权益分类	功能权益	普通用户	{{item.name}}会员
{{category.name}}	{{benefitItem.name}}

Beyond Legalism: Amnesties, Transition and Conflict Transformation

超越法家：大赦、过渡与冲突转化

基本信息

批准号：
AH/E008984/1
负责人：
K McEvoy
金额：
$ 38.97万
依托单位：
Queen's University Belfast
依托单位国家：
英国
项目类别：
Research Grant
财政年份：
2007
资助国家：
英国
起止时间：
2007 至无数据
项目状态：
已结题

来源：
https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=AH%2FE008984%2F1
关键词：
Beyond Legalism Amnesties Transition Conflict

项目摘要

This project aims to develop a 'thicker' understanding of the relationship between amnesty and conflict transformation under a number of overlapping themes.1. Amnesty and Public PowerThe shape and content of amnesties are directly related to prevailing political conditions. Thus amnesties can be used by military juntas to prevent investigations or transitional regimes to avert coups. In democracies, amnesties may result from the practical problems of prosecutions; or from desires to undermine political opponents, deflect criticism, or encourage insurgents to disarm. Legal understandings of amnesty must therefore be enhanced by more rounded theoretical understandings of political power and the construction of legitimacy.2. Amnesty, Truth Recovery and Public MemoryAmnesties have traditionally denoted efforts to erase crimes from the public memory, and were justified by asserting that reconciliation requires forgetting past pain and suffering. However, recent amnesties have been combined with truth-recovery mechanisms to promote memorialisation, encourage perpetrators' responsibilisation, and create an impartial historical record. Thus the intersection between truth, memory and amnesia is a crucial element in a thicker understanding of the phenomenon.3. Amnesty and AccountabilityAmnesty is traditionally seen as undermining accountability and creating impunity for perpetrators. However, we wish to explore further the notion of amnesty as a means for achieving accountability by developing an argument that in dictatorial regimes previously characterised by lawlessness, attempts to demonstrate respect for the law by enacting statutes to grant state agents immunity may actually symbolise a putative greater commitment to the rule of law.4. Amnesty and the Construction of Victim and PerpetratorAmnesties have traditionally been used to consolidate peace by providing incentives for combatants to disarm. They can be the most painful aspect of transition for victims; proof positive of perpetrators' impunity, the privileging of the pragmatic need to demobilise such individuals, and suggestive of the victims' 'worthlessness'. Thus, amnesties have historically helped to develop a unidimensional victim/offender dichotomy. However, recent amnesties, such as the Ugandan amnesty's targeting of child soldiers, challenge such monochromatic views. This research would therefore seek to explore more expansively the role that amnesties play in developing these simplistic dichotomies5. Amnesty, Forgiveness and ReconciliationIn amnesty processes, victims are often urged to forgo the desire to punish in favour of 'letting go' of the past or 'building a better future'. For example, the South African TRC's amnesty has been criticised for the pressure applied to victims to forgive perpetrators in the interest of broader national reconciliation. In effect, in many locations, religious ideas have been incorporated into secular processes of transition. Thus amnesties become a useful practical and symbolic site to explore further what is meant by the highly contested notions of forgiveness and reconciliation and their relationship to conflict transformation6. Amnesty and the Limitations of LegalismMuch contemporary literature on transitional justice is dominated by legal discourses. The creation of major institutions such as the ICC and the ad hoc and hybrid tribunals have all given institutional impetus to law's well-established seductive qualities. Law's dominance inhibits interdisciplinary understandings of conflict. It encourages a state-centred approach lacking regard for ground-level developments in wartorn communities, it privileges 'western' norms over indigenous traditions, and limits the ownership of transition to societal elites who understand legal complexities and language. Existing literature on amnesties provides an excellentcase study for this broader critique of the domination of legalism in the understanding of transition.

该项目旨在对大赦与冲突转化之间的关系在一些重叠的主题下形成“更深入”的理解。大赦与公共权力大赦的形式和内容与当时的政治条件直接相关。因此，军政府可以利用大赦来阻止调查，过渡政权可以利用大赦来避免政变。在民主国家，大赦可能是由于起诉的实际问题;或者是由于希望削弱政治对手、转移批评或鼓励叛乱分子解除武装。因此，对大赦的法律的理解必须通过对政治权力和合法性建构的更全面的理论理解来加强。大赦、真相恢复和公众记忆大赦传统上表示努力从公众记忆中抹去罪行，并声称和解需要忘记过去的痛苦和苦难。然而，最近的大赦与真相恢复机制相结合，以促进纪念，鼓励肇事者承担责任，并创造公正的历史记录。因此，真相、记忆和健忘症之间的交叉点是加深对这一现象理解的关键因素。大赦和问责大赦传统上被视为破坏问责和创造肇事者逍遥法外。然而，我们希望进一步探讨大赦作为实现问责制的一种手段的概念，提出一种论点，即在以前以无法无天为特征的独裁政权中，试图通过颁布法规给予国家代理人豁免权来表明对法律的尊重，实际上可能象征着对法治的假定更大承诺。大赦与受害者和罪犯的建构大赦传统上被用来通过激励战斗人员解除武装来巩固和平。对受害者来说，这可能是过渡时期最痛苦的方面;这是犯罪者逍遥法外的积极证据，强调了遣散这些人的实际需要，并暗示了受害者的“无知”。因此，大赦在历史上有助于形成一种单向度的受害者/犯罪者二分法。然而，最近的大赦，如乌干达对儿童兵的大赦，对这种单一的观点提出了挑战。因此，这项研究将寻求更广泛地探讨大赦在发展这些简单化的二分法中所发挥的作用。大赦、宽恕和宽恕在大赦过程中，受害者往往被敦促放弃惩罚的愿望，转而“放下”过去或“建设更美好的未来”。例如，南非真相与和解委员会的大赦受到了批评，因为它向受害者施加压力，要求他们为了更广泛的民族和解而原谅肇事者。实际上，在许多地方，宗教观念已被纳入世俗过渡进程。因此，大赦成为一个有用的实际和象征性的网站，进一步探讨什么是有争议的概念宽恕与和解及其关系的冲突转化6。大赦和法律主义的局限性当代许多关于过渡司法的文献都被法律的话语所主导。诸如国际刑事法院和特设法庭及混合法庭等主要机构的建立，都为法律早已确立的诱人品质提供了体制动力。法律的主导地位阻碍了对冲突的跨学科理解。它鼓励以国家为中心的做法，而不考虑饱受战争蹂躏的社区的基层发展，它将“西方”规范置于土著传统之上，并将过渡的所有权限制在了解法律的复杂性和语言的社会精英手中。现有的文献对大赦提供了一个很好的案例研究，这种更广泛的批判统治的法律主义在理解过渡。