasible but victims cannot be expected to simply forget the past, reparation can be the middle path.

International human rights law has clear, though ultimately unenforceable, obligations on states involved in torture or genocide (note 'states', not 'administrations': new, 'clean' regimes inherit these obligations from an abusive predecessor).
Individual perpetrators or claimants are only occasionally dealt with at the international level; national measures may be criminal or civil proceedings, state-run compensation funds, or victim-perpetrator mediation.
'Restitution' includes restoring belongings and rights to people. 'Compensation' may be nominal (to acknowledge wrongdoing); pecuniary (equal in value to material harm done); moral (compensating immaterial harm); or punitive (a deterrent). Both are legal rights which should be enforced.
'Satisfaction' or 'redress' include symbolic measures such as public apologies or commemoration ceremonies. 'Rehabilitation' is the physical and mental healing of victims, and 'reform' deals with institutional issues. These are not rights but policies to promote reconciliation.

Details of a reparation programme depend on specific circumstances, such as the nature of old and new regimes or the kind of transition. It will balance individual and collective measures, financial and non-financial, commemoration and reform. There is still a huge gap between theory and practice, and effectiveness should be the guiding principle.

A purely judicial approach cannot provide reparation for a large number of victims: it is expensive, time-consuming and complicated; the judicial system may be inadequate, and is not designed to deal with collective guilt or victimhood.
Non- judicial actions may be faster and place less burden of proof on victims, but must incorporate the strengths of the judicial approach - in recognising categories of victim and setting standards of compensation for instance.
State-run reparation funds such as the Reparation and Rehabilitation Committee of South Africa's Truth and Reconciliation Commission can go beyond financial payments to include rehabilitation programmes.
Reparation must not institute a new round of discrimination - it must be equally available to all victims. It should not be seen as a 'reward' for testifying, and unrealistic expectations should be avoided: excessive levels of compensation will not be sustainable to large numbers of victims.
Reparation should be explicitly linked to the acknowledgement of wrongdoing, otherwise it may be seen as a welfare fund, undermining its psychological value - although an urgent assistance fund may also be needed in the short term, as in Rwanda.
Financing reparation raises hard questions of scarce resources: carefully-designed measures to make direct and indirect offenders (individuals and companies) pay will be required; foreign contributions may also be needed.

Access full text: available online

Source: Vandeginste, S. 2003, 'Reparation', in Bloomfield, D., Barnes, T. and Huyse, L. (eds.) 2003, 'Reconciliation After Violent Conflict: A Handbook', International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance.
Author: Institute for Development Policy and Management (IDPM), http://www.sed.manchester.ac.uk/idpm/
Organisation: International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance, http://www.idea.int/