Search results

On June 15, 2023, Jarosław Kaczyński, leader of Poland's PiS party, announced a rare referendum, ostensibly to allow the public to weigh in on crucial elements of Polish immigration policy, alongside the general elections. Yet, in reality, the referendum had little to do with migration and the opposition parties largely ignored the referendum's questions to avoid its deployment as an electoral campaign tool. As such, whatever voters will decide on Election day, it will tell us little about the state of Polish migration politics.

This book examines how international judicial and non-judicial bodies in Europe address the needs of the families of forcibly disappeared persons. The needs in question are returning the remains of disappeared persons; the right to truth; the acceptance of responsibility by states; and the right to compensation. These have been identified as the four most commonly shared basic and fundamental needs of families in which an adult was disappeared many years previously and is now assumed to be dead, which is representative of the situation of the vast majority of families of disappeared persons in Europe.00The families of disappeared persons have an increasing number of international mechanisms through which they can attempt to address their needs. The proliferation of such mechanisms gives victims of enforced disappearance in Europe access to many different international procedures. At the same time, however, a functional analysis of the specific organs involved has shown that they respond to the needs of families to varying degrees. This results from the differences in their competences as well as those in their jurisprudence

Artykuł przedstawia analizę orzecznictwa Komisji Doradczej ds. Praw Człowieka w Kosowie w zakresie przeprowadzania dochodzeń w sprawie losu osób zaginionych. Komisja została powołana w celu rozpatrywania skarg dotyczących naruszeń praw człowieka popełnianych przez lub przypisywanych Misji Tymczasowa Administracji Organizacji Narodów Zjednoczonych (UNMIK). Rozpatrując te sprawy stosowała przede wszystkim Europejską Konwencję Praw Człowieka i powoływała się na orzecznictwo Europejskiego Trybunału Praw Człowieka. Mimo że między skargami do Trybunału i Komisji Doradczej występowały istotne różnice, to ich orzecznictwo było bardzo zbliżone: oba organy podobnie interpretowały rozkład ciężaru dowodu oraz obowiązki proceduralne wynikające z art. 2 Konwencji, a także przy zaistnieniu szczególnych czynników, uznawały naruszenie art. 3 Konwencji wobec bliskich osoby zaginionej. Przy czym Komisja Doradcza badając naruszenie praw bliskich osób zaginionych wprowadziła dwie istotne zmiany: stwierdzała naruszenie ich praw niezależnie od odpowiedzialności UNMIK za samo zaginięcie, a także ograniczyła swoją jurysdykcje temporalną w tym kontekście. W artykule poddano też analizie wykonywanie opinii Komisji Doradczej w sprawie zaginięć.

AbstractThis article analyzes the evolution in international law of the obligation to search for and return the remains of forcibly disappeared and missing persons. Receiving the remains of forcibly disappeared and missing persons is one of the primary needs of their families, who bring the issue to international courts and non-judicial mechanisms. This obligation has been incrementally recognized and developed by different human rights courts, which have included the obligation to search for and return the remains of disappeared persons in their remedies. In parallel to the development of the obligation by international courts, the international community has begun to become more involved in assisting in return of the remains of forcibly disappeared and missing persons to their families.

This article examines the connection between groups and disappearances. It argues that often those targeted for disappearance are from a group, particularly minority or indigenous groups of some description. The article argues that enforced disappearances are used as a systematic method of oppression in many countries, and that specific groups are particularly affected by this practice. Their different ethnic, cultural and/or linguistic identity and political aspirations are reasons why these groups are viewed as 'sources of contestation', which is why they become prime targets for governments. The goals that such groups are often trying to ensure include: greater democratization, ending discrimination against the group, trying to ensure that a specific resource is not taken from the group, or another similar objective. The article further argues that understanding the "group dimension" of enforced disappearances should ensure that more could be done to both prevent and react to disappearances. This is important, since if there is a better understanding that members of a certain minority are at risk of disappearing, they can be better protected. The article also examines the interconnection between enforced disappearances and genocide. It does this partly because in practice these acts target similar persons. While genocide is defined as being perpetrated against specific groups, enforced disappearances are not defined as targeting groups being a necessary aspect of the crime. However, as the article argues, enforced disappearances are often perpetrated against members of specific groups, particularly minorities or indigenous groups. Genocide is a crime that inherently targets groups, even though – as long as there is intent to destroy a group of people in whole or in part – it could consist of killing a single person. While disappearances can be and often take place on a large scale (and may then be classified as crimes against humanity), they are usually considered individually on a case-by-case basis. This research seeks to understand how disappearances are a popular tool for the control and disruption of a subjugated population, and may be the strategy of choice for a government that is unwilling or unable to commit genocide (or crimes against humanity) against such groups. The article argues that state authorities that aim at dissuading specific groups from their goals, or target them for whatever other reason, but do not want to conduct genocide against them, often wage a campaign of disappearances. Thus, rather than wiping out the group the state uses disappearances as a means to intimidate and harass a group, to achieve some specific outcome. In its final section, the article examines what can be done to deal with and try and prevent disappearances aimed specifically at groups. A variety of suggestions are made as to what can be done to prevent such disappearances as well as to how to deal with them when they do occur. ; Este artigo analisa a ligação entre comunidades e desaparecimentos. Argumenta-se que muitas vezes as vítimas de desaparecimentos pertencem a uma comunidade, particularmente a minorias ou grupos indígenas de algum tipo. O artigo defende que desaparecimentos provocados são utilizados enquanto método de opressão sistemática em muitos países, nos quais grupos de pessoas específicos são particularmente afetados. As suas identidades étnicas, culturais e/ou linguísticas, bem como as suas aspirações políticas servem como fundamento para estes grupos serem considerados como "fontes de contestação", o que explica o porquê destes grupos serem os principais alvos dos vários Governos. Os objetivos que esses grupos tentam muitas vezes assegurar incluem: uma maior democratização, o fim da descriminação contra o grupo em causa, uma tentativa de impedir que certo recurso seja retirado ao grupo, ou outro objetivo semelhante. O artigo também defende que a perceção correta da "dimensão de grupo" dos desaparecimentos provocados irá assegurar que se poderá fazer mais para não só prevenir, como também para reagir a estes desaparecimentos. Isto é importante, já que se existe uma maior perceção de que membros de uma certa minoria estão em risco de desaparecer, estes podem ser melhor protegidos. O artigo também examina a interligação entre os desaparecimentos forçados e o genocídio. Esta análise é devida em parte porque ambos os atos têm como alvo pessoas semelhantes. Enquanto o genocídio é definido enquanto sendo perpetrado contra grupos de pessoas específicos, os desaparecimentos provocados não implicam a persecução de grupos enquanto elemento necessário do crime. No entanto, tal como o artigo sustenta, desaparecimentos provocados são muitas vezes perpetrados contra membros de grupos específicos, particularmente minorias ou grupos indígenas. O genocídio é um crime que tem inerentemente como alvo grupos, ainda que – enquanto houver intenção de destruir um grupo de pessoas, no todo ou em parte – possa consistir em matar uma única pessoa. Enquanto desaparecimentos podem e muitas vezes são efetuados numa proporção maior (podendo aí ser classificados como crimes contra a Humanidade), eles são normalmente tratados individual e casuisticamente. Esta investigação visa perceber como os desaparecimentos forçados são uma ferramenta popular para controlar e destabilizar uma população subjugada, e como estes poderão ser a estratégia de eleição para um governo que não quer ou não pode cometer o genocídio (ou crimes contra a Humanidade) contra esses grupos. O artigo sustenta que as autoridades públicas que têm como objetivo dissuadir grupos específicos dos seus objetivos, ou persegui-las por qualquer outra razão, mas que não queiram conduzir atos de genocídio contra eles, conduzem muitas vezes campanhas de desaparecimentos. Assim, em vez de eliminar o grupo, o Estado utiliza desaparecimentos como meio de intimidar e perseguir um grupo, de modo a alcançar um resultado específico. O artigo examina, na sua secção final, o que poderá ser feito para lidar com e para tentar prevenir desaparecimentos apontados especificamente a grupos. É feito um conjunto de sugestões relativamente ao que poderá ser feito para prevenir esses desaparecimentos, bem como relativamente a o que se poderá fazer para lidar com eles quando ocorrerem.

The "right to truth" relates to the obligation of the state to provide information about the circumstances surrounding serious violations of human rights. Despite its increasing recognition, the concept raises questions as to its scope and implementation as well as its existence as a free-standing right. Similarly, "memory laws" relate to the way states deal with their past. However, there are certain "memory laws" that, while officially serving as a guarantee for accessing historical truth, lead to its deformation. As a result, an "alternative" truth, based on the will of the legislators, is being imposed. In this article, the authors elaborate on the general nature of the new legal phenomenon of the "right to truth", as a tool of transitional justice, in particular in the context of both providing and abusing historical truth by the legislators, through the instrument of "memory laws".

In recent years and decades, authoritarian regimes and illiberal democracies have passed and enforced punitive memory laws, intending to ban certain interpretations of past events or sheltering official versions of history against challenges. This comes as no surprise in countries whose governments undermine pluralism and assume the existence of a historical truth that is stable over time, invariable, and self-explanatory. But why do liberal democracies, committed to political pluralism and open debate, pass laws that penalize challenges to certain interpretations of the past and restrict freedom of speech? This article argues that liberal democracies may do so yielding to bottom–up pressure by courts and to regulate civil law disputes for which existing legislation and jurisprudence may not suffice. Based on case studies from Germany, France, Switzerland, Poland, Ukraine, Russia, Turkey, Rwanda, and the former Yugoslavia, we also found punitive memory laws in liberal democracies narrower and more precise than in nonliberal states.

The article demonstrates how references to Nazi and Soviet past are perceived and evaluated by the European Court of Human Rights. Individual cases concerning Holocaust and Nazism, which the Court has examined so far, are compared here to judgments rendered with regard to Communist regime. The article proves that the Court treats more leniently state interference with freedom of expression when memory about Nazism and Holocaust is protected than when a post–Communist state wants to preserve a critical memory about the regime. The authors of the article agree with the attitude of the Court which offers a wide margin of appreciation to states restrictively treating references to Nazism and Holocaust, including comparisons to the Holocaust, Nazism or fascism used as rhetorical devices. At the same time they postulate that other totalitarian systems should be treated by the Court equally

The field of memory studies has typically focused on everyday memory and commemoration practices through which we construct meaning and identities. The Right to Memory looks beyond these everyday practices, focusing instead on how memory relates to human rights and socio-legal constructs in order to legitimize and protect groups and individuals. With case studies including Polish Holocaust Law, the Indian origins of Amartya Sen's capability theory approach, and the right to memory through digital technologies in Brazilian and British museums, this collected volume seeks to establish the right to memory as a foundational topic in memory studies