Questa tesi è costruita sulle seguenti domande: una società che ha vissuto gravi e sistematiche violazioni dei diritti umani come può 'chiudere i conti' con il passato e perseguire giustizia e riconciliazione? Come rigenerare i legami sociali infranti? Quale ruolo giocano vittime e perpetratori? Questi problemi sono studiati, in concreto, nell’esperienza di El Salvador. Tra i profili sociologici possibili, la tesi si concentra sulla 'domanda di giustizia' delle vittime. Il primo capitolo fornisce un inquadramento storico-sociale. Il secondo ha per oggetto la giustizia di transizione; l’analisi teorica generale considera i seguenti modelli: giudiziario, amnistiale, delle commissioni verità e la "Truth and Reconciliation Commission" (TRC) sudafricana. La TRC è presentata come un’esperienza che attinge e supera le opzioni precedenti, mostrando le potenzialità della "restorative justice". Il terzo e il quarto capitolo tornano sul caso salvadoregno e considerano gli attori (nazionali e internazionali) e i problemi sociali della transizione del Paese centroamericano. La ricerca svolta sul campo ha permesso di mettere in luce il valore generativo degli sforzi con cui parte della società civile salvadoregna ha cercato di fronteggiare la latitanza dello Stato rispetto al diritto alla verità e alla giustizia. Il quinto capitolo, avvalendosi della voce delle vittime intervistate con il metodo delle 'storie di vita', riflette sul rapporto fra trauma e legame sociale. L’ultimo capitolo presenta gli strumenti metodologici utilizzati per la ricerca empirica. / This thesis is based on the following questions: can a society that has experienced severe and systematic human rights violations be reconciled with the past and pursue justice and reconciliation? How can broken social connections be repaired? What are the roles of victims and oppressors? These problems have been studied analyzing the experience of El Salvador. Among the possible sociological profiles, the thesis focuses on the Salvadorian victims' "demand for justice". The first chapter gives an historical-social overview. The second chapter analyzes the transitional justice. The general theoretical analysis takes into account the following models: judiciary, that related to amnesty, the model of the "truth commissions", and finally the South African "Truth and Reconciliation Commission" (TRC). The TRC is presented as an experience that draws on and surpasses the previous alternatives, showing the potential of restorative justice. The third and fourth chapters return to the Salvadorean case and take into account the agents (national and international) and the social problems connected to the transition El Salvador has undergone. Research in this field sheds light on the relevance of the efforts made by some parts of the Salvadorean civil society to deal with the absence of the government with respect to promoting the right of truth and justice. The fifth chapter, corroborated by interviews with victims analysed using the method of the "history of life", reflects on the connection between trauma and social bonds. The last chapter presents the methodological tools used during the empirical research.

This study evaluated the effectiveness of the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission (SATRC), using the theoretical and conceptual framework of the five pillars of transitional justice. Chitsike (2012) identified the five Pillars of Transitional Justice that the study uses. For that reason, Truth-Seeking and Truth-Telling, Trials and Tribunals, Reparations, Institutional Reform and Memorialisation are the Five Pillars of Transitional Justice that this study elected to use as the conceptual and theoretical framework. The Five Pillars of Transitional Justice that were delineated by Boraine (2005) are referred to for analytical purposes in the study. Methodologically, the study assumes a qualitative posture. Literature study through content analysis that uses description and exploration is deployed to make interpretation of the used literature. This study notes that each one of the pillars of transitional justice has its recommendations and limitations, and the pillars are much more enriched and enriching when applied in complementarity to each other rather than in isolation. The SATRC process also had its achievements and limitations, and its popularity was based on political impressions rather than concrete transitional justice achievements on the ground, in the view of the present study. Furthermore, it appears to the present study that more time is needed for much more reliable evaluations of the effectiveness of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) to be made, some of its successes and limitations will take many years and or even decades to manifest because at the end of the day, TRCs are historical process and not events. / Political Sciences / M.A. (Politics)

Text in English / While intergenerational transmission of trauma has been widely studied, there is a paucity of literature on intergenerational humiliation. Furthermore, humiliation is regarded as a significant feature of transgenerational transmission of trauma and revenge production. Therefore, the present study aimed to contribute to addressing this paucity and to explore and understand intergenerational humiliation as experienced by 20 children and grandchildren of victims of apartheid-era gross human rights violations. Conceptually, historical trauma theory framed the study. A hermeneutic phenomenological methodology was used to achieve the aims. Through purposive-criterion sampling, data was collected and analysed using interpretive phenomenological analysis. Results show that the consequences of intergenerational humiliation are varied as feelings of hurt and loss perpetuate through the generations. Although positive influences counter these feelings within a generation, they remain alive in memories. This has implications on ethnic and racial inter-group relations as transitional societies such as South Africa seek social cohesion. / Psychology / M.A. (Psychology (Research Consultation))

Facilitating forgiveness: an NLP approach to forgiving is an attempt at uncovering features of the blocks that prevent people to forgive. These blocks to forgiveness can be detected in the real life situations of the six individuals who told me their stories. The inner thoughts, feelings and the subsequent behaviour that prevented them from forgiving others is clearly uncovered in their stories. The facilitation process highlights the features that created the blocks in the past thus preventing forgiveness to occur. The blocks with their accompanying features reveal what needs to be clarified or changed in order to eventually enable the hurt individuals to forgive those who have hurt them. The application of discourse analysis to the stories of hurt highlights the links between the real life stories of the individuals within their contexts with regard to unforgiveness to the research findings of the existing body of knowledge, thereby creating a complexly interwoven comprehensive understanding of the individuals' thoughts, feelings, and behaviours in conjunction with their developmental phases within their socio-cultural contexts. Neuro-linguistic-programming (NLP) is the instrument with which forgiving is facilitated in the six individuals who expressed their conscious desire to forgive, because they were unable to do so on their own. Their emotions had the habit of keeping them in a place in which they were forced to relive the hurtful event as if it were happening in the present. Arresting the process of reliving negative emotions requires a new way of being in this world. The assumption that this can be learnt is based on the results from a previous study, in which forgiveness was uncovered by means of the grounded theory approach as a cognitive process (Von Krosigk, 2000). The results from the previous research in conjunction with the results and insights from this research study are presented in the form of a grounded theory model of forgiveness. / Psychology / D. Litt. et Phil. (Psychology)

Jurisprudence / LL. D.

[pt] A tese objetiva examinar a responsabilidade internacional do Estado brasileiro pelos crimes perpetrados por agentes estatais, no contexto do regime militar (1964-1985), a partir da jurisprudência da Corte Interamericana de Direitos Humanos (Corte IDH). A análise considerará os precedentes normativos e jurisdicionais que embasaram as condenações do Estado brasileiro nos casos Julia Gomes Lund e outros vs. Brasil (2010) e Vladimir Herzog e outros vs. Brasil (2018). Em um primeiro momento, vislumbra-se apresentar o cenário de emergência das normativas internacionais relacionadas à responsabilidade penal dos indivíduos e à responsabilidade dos Estados. Uma vez apresentado o panorama normativo global, será elencado o case law da Corte IDH referente às graves violações de direitos humanos perpetradas, de modo sistemático e massivo, por meio dos aparatos burocráticos de poder estatais. Conforme será aventado, apenas em casos específicos, a Corte IDH utiliza conceitos atinentes ao direito penal internacional como base interpretativa das obrigações consubstanciadas na Convenção Americana de Direitos Humanos, construindo um verdadeiro diálogo entre esse ramo do direito e a normativa dos direitos humanos. Finalmente, a pesquisa se concentrará nos supracitados julgados, separados por quase uma década, mas que possuem em comum o contexto no qual os fatos dos casos ocorreram. Destacadamente, o caso Herzog traz em seu bojo a qualificação dos crimes contra a humanidade – um passo significativo, em relação ao caso Gomes Lund, para ativistas e operadores do direito no âmbito doméstico. Sob esse viés, o presente trabalho pretende investigar em que medida o enquadramento dos crimes contra a humanidade possui o condão de fortalecer as iniciativas em prol da responsabilidade criminal dos agentes do regime ditatorial e de ensejar a contestação de estruturas e práticas repressivas ainda vigentes.A tese objetiva examinar a responsabilidade internacional do Estado brasileiro pelos crimes perpetrados por agentes estatais, no contexto do regime militar (1964-1985), a partir da jurisprudência da Corte Interamericana de Direitos Humanos (Corte IDH). A análise considerará os precedentes normativos e jurisdicionais que embasaram as condenações do Estado brasileiro nos casos Julia Gomes Lund e outros vs. Brasil (2010) e Vladimir Herzog e outros vs. Brasil (2018). Em um primeiro momento, vislumbra-se apresentar o cenário de emergência das normativas internacionais relacionadas à responsabilidade penal dos indivíduos e à responsabilidade dos Estados. Uma vez apresentado o panorama normativo global, será elencado o case law da Corte IDH referente às graves violações de direitos humanos perpetradas, de modo sistemático e massivo, por meio dos aparatos burocráticos de poder estatais. Conforme será aventado, apenas em casos específicos, a Corte IDH utiliza conceitos atinentes ao direito penal internacional como base interpretativa das obrigações consubstanciadas na Convenção Americana de Direitos Humanos, construindo um verdadeiro diálogo entre esse ramo do direito e a normativa dos direitos humanos. Finalmente, a pesquisa se concentrará nos supracitados julgados, separados por quase uma década, mas que possuem em comum o contexto no qual os fatos dos casos ocorreram. Destacadamente, o caso Herzog traz em seu bojo a qualificação dos crimes contra a humanidade – um passo significativo, em relação ao caso Gomes Lund, para ativistas e operadores do direito no âmbito doméstico. Sob esse viés, o presente trabalho pretende investigar em que medida o enquadramento dos crimes contra a humanidade possui o condão de fortalecer as iniciativas em prol da responsabilidade criminal dos agentes do regime ditatorial e de ensejar a contestação de estruturas e práticas repressivas ainda vigentes. / [en] The thesis aims to analyze the international responsibility of the Brazilian State for crimes perpetrated by State agents, in the context of the military regime (1964-1985), based on the jurisprudence of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACourtHR). The analysis will consider the normative and jurisdictional cases that served as precedents to the Brazilian State s convictions in the cases Julia Gomes Lund et al. vs. Brazil (2010) and Vladimir Herzog et al. vs. Brazil (2018). Initially, will be presented the emergency scenario of international regulations related to the criminal responsibility of individuals and the responsibility of States. Once the global normative panorama is presented, will be introduced the case law of the Inter-American Court regarding the serious violations of human rights perpetrated, in a systematic and massive way, through the bureaucratic apparatus of State power. As will be explained, only in specific cases, the Inter-American Court uses concepts of international criminal law as an interpretive basis for the obligations embodied in the American Convention of Human Rights, building a dialogue between this area of Law and the human rights normative. Finally, the research will focus on the aforementioned judgments, separated by almost a decade, but which share the context in which the facts of the cases occurred. Notably, the Herzog s case considers the qualification of crimes against humanity – a significant step, in relation to the Gomes Lund s case, for activists and legal practitioners in the domestic sphere. Under this bias, the present work intends to investigate to what extent the framing of crimes against humanity has the power to strengthen initiatives in favor of the criminal responsibility of the agents of the dictatorial regime and the contestation of repressive structures and practices still valid.

In the perilous waters of the Mediterranean Sea, migrants find themselves facing limited choices when in distress. Their options are stark: either to rely on the lifesaving efforts of Non- Governmental Organisations (NGO) aid workers conducting Search and Rescue (SAR) Operations, to be intercepted by the Libyan Coast Guard (LCG) and subsequently detained in Libya where their human rights are gravely violated, or to face the tragic fate of perishing at sea. Unfortunately, the criminalisation of SAR Operations, spearheaded by NGO aid workers, hinders the rescue of migrants, thereby exacerbating the risks they face and leaving them vulnerable to interception by the LCG. This interception, as argued in this thesis, inevitably leads to the perpetration of Crimes Against Humanity (CAH) against these vulnerable migrants. This thesis sheds light on the issue of Italy’s increasing criminalisation and vilification of humanitarian aid workers engaged in SAR missions in the Mediterranean Sea. It critically examines the consequences of such criminalisation on the lives and rights of migrants, exploring the complex dynamics between SAR Operations, interception by the LCG, and the commission of CAH. Drawing upon a comprehensive lens of interpretation that integrates legal analysis, human rights principles, and the international legal framework, this study concludes that criminalisation of SAR operations is indeed a contributing factor towards the CAH faced by migrants in Libya. Moreover, it identifies the potential liability of Italian State Officials (ISO) at the International Criminal Court (ICC) for their role in enacting legislations that effectively criminalises SAR operations.

Ph.D. Thesis ABSTRACT Mgr. Veronika Kristková, LL.M., 2013 Position of victims of human rights violations in international law with focus on victims of serious violations of human rights and international humantiarian law This work focuses within the broad theme of " Position of the victims of the human rights violations in international law" on victims of serious human rights violations and serious violations of international humanitarian law (hereinafter only serious violations). The author decided to focus on the victims of serious violations because the research revealed that while the rights of victims of human rights violations are in general relatively settled in theory as well in practice of international law, the rights of the victims of serious violations is an area, which raises several doctrinal questions, encountered rapid development in recent years and continues to develop. Analysis of the rights of the victims of serious violations necessary must be based on the rights of the victims of human rights violations in general, which serves as a baseline for the analysis of the rights of the victims of serious violations. Only in comparison with the general rights of the victims of human rights violations the specificities of the rights of the victims of serious violations stand up. First the work...