Search

Begin New Search Topic Truth and Reconciliation Author Elena Naughton

1. Gone Without a Trace: Syria’s Detained, Abducted, and Forcibly Disappeared

Author:
Hanny Megally and Elena Naughton
Publication Date:
05-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The International Center for Transitional Justice (ICTJ)
Abstract:
In most cases, to be imprisoned in Syria is to disappear. Tens of thousands of people, if not more, have been unlawfully taken prisoner or held incommunicado in the context of the Syrian conflict. This policy paper examines the dark reality of detentions in Syria, its impact on those who are detained and their families, and recommends a set of urgent steps that should be taken to assist families in obtaining information about the whereabouts of their loved ones, gaining access to them, and achieving their prompt release. While most parties to the Syrian conflict are complicit in carrying out arbitrary and incommunicado detentions, including both state and non-state actors, the vast majority of detention-related violations since 2011 have been carried out by the Syrian state. The policy paper – a joint project of ICTJ and the Center on International Cooperation (CIC) at New York University – draws from a variety of sources, including the authoring organizations’ longstanding work on Syria and engagement with Syrian victims, as well as inputs from interviews and an expert roundtable in The Hague, Netherlands, in October 2019. The paper looks in depth at the main government security agencies responsible for arrests and detentions in Syria and shows how the regime weaponizes the law to criminalize political activity, to maintain absolute control over the Syrian population, and to justify arrests and detentions of peaceful demonstrators, political opponents, and human rights activists, all behind a facade of legality. It shows how, at every level, the system works in contravention of fundamental principles of human rights law designed to protect individuals from unlawful and arbitrary deprivation of liberty, including rights guaranteed in the international declarations and conventions to which Syria is a party. The paper provides additional information about nonstate actors who over the course of the conflict are known to have abducted and detained not only opposing armed forces, including Syrian army, but many civilians. From there, the paper goes on to examine the harsh realities facing families of those who have been detained, abducted, and forcibly disappeared in Syria and what must be done to begin addressing the rights of these victims, which have been so seriously violated. It looks at four primary areas of action that must be considered urgent for Syrians: (1) official acknowledgment of detentions and the disclosure of information about the whereabouts and fate of the forcibly disappeared and abducted; (2) detainee releases; (3) access to detention facilities by monitoring groups; and (4) addressing the consequences of enforced disappearance on families. The paper concludes with comprehensive recommendations for what can and should be done, now and in the future by the Syrian regime and other parties to the conflict, as well as the international community. On an urgent basis, it recommends among other things the immediate release of all those arbitrarily detained as well as vulnerable prisoners such as the sick, women, the elderly, children, and the disabled; unimpeded access by the International Committee of the Red Cross to all places of detention; and the sharing of lists specifying the status and location of detainees held by the Syrian government and other nonstate actors. In the long-term, it proposes creating among other things an independent mechanism for reviewing the remaining cases of detention, safe centers where families can request information about the fate of their loved ones, and rehabilitation programs where released individuals can access psychosocial and other vital services. These and other critical steps are a matter of extreme urgency, as the paper makes plain, if there is to be any possibility of lasting peace in Syria.
Topic:
Reform, Youth, Criminal Justice, Memory, Institutions, Justice, Engagement, Gender, and Truth and Reconciliation
Political Geography:
Middle East and Syria

2. More Than Words: Apologies as a Form of Reparation

Author:
Ruben Carranza, Cristian Correa, and Elena Naughton
Publication Date:
12-2015
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
The International Center for Transitional Justice (ICTJ)
Abstract:
It has become more common for political leaders to apologize publicly to victims, their families, and communities, often during a formal national address or other ceremonial event. Such apologies have taken place in the midst of cease-fire and peace processes, made not only by those holding public offi ce, such as heads of state, ministers, judges, and the heads of the police, military, and intelligence services, but also by paramilitary leaders. Apologies delivered by state agents signal the full backing of the state for what is being conveyed. Apologies are not enough as reparation to victims of serious violations. While apologies have value in themselves and can address both moral and physical harm, they should be combined with material forms of reparation. In particular, care needs to be taken to ensure that a disproportionate emphasis on apologies does not diminish the likelihood that other reparative measures, such as restitution and medical care, will be implemented, to help limit the long-term harm caused to victims or address their physical needs. Apologies should, in many cases, refl ect a communal reckoning with crimes of the past. They describe what has been learned and what needs to be done to prevent such events from ever happening again; sometimes they mark either the commencement or the culmination of a long, sometimes divisive period of debate and reflection in a society. In many cases, it is victims and organizations of survivors who provide the main impetus for pursuing an apology and help to decide when and how an apology might best be given. Whatever the catalyst, apologies (and the process for developing them) can help a country to replace, at least partially, partisan recriminations with constructive dialogue and unite the public behind the common goals it needs to achieve to move forward. Th e process of developing consensus around the need for an apology can help societies to face their past, reaffirm values, and meet their obligations to victims as human beings and citizens in the present and in the future. Because official apologies are most often public acts, they usually attract considerable media attention and scrutiny. Therefore, the content, delivery, tone, and proper timing of an apology are crucial. Th e most effective apologies are unequivocal; they are not diluted by qualifying language designed to limit their scope or redirect blame. For victims, it may matter whether an apology is written, handed over on paper, or read or spoken aloud. Likewise, the language spoken, the access to written, spoken, or recorded materials, the venue in which it is made, even the body language and appearance of the person delivering the apology are all significant. Some of the most meaningful apologies have occurred at the place where the violations occurred. Although most offi cial apologies provide a form of comfort to victims, some have been judged harshly for being poorly conceived, insincere, and ineffective. Expressions of regret, for instance, are most frequently statements of sadness and disappointment that fall short of an apology, whereas unequivocal apologies contain a more explicit if not unconditional acknowledgment of responsibility. They acknowledge the specific injustices that occurred, recognize that victims suffered serious harm as a result, and take responsibility for what happened. Effective apologies take into account what victims are likely to feel and think about what is being said. In fact, the most effective apologies are arguably those that have been agreed on with survivors, families of victims, or their representatives, and which address the future and not just the past. Th ey assure victims—and the rest of society—that victims were not at fault for what happened and emphasize common values shared by everyone in society. While apologies on their own cannot fully restore trust nor ever provide the full relief that victims and a society need to heal, they play an important role in giving meaning to reparations and promoting efforts to reform institutions and guarantee non-repetition of violations and can be an important step toward reconciliation, on the journey toward lasting peace.
Topic:
Transitional Justice, Reparations, Human Rights Violations, and Truth and Reconciliation
Political Geography:
Global Focus