Amnesty and accountability : a study of the South African amnesty in the light of the Nuremberg Tribunal

Simple item page
dc.contributor.advisorDu Toit, Andréen_ZA
dc.contributor.authorAbrahamsen, Thereseen_ZA
dc.date.accessioned2014-08-29T12:41:51Z
dc.date.available2014-08-29T12:41:51Z
dc.date.issued2004en_ZA
dc.descriptionIncludes bibliographical references (leaves 98-106).en_ZA
dc.description.abstractThe topic of this Masters mini-dissertation is amnesty and the principle of individual accountability for gross human rights violations. The field in which this topic is located is that of transitional justice. The issue with which this mini-dissertation is concerned is the practical, political and moral problems which states in transition from authoritarian regimes to newly established democratic government based on human rights have experienced in the last three decades when seeking accountability for the past atrocities. These state transitions have significantly employed amnesty as a means to address the need for peace and stability at the end of conflict, but this has tended to foreclose the possibility of holding the previous regime accountable for its legacy of human rights abuse. The historical context of this enquiry is the the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg (IMT) in Germany 1945 1946, which established a precedent for individual criminal accountability for crimes against humanity. The Nuremberg precedent fundamentally assumed that individuals at every level of the authorisation of crime are accountable for their own actions. Since the Milgram experiment on obedience to orders in the 1960s, social science experiments have shown, however, that individuals acting under orders do not perceive of their moral autonomy as clearly as previously assumed. In the light of the historical transitions since Nuremberg, the recent innovation in the South African Constitution in 1995, which introduces the notion of conditional amnesty, represents a novel attempt to hold individuals accountable. It required individual acknowledgement and full disclosure in public of the responsibility for heinous deeds. This framework also grants amnesty for gross human rights violations committed in the execution of an order of, on behalf of or with the approval of a political organisation. Few commentators have addressed the question of whether such conditional amnesty may be compatible with the Nuremberg model of accountability. The specific task which this mini-dissertation sets out is, therefore, to 1) clarify the concept of accountability, 2) determine in which senses one may hold individuals accountable for their actions, and 3) assess whether, to what extent and how the South African amnesty may achieve the accountability required by a liberal-democratic framework which upholds the moral principle that individuals are responsible for their actions.en_ZA
dc.identifier.apacitationAbrahamsen, T. (2004). <i>Amnesty and accountability : a study of the South African amnesty in the light of the Nuremberg Tribunal</i>. (Thesis). University of Cape Town ,Faculty of Humanities ,Department of Political Studies. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/11427/6751en_ZA
dc.identifier.chicagocitationAbrahamsen, Therese. <i>"Amnesty and accountability : a study of the South African amnesty in the light of the Nuremberg Tribunal."</i> Thesis., University of Cape Town ,Faculty of Humanities ,Department of Political Studies, 2004. http://hdl.handle.net/11427/6751en_ZA
dc.identifier.citationAbrahamsen, T. 2004. Amnesty and accountability : a study of the South African amnesty in the light of the Nuremberg Tribunal. University of Cape Town.en_ZA
dc.identifier.ris TY - Thesis / Dissertation AU - Abrahamsen, Therese AB - The topic of this Masters mini-dissertation is amnesty and the principle of individual accountability for gross human rights violations. The field in which this topic is located is that of transitional justice. The issue with which this mini-dissertation is concerned is the practical, political and moral problems which states in transition from authoritarian regimes to newly established democratic government based on human rights have experienced in the last three decades when seeking accountability for the past atrocities. These state transitions have significantly employed amnesty as a means to address the need for peace and stability at the end of conflict, but this has tended to foreclose the possibility of holding the previous regime accountable for its legacy of human rights abuse. The historical context of this enquiry is the the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg (IMT) in Germany 1945 1946, which established a precedent for individual criminal accountability for crimes against humanity. The Nuremberg precedent fundamentally assumed that individuals at every level of the authorisation of crime are accountable for their own actions. Since the Milgram experiment on obedience to orders in the 1960s, social science experiments have shown, however, that individuals acting under orders do not perceive of their moral autonomy as clearly as previously assumed. In the light of the historical transitions since Nuremberg, the recent innovation in the South African Constitution in 1995, which introduces the notion of conditional amnesty, represents a novel attempt to hold individuals accountable. It required individual acknowledgement and full disclosure in public of the responsibility for heinous deeds. This framework also grants amnesty for gross human rights violations committed in the execution of an order of, on behalf of or with the approval of a political organisation. Few commentators have addressed the question of whether such conditional amnesty may be compatible with the Nuremberg model of accountability. The specific task which this mini-dissertation sets out is, therefore, to 1) clarify the concept of accountability, 2) determine in which senses one may hold individuals accountable for their actions, and 3) assess whether, to what extent and how the South African amnesty may achieve the accountability required by a liberal-democratic framework which upholds the moral principle that individuals are responsible for their actions. DA - 2004 DB - OpenUCT DP - University of Cape Town LK - https://open.uct.ac.za PB - University of Cape Town PY - 2004 T1 - Amnesty and accountability : a study of the South African amnesty in the light of the Nuremberg Tribunal TI - Amnesty and accountability : a study of the South African amnesty in the light of the Nuremberg Tribunal UR - http://hdl.handle.net/11427/6751 ER - en_ZA
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11427/6751
dc.identifier.vancouvercitationAbrahamsen T. Amnesty and accountability : a study of the South African amnesty in the light of the Nuremberg Tribunal. [Thesis]. University of Cape Town ,Faculty of Humanities ,Department of Political Studies, 2004 [cited yyyy month dd]. Available from: http://hdl.handle.net/11427/6751en_ZA
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisher.departmentDepartment of Political Studiesen_ZA
dc.publisher.departmentDepartment of Political Studiesen_ZA
dc.publisher.facultyFaculty of Humanitiesen_ZA
dc.publisher.institutionUniversity of Cape Town
dc.subject.otherJustice and Transformationen_ZA
dc.titleAmnesty and accountability : a study of the South African amnesty in the light of the Nuremberg Tribunalen_ZA
dc.typeMaster Thesis
dc.type.qualificationlevelMasters
uct.type.filetypeText
uct.type.filetypeImage
uct.type.publicationResearchen_ZA
uct.type.resourceThesisen_ZA
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
thesis_hum_2004_abrahamsen_t (1).pdf
Size:
2.33 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Download
Collections
Other Theses