Introduction

While states have a duty under international law to provide an effective remedy for past human rights violations, the content of this duty is far from being definite. Nevertheless, the UN-sanctioned ‘van Boven principles’ provide that the right to effective remedy should contain the following minimum components: investigation and prosecution, compensation, restitution, rehabilitation, satisfaction and guarantees of nonrepetition. Investigation and prosecution are aimed at punishing human right violators and documenting the violations. In undertaking the tasks of investigating the past violations and prosecuting those responsible, while providing due process of law, states are dispensing justice to victims as well as reaffirming the importance of the rule of law and sending a deterrent message to potential violators. Compensation, on the other hand, not only alleviates the economic burdens caused by human rights violations, but is also a symbolic gesture of acknowledging responsibility for what happened to the victims and an appeal for forgiveness and reconciliation.

Although retributive justice might be dispensed after prosecution and compensation, this can not ensure by itself the reintegration of the victims into a stabilized and secured life in society. There is thus a need for restitution and rehabilitation, which should consist of an overarching course of action to empower the victims to regain their hold on life as individuals and members of the society. Publicizing and acknowledging what happened through different mechanisms is the idea behind another component of the right to effective remedy: the duty of satisfaction.