Should we ever say Never? Arguments against granting amnesty tested.

Research output: Chapter in Book / Report / Conference proceedingChapterAcademic

Abstract

In this chapter I explore why advocates of criminal prosecution deem granting amnesty to serious perpetrators of international crimes no longer acceptable. What arguments do (often legal) scholars, NGOs, journalists and policy makers use to substantiate their claims? And how convincing are these arguments? I will firstly identify the various arguments that are most often used. Secondly, I will assess to what extent it is possible to test whether these arguments hold true. I will illustrate this by analysing the effects of amnesties granted in Mozambique, Angola and
Uganda. It leads me to the conclusion that certain assumed negative effects of amnesties cannot be observed in these three countries. Either because no indicators of the assumed negative effects in the countries exist, or because no indicators can be found resulting from a paucity of reliable data. And when indicators of the assumed effects are found, it proves impossible to establish a causal relation between certain observed indicators and the granting of amnesty.
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationVictimological Approaches to International Crimes
EditorsR. Letschert et. al
Place of PublicationAntwerp
PublisherIntersentia
Pages289-314
ISBN (Print)9789400000902
Publication statusPublished - 2011

Fingerprint

amnesty
Angola
Mozambique
prosecution
journalist
non-governmental organization
offense

Cite this

van Wijk, J. (2011). Should we ever say Never? Arguments against granting amnesty tested. In R. Letschert et. al (Ed.), Victimological Approaches to International Crimes (pp. 289-314). Antwerp: Intersentia.
van Wijk, J. / Should we ever say Never? Arguments against granting amnesty tested. Victimological Approaches to International Crimes. editor / R. Letschert et. al. Antwerp : Intersentia, 2011. pp. 289-314
@inbook{8eb53a93d56b41eebfce46d1a97a1da4,
title = "Should we ever say Never? Arguments against granting amnesty tested.",
abstract = "In this chapter I explore why advocates of criminal prosecution deem granting amnesty to serious perpetrators of international crimes no longer acceptable. What arguments do (often legal) scholars, NGOs, journalists and policy makers use to substantiate their claims? And how convincing are these arguments? I will firstly identify the various arguments that are most often used. Secondly, I will assess to what extent it is possible to test whether these arguments hold true. I will illustrate this by analysing the effects of amnesties granted in Mozambique, Angola andUganda. It leads me to the conclusion that certain assumed negative effects of amnesties cannot be observed in these three countries. Either because no indicators of the assumed negative effects in the countries exist, or because no indicators can be found resulting from a paucity of reliable data. And when indicators of the assumed effects are found, it proves impossible to establish a causal relation between certain observed indicators and the granting of amnesty.",
author = "{van Wijk}, J.",
year = "2011",
language = "English",
isbn = "9789400000902",
pages = "289--314",
editor = "{Letschert et. al}, R.",
booktitle = "Victimological Approaches to International Crimes",
publisher = "Intersentia",

}

van Wijk, J 2011, Should we ever say Never? Arguments against granting amnesty tested. in R Letschert et. al (ed.), Victimological Approaches to International Crimes. Intersentia, Antwerp, pp. 289-314.

Should we ever say Never? Arguments against granting amnesty tested. / van Wijk, J.

Victimological Approaches to International Crimes. ed. / R. Letschert et. al. Antwerp : Intersentia, 2011. p. 289-314.

Research output: Chapter in Book / Report / Conference proceedingChapterAcademic

TY - CHAP

T1 - Should we ever say Never? Arguments against granting amnesty tested.

AU - van Wijk, J.

PY - 2011

Y1 - 2011

N2 - In this chapter I explore why advocates of criminal prosecution deem granting amnesty to serious perpetrators of international crimes no longer acceptable. What arguments do (often legal) scholars, NGOs, journalists and policy makers use to substantiate their claims? And how convincing are these arguments? I will firstly identify the various arguments that are most often used. Secondly, I will assess to what extent it is possible to test whether these arguments hold true. I will illustrate this by analysing the effects of amnesties granted in Mozambique, Angola andUganda. It leads me to the conclusion that certain assumed negative effects of amnesties cannot be observed in these three countries. Either because no indicators of the assumed negative effects in the countries exist, or because no indicators can be found resulting from a paucity of reliable data. And when indicators of the assumed effects are found, it proves impossible to establish a causal relation between certain observed indicators and the granting of amnesty.

AB - In this chapter I explore why advocates of criminal prosecution deem granting amnesty to serious perpetrators of international crimes no longer acceptable. What arguments do (often legal) scholars, NGOs, journalists and policy makers use to substantiate their claims? And how convincing are these arguments? I will firstly identify the various arguments that are most often used. Secondly, I will assess to what extent it is possible to test whether these arguments hold true. I will illustrate this by analysing the effects of amnesties granted in Mozambique, Angola andUganda. It leads me to the conclusion that certain assumed negative effects of amnesties cannot be observed in these three countries. Either because no indicators of the assumed negative effects in the countries exist, or because no indicators can be found resulting from a paucity of reliable data. And when indicators of the assumed effects are found, it proves impossible to establish a causal relation between certain observed indicators and the granting of amnesty.

M3 - Chapter

SN - 9789400000902

SP - 289

EP - 314

BT - Victimological Approaches to International Crimes

A2 - Letschert et. al, R.

PB - Intersentia

CY - Antwerp

ER -

van Wijk J. Should we ever say Never? Arguments against granting amnesty tested. In Letschert et. al R, editor, Victimological Approaches to International Crimes. Antwerp: Intersentia. 2011. p. 289-314