Abstract Judgments of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR) that hold amnesty laws illegal under the American Convention on Human Rights (‘anti-amnesty law judgments’) have often been criticized for excessively prioritizing human rights and justice over peace and national reconciliation. This study empirically examines how the IACtHR should address this ‘peace-versus-justice dilemma.’ Using IACtHR judgments from 2003 to 2019 and case studies of Peru and El Salvador, we analyze the impact of the IACtHR’s anti-amnesty law judgments on peace and national reconciliation in Latin American societies, focusing on protests against governments and polarization as early indicators of civil conflict. Our findings suggest that although the IACtHR’s anti-amnesty law judgments do not necessarily undermine peace and national reconciliation directly, the IACtHR should address the resultant long-term political and social polarization as a potential factor in social destabilization that could lead to civil conflict.
Maekawa et al. (Thu,) studied this question.