Source: (2004) In, Lukas H. Meyer, ed., Justice in Time: Responding to Historical Injustice. Baden-Baden: Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft. Pp. 315-318.
In this essay, Christian Tomuschat responds to Jaime Malamud GotiÃ¢Â€Â™s chapter in this book on Ã¢Â€ÂœThe moral dilemmas about trying Pinochet in Spain.Ã¢Â€? Goti basically contends that in cases such as PinochetÃ¢Â€Â™s Ã¢Â€Â“ cases of grave human rights violations Ã¢Â€Â“ trials Ã¢Â€Âœfrom withinÃ¢Â€? are to be preferred to trials Ã¢Â€Âœfrom without.Ã¢Â€? That is, for various reasons, it is preferable that a country address its own past and deal with it, rather than have an outside entity (either another country or an international body) take on and carry out this responsibility. Tomuschat commends much in GotiÃ¢Â€Â™s reasoning, yet finally cautions that GotiÃ¢Â€Â™s argument may not adequately account for the complexity of realities in some situations. While trials from within may be preferred, it may be necessary in particular situations to have an outside entity adjudicate human rights violations committed within a country. Tomuschat describes several situations to show the ambiguities of trials from within versus trials from without.
Your donation helps Prison Fellowship International repair the harm caused by crime by emphasizing accountability, forgiveness, and making amends for prisoners and those affected by their actions. When victims, offenders, and community members meet to decide how to do that, the results are transformational.Donate Now