POLITICAL SCIENCE

Power, Impunity, Memory and Reconciliation



Power, Impunity, Memory and Reconciliation

Is there any value in contemporary states apologising for the past abuse of human rights?

This essay will be focusing on contemporary accounts in regards to public apologies for past abuses taken place in the past in association with human rights. This has become an issue in the eyes of the public as they feel there was a lack of empathy and sorrow towards victims that have suffered from severe atrocity over the past decades. The response and action made by the contemporary state account in relation to the highlighted issue will be explored; this will include debates made through compensation and other related remedies to those remaining victims and their families experience of suffering due to the past abuse.

Many of the contemporary states are, with no doubt, accountable for atrocities that took place, resulting in thousands and thousands of innocent deaths. In recent years, it has been debated to what extent a contemporary state has responded in terms of apologising through compensating and other related remedies to those remaining victims and their families of the past abuse.

This essay will essentially look into whether there are any values that a contemporary state accounts for in apologising for the past abuse of human rights. A thorough explanation of what states have done to compensate for their wrong doings will be explored.

As we have the third-world countries some of which have suffered from violence, it is an option for the contemporary states to apologies not necessarily in a direct way but eventually through compensating in a manner that will make the society a better place in terms of offering more appropriate aid, schooling to educate those vulnerable people that are eager for a better future.

Contemporary states should apologies to those victims and their families through admitting what they have done, with a thorough explanation to how, why etc. of what they did. This will not completely amend the issues with the victims and their families of the past but would at least help to restore some assurance of it not happening again. It is the states duty to confront every wrong doing that they have done as it would help not to only make them feel better but will also, give the victims the gist, that they are willing to heal the affects of the past (Shriver & Donald, 1995).

The author Bassiouni (2002) discusses the potential outcomes of why a state should apologies especially when they are the main perpetrator of the past abuse of human rights, an apology does not only “reconstitute relations between communities ripped apart by conflict, but it can also lay a foundation for unity even where ethno-national rivals have historically lived apart”, for instance South Africa following the abolition of apartheid.

Responsibility from the contemporary state is a very primary to position disagreement justice, as the restoration of a just and implementation illicit justice structure in the consequences of disagreements is the only way to evade ...