1932

Abstract

This article analyzes the different ways in which transitional justice has dealt with demands over property restitution and redistribution. To do this, it presents a review of academic literature regarding how to define reparation, the justifications for restitution, and the debate regarding property redistribution as a part of peace negotiations. The article ends with a synthesis of the different critiques raised to the ways in which restitution and redistribution of property have been legally structured. These critiques include foregrounding neoliberalism (as an economic ideal and a governance project) in transitional justice, unveiling gender biases as well as demands for more comprehensive redistribution in the aftermath of civil war.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-120920-085908
2021-10-13
2024-06-12
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/lawsocsci/17/1/annurev-lawsocsci-120920-085908.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-120920-085908&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Alviar García H 2011. The unending quest for land: the tale of broken constitutional promises. Tex. Law Rev. 89:71895–914
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Alviar García H 2020. La lucha por el género en la paz. Género en Transición: Estudios sobre el papel del derecho en la distribución de recursos para y en el posconflicto colombiano IC Jaramillo Sierra 37–59 New York: Peter Lang
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Alviar García H, Engle K 2016. The distributive politics of impunity and anti-impunity: lessons from four decades of Colombian peace negotiations. Anti-Impunity and the Human Rights Agenda K Engle, Z Miller, DM Davis 216–55 Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Atuahene B. 2007. From reparation to restoration: moving beyond restoring property rights to restoring political and economic visibility. . SMU Law Rev 60:41419–70
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Buyse AC. 2009. Home sweet home? Restitution in post-conflict Bosnia and Herzegovina. Neth. Q. Hum. Rights 27:19–26
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Coates T-N. 2014. The case for reparations. The Atlantic June. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2014/06/the-case-for-reparations/361631/
    [Google Scholar]
  7. De Soto H. 2000. The Mystery of Capital New York: Basic Books
    [Google Scholar]
  8. El Colombiano 2014. Santos dice a inversionistas que Colombia no es “castrochavista. .” El Colombiano Sept. 22. https://www.elcolombiano.com/historico/santos_dice_a_inversionistas_que_colombia_no_es_castrochavista-IFEC_312192
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Franke KM. 2006. Gendered subjects of transitional justice. Columbia J. Gend. Law 15:813–28
    [Google Scholar]
  10. García-Godos J. 2008. Victim reparations in transitional justice: What is at stake and why?. Nord. Tidsskr. Menneskerettigheter 26:2111–30
    [Google Scholar]
  11. García-Godos J, Wiig H. 2018. Ideals and realities of restitution: the Colombian Land Restitution Programme. J. Hum. Rights Pract. 10:40–57
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Greeley RA, Orwicz MR, Falconi JL, Reyes AM, Rosenberg FJ, Laplante LJ. 2020. Repairing symbolic reparations: assessing the effectiveness of memorialization in the Inter-American System of Human Rights. Int. J. Transit. Justice 14:1165–92
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Kennedy D 2004. The international human rights movement: Part of the problem?. The Dark Sides of Virtue: Reassessing International Humanitarianism D Kennedy 3–37 Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Leckie S. 2009. Post-conflict reparation, restitution and human rights—where to head from here. Neth. Q. Hum. Rights 27:13–8
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Miller Z. 2008. Effects of invisibility: in search of the “economic” in transitional justice. Int. J. Transit. Justice 2:266–91
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Moffett L. 2017. Reparations in transitional justice: Justice or political compromise?. Hum. Rights Int. Legal Discourse 11:11–11
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Mohan S. 2011. The battle after the war: gender discrimination in property rights and post-conflict property restitution. Yale J. Int. Law 36:2461–96
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Nesiah V 2019. Indebted: the cruel optimism of leaning-in to empowerment. Governance Feminism: Notes from the Field J Halley, P Kotiswaran, R Rebouché, H Shamir 505–54 Minneapolis: Univ. Minn. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Onishi N, Gebrekidan S. 2018.. “ They eat money”: how Mandela's political heirs grow rich off corruption. New York Times April 16. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/16/world/africa/south-africa-corruption-jacob-zuma-african-national-congress.html?searchResultPosition=1
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Parmentier S, Valinas M, Weitekamp E. 2009. How to repair the harm after violent conflict in Bosnia? Results of a population based survey. Neth. Q. Hum. Rights 27:27–44
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Posner EA, Vermeule A. 2004. Transitional justice as ordinary justice. Harvard Law Rev. 117:3761–825
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Restrepo Salazar JC 2011. Política Integral de Tierras: Un Viraje Trascendental en la Restitución y Formalización de la Propiedad Agraria Bogotá: Villegas Ed.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Torpey J. 2001.. “ Making whole what has been smashed”: reflections on reparations. J. Mod. Hist. 73:2333–58
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Torrado S. 2020. El encargado de Memoria Histórica que enfrenta a Colombia con sus fantasmas. El País Feb 7: https://elpais.com/internacional/2020/02/05/colombia/1580937120_937970.html
    [Google Scholar]
  25. UN Gen. Assem. Resolut. 60/147 2005. 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 Dec. 16. https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/remedyandreparation.aspx
    [Google Scholar]
  26. UN High Comm. Hum. Rights (UNHCR) 1998. Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement. Geneva: UNHCR https://www.unhcr.org/protection/idps/43ce1cff2/guiding-principles-internal-displacement.html
    [Google Scholar]
  27. UN High Comm. Hum. Rights (UNHCR) 2005. Principles on Housing and Property Restitution for Refugees and Displaced Persons UN Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/2005/17. https://www.unhcr.org/protection/idps/50f94d849/principles-housing-property-restitution-refugees-displaced-persons-pinheiro.html
    [Google Scholar]
  28. van der Auweraert P 2013. Institutional aspects of resolving land disputes in post-conflict societies. Land and Post-Conflict Peacebuilding, ed. J Unruh, RC Williams 345–62 London: Earthscan
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Williams RC. 2005. Post-conflict property restitution and refugee return in Bosnia and Herzegovina: implications for international standard setting and practice. N.Y. Univ. J. Int. Law Politics 37:3441–552
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Williams RC. 2013. Restitution at the juncture of humanitarian response to displacement and transitional justice Res. Brief, Brookings-LSE Proj. Intern. Displac ICTJ Res. Unit, Brookings Inst Washington, DC: https://www.ictj.org/sites/default/files/ICTJ-Research-Brief-Displacement-Restitution-Williams.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-120920-085908
Loading
  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error