Amnesties and Inclusive Political Settlements

Abstract

This report draws on the new Amnesties, Conflict, and Peace Agreement (ACPA) dataset, developed through the Political Settlement Research Programme, to explore when and how amnesties are used during conflict and peace. In particular, it uses the empirical data from its large-scale comparative of analysis of amnesty practice to examine how the context in which amnesties are adopted can shape decisions on the scope, conditionality, and legal effects of amnesties. The report argues that these aspects of amnesty design can have significant implications for the extent to which amnesty can contribute to inclusive political settlements or conversely to excluding some individuals or groups from the post-conflict political contract.

The violent legacy of fascism: Neofascist political violence in Italy, 1969–88

“…According to reliable estimates, more than 20,000 collaborationists and more than 5,000 fascists were set free due to the amnesty (Franzinelli 2016). If the Italian case could seem an outlier, due to its amnesty, it is in fact rather a forerunner of many other cases: between 1990 and 2016, 289 amnesties have been introduced because of ongoing conflict, as part of peace negotiations, or in post-conflict periods, 245 of which included political crimes (Mallinder 2020).…”

Amnesties and transitional justice

“…Most amnesties enacted over the last three decades have not had conditions requiring individual amnesty applicants to disclose the truth about their actions. 66 Instead, these laws have served to close down criminal, and sometimes other legal remedies, without containing express provisions to support truth recovery. Does this mean that these amnesty laws should be understood as what Ricoeur has termed 'commanded forgetting'?…”

“…The amnesty does not change the facts of the crimes, nor does acquit someone of wrongdoing. Very few amnesties entail an erasure of criminal records 68 and an amnesty granted to prevent criminal trials rarely bars other investigative avenues such as truth commissions and public inquiries. In addition, individualized, limited amnesties may require some consideration of individual eligibility, which may provide a means for information becoming known about past crimes.…”

“…Guideline 4. example, amnestied persons' freedom of movement or right to own weapons, which are intended to restrict their ability to engage in armed opposition to the state. 131 In recent years, as part of the broader turn towards measuring the impact of transitional justice processes, a small body of political science scholarship has emerged that uses large-N cross-national studies to assess the impact of amnesties on peace. These studies have focused on the impact of amnesties during conflict, as part of peace processes, or following a peace agreement.…”

National Human Rights Institutions in Post-Conflict Settings: An Evolving Research Agenda?

“…However, in the context of transitioning societies, it would also be necessary to contend with the possibility that NHRI functions are curtailed as a result of prior agreements on such issues as amnesty. It is common for amnesties to be granted as part of a set of trade-offs to get belligerents to lay down their arms or as a compromise to help facilitate truth (Mallinder 2018). Thus, a broader context-specific examination might reveal that the scope of responsibilities designated to NHRIs are curbed by parallel developments in the area of transitional justice mechanisms.…”