Transitional justice: framing a model for Eritrea

Abstract

English: Since its independence in 1991, Eritrea has seen egregious violations of human rights and humanitarian law. This study examines the perpetration of international crimes in Eritrea between 24 May 1991 and 30 May 2008. A factual and legal analysis of the major incidents and events that took place during the above period of time reveals that crimes against humanity, war crimes and crimes of aggression have been perpetrated in Eritrea in an alarming manner affecting hundreds of thousands of people. In most cases, human rights violations have been perpetrated under a clear and premeditated government plan of persecution and repression of political dissent and certain religious convictions. Although some of the incidents discussed in this work appear to be sporadic events occurring only in a specified time and with a specific objective, most of the violations portray a clear, coherent, systematic and comprehensive government policy of repression. The widespread and systematic violation of human rights in Eritrea constitutes crimes against humanity as defined by the relevant provisions of international law. There are also violations perpetrated in the context of the 1996 Eritrea-Yemen border conflict, the 1998-2000 Eritrea-Ethiopia border conflict, as well as other incidents of internal and international armed conflicts. These cases portray categories of crimes perpetrated with political motive of a cross-country nature. It is concluded that a certain group of highranking government officials can be tentatively identified as the most responsible perpetrators and accordingly they bear individual criminal responsibility for serious violations of international law since 1991. To end the culture of impunity, this study proposes that international criminal justice, administered by the International Criminal Court, foreign municipal courts, or national or mixed tribunals, should be instituted. However, in the event of a negotiated and peaceful political transition, conditional amnesty administered by a democratically constituted truth and reconciliation commission is also regarded as an acceptable option.

Afrikaans: Sedert onafhanklikwording in 1991, het Eritrea onder ongehoorde skendings van menseregte en humanitêre reg gebuk gegaan. Hierdie studie ondersoek die pleging van internasionale misdade in Eritrea tussen 24 Mei 1991 en 30 Mei 2008. ‘n Feitlike en juridiese ontleding van die belangrikste gebeurtenisse en insidente wat plaasgevind het in hierdie tydperk, bring aan die lig dat misdade teen die mensdom, oorlogsmisdade en dade van aggressie in Eritrea gepleeg is op ‘n ontstellende wyse waardeur honderde duisende mense getref is. In die meerderheid van gevalle het menseregteskendings plaasgevind in die loop van ‘n duidelike en voorbedagte regeringsplan van vervolging van politieke andersdenkendes en onderdrukking van sekere godsdienstige oortuigings. Alhoewel sommige van die gevalle wat in hierdie studie bespreek word voorkom as sporadiese insidente, beperk tot ‘n spesifieke plek en met ‘n beperkte oogmerk, vertoon die meeste gebeurtenisse die kenteken van ‘n duidelike, samehangende, sistematiese en omvattende regeringsbeleid van onderdrukking. Die sistematiese en wydverspreide skending van menseregte in Eritrea stel misade teen die mensdom daar, soos gedefinieer in die relevante voorskrifte van die internasionale reg. Daar is ook skendings wat plaasgevind het tydens die 1996 Eritrea-Jemen grensgeskil, die 1998-2000 Eritrea-EthiopiÃ«ð€€‚ï¿½grensgeskil,ð€€‚ï¿½sowel as ander insidente tydens interne en internasionale gewapende konflikte. Hierdie gevalle kom neer op interstaatlike misdade met ‘n politieke motief. Daar word tot die slotsom gekom dat ‘n bepaalde groep van hooggeplaaste regeringsamptenare tentatief geïdentifiseer kan word as die mees verantwoordelike groep daders en wat gevolglik individueel strafregtelik aanspreeklik gehou kan word vir ernstige skendings van die internasionale reg sedert 1991. Ten einde die kultuur van straffeloosheid te beëindig, word voorgestel dat internasionale strafregtelike vervolging ingestel moet word deur die Internasionale Strafhof, die howe van buitelandse jurisdiksies, nasionale of gemengde tribunale. In die geval van ‘n onderhandelde en vreedsame politieke oorgang egter, kan voorwaardelike amnestie, geadministreer deur ‘n demokraties saamgestelde waarheids- en versoeningskommissie as ‘n aanvaarbare alternatief beskou word.